The United Kingdom and a group of international partners have signalled readiness to take action to safeguard shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, following a joint statement condemning recent Iranian activity in the region.
Leaders from the UK, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Japan and Canada criticised attacks on commercial vessels and infrastructure, as well as efforts to restrict access to one of the world’s most critical maritime chokepoints.
“We condemn in the strongest terms recent attacks by Iran on unarmed commercial vessels in the Gulf, attacks on civilian infrastructure including oil and gas installations, and the de facto closure of the Strait of Hormuz by Iranian forces,” the statement said.
The group warned that continued disruption to shipping and energy flows would have global consequences, particularly for vulnerable economies.
“The effects of Iran’s actions will be felt by people in all parts of the world, especially the most vulnerable,” the leaders said.
They called for an immediate halt to attacks and interference with commercial traffic, including the laying of mines and the use of drones and missiles targeting maritime activity. “Freedom of navigation is a fundamental principle of international law,” the statement added, referencing obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Alongside condemnation, the statement signalled that participating nations are preparing potential responses to ensure safe passage through the Strait. “We express our readiness to contribute to appropriate efforts to ensure safe passage through the Strait. We welcome the commitment of nations who are engaging in preparatory planning,” it said.
Maybe condemn the halfwit who started this latest spasm of *uckwittery as well?
He is going to have to be cut off at the knees in the mid terms or the whole World will be in collapse in another 3 years of this. Amazing what one protected paeodophile can set in motion when so many are willing to turn a blind eye…. If not actually actively involved.
Exactly. I never want to see British forces supporting an American Hitler with the intellect of a dim toddler. Let the USA regain control of the Whitehouse & use its own massive fleet to”escort” shipping. It’s Trump & Netanyahu’s war. If they’re the geniuses they claim let them sort it out. Of course it probably doesn’t help that the USN just scrapped its minehunting fleet, but that’s the sort of joined up un-thinking we expect of MAGA. These two guys are painting a huge target on their nations for Islamic terrorism for yet another whole generation.
What a sh-t sh-w the buffoon in the Whire House and his attack dog at the Pentagon have got us all into. When Iran can hit Israeli refineries at will it deeply concerns me the dangers any ships would face trying to open the Strait of Hormuz. Not even sure they will be able to achieve much either while in the firing line, tankers are very big targets with very little engagement time for any warship. Anyone with real military experience have any insights.
Well General Nick carter said we have to do it and send ships, but it’s high risk and we may loss them
“ quite exciting meant ships could be lost, he added: ‘It would be challenging, no doubt about it, the risks as I have described them are significant.’
However he added that it should be balanced against the interest the UK and the global economy has in keeping the Straits open.”
The strait is only 21miles wide.. it has islands to hid behind and is flanked by mountainous terrain on the Iranian side..
It’s got two 2 mile wide shipping lanes separated by 2 miles.. so a 6 mile wide deep channel for the tankers..
It’s 104 miles long and supertankers have a top cruise speed of 13-17 knots ( most can’t reach beyond 15-16 knots).. they cannot essentially turn around in the straits at 17 knots they require a 10 mile wide shipping lanes+ shipping lane.. they take miles for a crash stop and then they would need to do a U turn.. essentially you go in your committing to a 17knot manoeuvre on a known heading and speed for 100 miles ( 4-5 hours) about 10 miles from an enemy coastline… looking after a set of ships that will burn with any hit and cannot manoeuvre…
Unless the US takes that 100 miles of coastline with significant ground forces and completely suppresses all resistance ships will die.
And the moment the convoy system fails insurance policies will be pulled..
And you need to keep 100 ships a day safe every day..
It’s to all intents and purposes impossible with military force unless you physically invade.
At the moment the straight has not been mined, if we start escorting ships through there and putting soldiers on the ground (soldiers that America does not have) then the first thing Iran will do is mine the straits.
Once that happens they will be closed for months if not years.
The only way to get the straits open is for the US and Israel to stop bombing Iran.
There is no military solution.
America is all bling, it lacks the manpower or logistics to put a substantial force into Iran. One or two ARG’s with 5,000 marines ain’t going to cut it. Unless Trump is willing to call up the entire guard, restart the draft and some how get Kuwait and Iraq to allow him to spend 12 months building up a massive army in their country he has no cards to play.
He already blew everything up and now Israel thinks that blowing up their oil infrastructure is going to make them change their mind.
Yep basically.
I disagree the US has the manpower and capability to put a significant land force into Iran unlike any other nation on the planet but they have proven on more than one occasion they lack the will to see something through and as in other recent conflicts there is no plan.
We have dodged a bullet so far but it is going to get very difficult not to get drawn in because of the current escalation of the conflict and the huge economic hit this country is now facing.
Really, how do you think they would get them to Iran? you are aware it’s taken the US 12 days to deploy its only forward based MEU with just 2,500 soldiers in it to Iran. 2,500 soldiers is just 1 % of the relatively small force used to invade Iraq in 2003.
If it’s taken 12 days to deploy 2,500 soldiers how long do you think it would take them to deploy a significant force to the gulf? Could you elaborate how the army would even get into Iran?
Do you think Iraq will allow them to invade or perhaps Afghanistan or Pakistan or do you see them landing several hundred thousands troops over the beach nearly 15,000 miles from home.
I think your anti US views are blinding you to the fact they are currently the only superpower on the planet whether you or I like it or not – the U.K. could certainly do with more of their bling as you call it.
The US have airfields and logistical support across the Middle East and will already have people inside Iran and could shift forces across the border from Iraq if desired and reinforce them from there. What could Iraq do to stop them because it wouldn’t be international law, Mr Trump doesn’t really care for it.
The combination of their airborne forces direct from the U.S. if absolutely necessary in coordination with the US marines could capture an Iranian island to enable a build up of larger forces if the US was prepared to do so. They have the sea and airlift capability to do this comparatively quickly (but of course not immediately), which would enable them to suppress Iranian activity (and cut off oil exports) along the all important coastline but there is huge but.
They have as we both agree not planned for anything other than a huge bombing effort and are unwilling to put forces in any sort of numbers on the ground.
Interestingly a good comparison for what could be achieved by the US if they had the appetite for something more than just bombing is the invasion of landlocked Afghanistan, which was done quickly given the obvious lack of logistical support in the theatre.
Perhaps the Iranian regime are therefore somewhat lucky in that they are dealing with the current POTUS and Mr Hegsmith.
Perhaps what we are actually witnessing is the Americans ‘Suez’ moment where despite still having the military capability they have lost the political resolve to undertake these military interventions.
In Afghanistan they had neighbours (Uzbekistan) willing to host US forces and approximately 10% of the area of Afghanistan occupied by friendly forces to base from.
They have none of that in Iran.
12 days to get a very small lightly armed force into theatre (is that a super power.) How are they going to get the 31st MEU to Kharg island as they themselves can’t access the straits of Hormuz.
It’s seems the Trump administration have very quickly forgot the lessons of Somalia. Putting a small marine detachment with no armour, no artillery onto an heavily defended island with 20,000 civilians on it is a recipe for a massacre.
How are they going to feed 20,000 civilians and 7,000 workers on the island along side 2,500 marines if they can’t get ships in their and its in range of Iranian artillery, missiles and drones.
I think this is exactly the US’ suez moment.
💯👍🏻
Let’s be blunt.., Despite What the PM and Goverment Say..!…Were Not Neutral.!..We’ve Become one of the main Airbases for U.S Airforce Operations B1, B2, B52s you Name it….!.. And we’re Soon going to be Escorting Vessels thru Straights of Hormuz.!
Uk Neutrality is Political myth…!…Designed for Gullable Media and Public…!
The really difficult part now is that in a perfect world you would leave them to it but now this has started whatever we think of the POTUS doesn’t really matter (and I agree with much of the sentiment expressed on here). However, we cannot afford for the Iranian regime to be seen to come out anything other than losers because if they can be seen to have faced down the U.S. then be prepared in a few years time for ballistic missiles to be coming to a place near you. All this will also significantly embolden China, Russia and NK and make the West’s challenges in the future even more difficult.
Our next step with our like minded allies is extremely important and sadly it might mean we need to commit our sorely depleted forces into protecting shipping through that choke point.
Whatever happens next the relationship with the US will never be quite the same again and we along with other similar nations need to recognise ‘contracting out’ defence and foreign policy is not a good idea.
Its hard for Iran to really paint a conflict as a victory when their entire leadership has been killed but short of a all out ground invasion taking over all of Iran there is nothing the USA or anyone else can do to replace the regime.
Neither the Trump administration or the Iranian regime operate with in reality. Both sides can and will claim victory regardless and no one will believe either.
In the end for them survival will be victory.. for that all they need is the will to out suffer the enemy until the enemy losses the will and packs up.. Isreal never will.. but the US.. they have proven over and over their will is not extremely fragile, but its relatively short term..
You can lose every battle and still win the war, ask the Taliban.
The problem is sjb is “winning” against extremists is very very difficult.. as Afghanistan and Iraq shows you can swat them down and win every battle but destroying an extremist movement is not possible unless your willing to essentially utterly and completely destroy a nation and kill untold millions, then essentially hold that nation for a generation.. that’s what we did with the Japanese military extremist and the German far right extremists.. we as the allies killed 9 million Germans and 3 million Japanese.. then an occupation of each that lasted almost a decade with many millions of troops deployed in that time..
That’s what makes all this so dangerous because how do you deal with an extreme regime in the future if they can present this as a victory.
If they had missiles capable of hitting us they would use them and strongly worded statements won’t stop them.
Really the only way is for the population to deal with it.. but for that you have to have a cohesive well organised motivated and armed population who are ready and willing to kill any extremist that comes along..
That’s what frustrating about the Trump approach because I think the US could have done more to assist the population but as the bombing intensifies then it is likely the country will actually come together, which is the exact opposite of what is required.
You say that if the US loses that it will embolden China, North Korea and Russia, maybe it will, but have you given any thought to what would happen if the US wins, do you not think that it would just embolden Trump?? to act against Cuba?? or Greenland?? and ramp up the rhetoric against Canada??
I also think people are missing the point though, at the moment people are focused on the military side of things, not the economic side.
China and India are already sailing ships into the Straights of Hormuz and the Iranians aren’t touching them, why?? because they are paying for Iranian oil with Chinese Yuan, if other countries did the same then the US Petro Dollar would be dead or greatly diminished. Iran doesn’t have to win this war, all it has to do is fight long enough to damage the US economy to such an extent that it makes the US quit fighting.
I don’t disagree with anything you say and it would certainly embolden Trump but it does look like the democratic process maybe about to catch up with him as the mid term elections are soon. That won’t undo the damage he has and will do but I hoping we maybe witnessing ‘peak’ Trump.
I also know what side we are on when comparing the US with China, Russia and NK despite Trump because those 3 would happily rub us out.
Who would want to be our PM at the moment with a weak economy and depleted military.
Starmer has been dealt a weak hand and is playing it pretty well. I hope you are right with your comment about ‘peak Trump’. I have a feeling we are at a turning point. I read that UK staff are working with the US on plans to restore freedom of navigation in the Gulf. With luck, some clever drones and a symbolic RN ship or two the UK could come out of this as hero peacemaker.
I read that you`d need eight to ten frigates or destroyers
to escort five or six ships.
Not enough to supply the demand for oil.
God be with all who sail into this sad unfortunate storm.
The numpty did claim the job in the straits was easy and couldn’t understand why nobody wanted to go there! That’s after sending HIS two mine hunters to the other side of the pacific🙄
🤔👍
What’s worse as we have seen time and again this PM has no insight whatsoever as to what can be done even in trying to look decisive he is indecisive I fear he will under pressure take a military decision based purely on political self survival trying to please everyone by using the military as cannon fodder simply because he doesn’t despite all the evidence recognise over reach. So let’s hear the plan for once, or do we need a damn Committee for that.
It’s a bit of a test really.. I hope what we see is an international response of many nations that says yes we will escort.. once your de escalating at the peace table.
Any movement into the straits as is would be deadly.. the USN know this it’s why they are not starting to even consider it themselves.
Personally I think it’s all Trump trying to set up a few key nations to pick as fall guys and lighting rods for his base as it all goes to shite economically.. its perfidious albions fault, it’s the EUs fault ( Germany and France) it’s Japans fault and Chinas fault.. look at it logically the states he either wants to separate from obligations wise and his geostrategic enemies ( China and the EU)… it has a low cunning purpose to it.
Agree our forces should not be put in harms way to appease trump. Can’t see mine clearance being done during hostilities.
Fifteen U turns so far from Starmer. I have never known such a useless PM in my lifetime and I’ve been around a long while. We don’t even have a plan to get ships to sea, never mind send them anywhere. Healey seems to have disappeared, Reeves is saying no and Starmer is afraid of Rayner. All great news for the men and women who might be put in harms way.😠
I actually don’t know what any of that means in a practical sense. Was it in English?
The government does know what could potentially happen in weeks if energy flows from the gulf dry up, anyone who research removing various %s of energy from the world market will tell you that things start to problematic if less then 7% is removed. Unlike when Russia was sanctioned the energy market just reshuffled buyers and sellers this is different. Politically and publicly the UK is say it not our war, legality etc but the reality is this is a war that could impact us the RoW massively.
As an aside its also forced some to have different discussions on energy, google Sky News video “Is Britain sitting on more gas? | Ed Conway analysis” is really interesting take on UKs energy supply, probably best not watch if you’re a net zero fanatic, you might get over emotional 🙂
Rachel calls the tune. More UK gas at high prices would mean more tax revenue. 😂
I hope we condemn Israel for bombing gas infrastructure as well and take sanctions against them. Two sets of animals we are dealing with now. Bombing desalination plants and now gas infrastructure.
The UK has played this right and joining with the major European Allie’s and Japan sends the right message to both sides. Next we should bring in China if they don’t stop.
This is a total cluster. Putting all these nations together there is still not enough assets that could be spared with the other commitments each nation has. And then what rely on the muppets in the White House to provided the air assets and over watch??
Analysts are suggesting that a credible Straits of Hormuz escort force will need to include at least 8-10 capable escorts (destroyers and frigates) with strong air cover. The USA can provide much of the later but wants other countries (not necessarily close allies given the mention of China!) to provide the first.
Being pragmatic, the most realistic solution is a combined maritime force led by France – setting a UN Maritime Task Force or trying to expand the mandate of the European Union´s Naval Force (EUNAVFOR) Operation Aspide will take too long and meet too much resistance. France is the only European country that has the required warships and support ships, bases and command structure (headed by a Rear Admiral) in the region. Assuming a core based on the 2-3 MN destroyers/frigates already in the area, the likes of Italy, Australia, German, Netherlands, Greece, Japan, India, Turkey, Spain and UK could then each regularly contribute one escort. Backstop cover from the CdeG CSG would be highly desirable (essential?), possibly replaced by the POW CSG later. A French Mistral LHD, probably Tonnerre, could provide special forces and hospital facilities, possibly replaced by an Italian San Giorgio or other allied vessels later. Close cooperation with Chinese PLAN ships in the area will be inevitable. The UKMCC base in Bahrain would have a useful admin and logistics role, having more facilities than the small French base in Abu Dhabi whilst being much closer to the SoH than the large French naval base in Réunion.
That’s 8-10 escorts per convoy.. you could have maybe 10 tankers per convoy.. 200 ships a day go in and 200 come out.. so out and in your convoy force is taking a good 12 hours so at best it’s 2 convoys in and 2 out.. so those 10 escorts can manage 10% of the traffic.. according to loyds.. a full return would require 100 escorts running 20 in and out convoys a day…
Just a final thing close co-operation with the PLAN is a strategic disaster of epic proportions.. the latest US navel war college lecture made it clear one of the few tools the US had left to try and control development of the PLAN was to try and exclude them from everything…
Would have thought big escorts vulnerable so close to Iran coast. Little sea room and 100’s of small Iran republic guard craft reportedly ready to swarm possibly preparing for one way missions. Firstly though, they can lay mines.
And they can do that from little fishing boats.. so unless the US is willing to sink every fishing boat in the Gulf it could not stop it.. but mining is a nuclear option for Iran as it’s still sending our oil to China..I have no doubt Iran would do it buts its and end game burn it down tactic..
Yo do realise the USA only has 8 escorts in total able to deploy in the entire Indian Ocean and all 8 are currently deployed around the two carriers stationed there and can’t be spared
I don’t think people are really aware of just how small the US navy is and how few ships it actually has. The entire US navy only has 78 destroyers and zero frigates, its entire deployable strength on a good day is 26 ships globally and every one of them is needed to escorts its CSG and ARG formations.
Whats worse is the gulf is two oceans away for the nearest major US naval base, Bahrain is the only major facility it has in the region and the USN is completely cut off from its base in Bahrain. It’s so bad for them there LCS in the region are having to pull all the way back to Singapore.
The USN completely lacks the capacity to provide major escorts to get tankers through the straits, Trump knows this which is why he wants us to do it.
Good analysis. Add in a scenario where there’s a heavily damaged escort, what then?
Especially if no one in the region will allow it to dock which is entirely probable as it will attract Iranian ballistic missiles.
Would it be able to make it to Diego Garcia? If not it would have to be scuttled. Same problems we had in the Falklands in 1982. The US has not had to face such logistical issues since World War II.
It’s one thing to game tour very expensive Arleigh Burkes near a mine threat, it’s quite another if tour nearest dry dock is thousands of miles away.
Well I doubt the Royal Navy can contribute much in its current state. France will probably take the lead on the European side and besides I doubt that spineless cretin in number 10 would give the Royal Navy permission to return fire on any Iranian missile or drone sites that attack the fleet
Trump doesn’t need any help. Iran has no weapons, no leaders and the war is over.
And thanks for the tariffs, America looks after their own, don’t they.
I feel sorry for all the guys in the US military having to cash all the cheques Trump keeps writing. America has the strongest military on the planet but it’s a peace time military same as every one else, it’s a fraction of its Cold War size. Its navy is tiny by its own historic standards, its army is even smaller. It’s loosing tanker aircraft which are irreplaceable at a rate it can’t sustain (7 in one week)
It’s not sized or funded to pull off anything other than limited air strikes against a country the size of Iran.
1. All totally dependent on an agreed cease fire that includes Iran – an essential pre-requisite
2. The USN does not have suitable escorts in suitable numbers – hence Trump’s request for help
3. The military escort of tankers (and other merchant ships) through the S of H has frequently occurred since the 1980’s.
4. One warship accompanying a loose grouping of 3-4 tankers selected on a queued basis seems to be the sweet spot. Assuming a c.150 nm passage though the area of maximum risk, the warship can do one outbound and one inbound transit a day.
5. With 6 warships on duty, that is about 40 escorted tanker transits a day – about two-thirds of pre-war levels.
6. Heavily escorted true conveys (10+ tankers and merchant ships) have been run by the USN through the straits, but they are far more difficult and costly to organise, and would also imply that item 1 is not valid.
Besides counter drone tech can the T45 and T23s have their AA capabilities of the 4.5″ gun restored quickly, both software and hardware? Can additional 30mm Terrahawk/Seahawk platforms be added maybe atop their hangars? Can the tri-launcher with Martlet be added? Can additional decoy launchers be added onboard at short notice?
Deploying ships to conduct escort duties to the Straits of Hormuz would make the Charge of the Light Brigade look like a sensible military decision.
Or, under the correct set of preconditions, as successful (though less iconic) as the Charge of the Heavy Brigade.
The Charge of the Heavy Brigade SHOULD have been a disaster, only personal courage by the men involved overcame the disadvantage of charging uphill.
Do tell what preconditions will make an escorting ships through the Straits of Hormuz. Perhaps like Trump you think it’s a “simple military manoeuvre”?
A ground invasion to secure the coastline?
The Russian cavalry mount was about the size of a polo pony. British heavy cavalry horses were a great deal larger and heavier. The Russian cavalry were further disadvantaged by surprise:
‘Scarlett rode out ahead of his rapidly manoeuvring line of men, Elliot at his side, ‘hollering to them to come on’ before he charged uphill towards the Russians who, ‘quite astonished’ according to a Lieutenant who was present, slowed to a walk and then a halt.’
It was an encounter battle won by superior leadership, tactics, the Russian cavalry being surprised by the initial charge, receiving it at a standstill and then being put to flight by a secondary flanking charge from the gallant Inniskilling Dragoon Guards, ably supported by C Troop of The Royal Horse Artillery whose fire prevented the retreating Russian horsemen from rallying.
A multi phase operation, the current phase already underway is on degrading:
Anti-ship missile systems
Drones
Naval mines
Fast attack boats
U.S. Central Command says it has conducted strikes on thousands of Iranian-linked targets in recent weeks, including anti-ship missile sites and mine-laying vessels. The aim of this phase is to ensure that incoming threats are reduced to a level that can be intercepted and managed. Because once escorts begin, the expectation is not that attacks stop but that they become survivable.
Potential phase two (enabled by and coinciding with phase one as and when amphibious assault units available, likely end March, and continuing in conjunction with phase three): Coalition raiding parties may very well secure Abu Musa, the Greater Tunb and Lesser Tunb islands which are claimed by the UAE, a claim supported by the EU. Coordinated with convoy transits, amphibious/heliborne raids on IRGC launch sites will disrupt air and sea drone launches.
Phase three: ‘Convoy operations will entail having active optical and electronic surveillance overhead, with an immediate response capability, covering potential mobile launcher firing points along at least 250 miles of Iranian coastline and its hinterland, from Abu Musa in the West to Jask in the East. A minesweeping capability will be required, and the means to keep a swept channel clear. Shipping channels will also have to be kept completely clear of small craft and fishing boats, which the Iranians could use both for cueing long-range strikes and for mounting close-quarter physical attacks…naval vessels to provide close-in electronic counter-measures, detection and intercept protection for merchant vessels making the transit.’
‘Oil tankers are not very vulnerable to damage. 61 percent of the ships attacked during the Tanker War were oil tankers. In total, only 55 of the 239 petroleum tankers (23 percent) were completely sunk or declared CTL, compared to 39 percent of bulk carriers and 34 percent of freighters.’
‘No solution will be without risks…if European countries make it through the Red Sea with the naval reinforcements being discussed, then convoying becomes easier.’
Well that’s one way to reduce the number of Arleigh Burke’s the USN has, not to mention the LCS vessels they now use for anti-mine warfare…
As for the Iran-Iraq Tanker War, using that as a template is like planning WW2 based on WW1:-
• airborne drones didn’t exist
• seaborne drones didn’t exist
• LNG shipping was in its infancy
• tankers are now much, much, larger
The plan also fails to account for artillery and ballistic missiles.
• Iran has a large number of 155mm upwards towed and self-propelled howitzers that have the range to actually fire all the way across the Straits let alone at ships trying to transit it. Iran will have no doubt dug in howitzers into the mountains on its coastline overlooking the Straits.
• Iran probably still has hundreds, if not thousands of ballistic missiles remaining that it could use against the Straits. However I expect they will preserve these for ground attacks against Israel, US bases, and Gulf state refineries.
Or not really…
Air defence against low and slow drones is a great deal easier than against Exocet 1986.
Defence against surface drones is no different to defending against swarms of small, manoeuvrable fast attack craft 1986.
Larger tankers are less vulnerable.During the 1980s “Tanker War,” large tankers often survived missile hits, while smaller vessels were often severely damaged or sunk.
The A-10 Warthog is now in the fight across the southern flank and is hunting and killing fast-attack watercraft in the Straits of Hormuz,” Gen. Dan Caine 19 March 2026.
1991: A-10 Warthog crews destroyed over 900 Iraqi tanks, 1,200 artillery pieces and 2,000 other military vehicles.
Iran has fired around 400 ballistic missiles since the start of the war, with an interception rate of about 92%.
and it’s about time, the idea the world economy can be held hostage by a russia/china proxy is unthinkable, the end of western dominance, this is the key strategic issue of our time, the europeans must come in on the side of the west a.s.a.p. or forever lose their role in the world order
May be Trump is right on the Drill Baby Drill, check out sky news video article “Is Britain sitting on more gas? | Ed Conway analysis”. having posted that its probably a good job I don’t reply to comments but the rest of you go for your lives 🙂
And in case you don’t get it the Trump comment is deliberately provocative, its designed that way but I suspect most will respond to that rather than the Ed Conway analysis 🙂
Iran had rapidly increased its stockpile of highly enriched uranium in recent years. As of mid-June 2025, before U.S. strikes on nuclear facilities, Iran had enriched roughly 972 pounds, or more than 440 kilograms, of uranium up to 60% purity, according to estimates from the IAEA. That’s enough for about eight warheads capable of destruction similar to the Nagasaki attack of 09 August 1945.
Reasons to be cheerful:
‘If ever an exercise were needed to show that there are military means available to maintain freedom of navigation, then this would be such a demonstration. Within days, operations to neutralize Iranian anti-shipping capability in the Strait of Hormuz should culminate, to the extent that convoy operations should become feasible.
Convoy operations will entail having active optical and electronic surveillance overhead, with an immediate response capability, covering potential mobile launcher firing points along at least 250 miles of Iranian coastline and its hinterland, from Abu Musa in the West to Jask in the East. A minesweeping capability will be needed, and the means to keep a swept channel clear. Shipping channels will also have to be kept completely clear of small craft and fishing boats, which the Iranians could use both for cueing long-range strikes and for mounting close-quarter physical attacks…naval vessels to provide close-in electronic counter-measures, detection and intercept protection for merchant vessels making the transit. The fewer the ships available, the less frequently convoys can be mounted. No solution will be without risks…if European countries make it through the Red Sea with the naval reinforcements being spoken of, then convoying becomes easier.’
Coalition raiding parties may very well secure Abu Musa, the Greater Tunb and Lesser Tunb islands which are claimed by the UAE, a claim supported by the EU. Coordinated with convoy transits, amphibious/heliborne raids on IRGC launch sites will disrupt air and sea drone launches.
‘Oil tankers are not very vulnerable to damage. 61 percent of the ships attacked during the Tanker War were oil tankers. In total, only 55 of the 239 petroleum tankers (23 percent) were completely sunk or declared CTL, compared to 39 percent of bulk carriers and 34 percent of freighters.[ix]
The oil market is likely to adapt to disruption in the Strait of Hormuz. Initially, the Tanker War led to a 25 percent drop in commercial shipping and a sharp rise in the price of crude oil. But the Tanker War did not significantly disrupt oil shipments.’
You never know, it might work…
It is clear Trump wants to put others in the line of fire so he can extricate himself and the US from a war that will go on and one. If the mighty US navy cannot get the job done a few European ships will not do it. Trump landed in the sh⭐️⭐️ and now he wants the Allies he belittled and bullied to help him out. He caused the mess said he did not want or need the UK and now he wants us to hold the baby while he does a runner!
The sad fact is,we’re allready involved…Bases in Britain are full of US Aircraft…All being loaded up with Weapons…! This Neutrality Position is Full on Bogus…!
It’s amusing to see how many people here focus only on the problems rather than on the objective, which is to remove an unstable chokehold on the world’s energy infrastructure and prevent it from finally achieving the goal of becoming a nuclear-capable enemy. Are you all really that blind to the fact that this is the only time left to stop a blockade of the Hormuz from becoming a nuclear-capable blockade of the Hormuz? Have you not a glimmer of foresight whatsoever?
And what happened to the spirit of “Very well, alone”? The mere prospect of a slight hike in energy prices has sent the grandchildren of people who underwent war rationing into a state of utter terror and demoralisation, turning rabidly on those who wish to fight and capable of counting nothing other than the cost.
You’re all behaving like a parcel of Vichy French.
Churchill might have something different to say about the wisdom of using warships to force a strait…
‘The Royal Navy had conducted a raid of the Dardanelles the previous November. At that time, the British warships might have been able to steam up the straits and shell Constantinople – but the raid actually was conducted to test the range of the Turkish guns, and because the Royal Navy didn’t press on, its attack simply alerted the Turks to vulnerabilities.
In that time between raids mines were laid, guns were better positioned and searchlights installed to sweep the narrows at night.’
Oops!
Its all bye the bye for us anyway, our Navy is essentially non existant. What could we send? 1 x Destroyer and 1 x Frigate? Whats that going to offer?
I wonder if MAGA loses the next election, if whoever replaces them can rebuild the US reputation or if it’s now fully broken and now Europe Vs USA Vs China as three economic super powers and the UK stuck in the middle.
‘Chinese forces attacked along a 300-mile front, breaking UN lines and sending them into a massive retreat known as the “longest retreat in U.S. Army history”.
Uncoordinated Withdrawal: The retreat, particularly in the west, was rushed and caused significant friction with British, Turkish, and other allied forces who often found themselves unsupported and left in the dark by the U.S. Eighth Army’s rapid withdrawal.’
‘…the chaotic and undignified NATO withdrawal from Kabul marks the end of the European honeymoon with the Biden administration. Despite all the talk of NATO as a ‘sacred obligation’ and of consulting the European allies on all the big strategic issues, the Afghan imbroglio has underlined that Washington will still act unilaterally and according to its own interests…’
‘The U.S. is not a country. It is a business.’ It has always been and always will be ‘America first’.
It’s about time Britain put its own interests first and re-armed.
All countries are businesses. All countries should do what is their best economic interests. Supportinf allies has always been considered to be that, sometimes it’s a long term play but no nation has ever gone to war purely because it’s the right thing to do, it’s always been about money.
‘One day when George III was insane he heard that the Americans never had afternoon tea. This made him very obstinate and he invited them all to a compulsory tea-party at Boston: the Americans, however, started pouring the tea into Boston harbour and went on pouring things into Boston harbour until they were quite Independent, thus causing the United States.’
‘America was thus clearly Top Nation, and history came to a’
Well sadly the UK have really be found wanting on this one .🙄 RN ships are 🕵 ?
Anyone got a telescope to look for Trump?
He’s kicked up the Hornets nest and now he’s leaving the mess for the intelligent countries to sort out.
I seem to remember back in the 80s the RN regularly escorted commercial vessels in this region. I also seem to remember the RN had more resources to deploy back then.
🤦🏻♂️
Individual airborne drones are easier to down than an anti-ship missile. But it’s not a one-for-replacement.
The drones are in addition to the anti-ship missiles, and they aren’t sent individually, they are sent as swarms to overwhelm defences. Seems you’ve been asleep the last 4 years.
More disingenuousness from your concerning seaborne drones. They are way more numerous because they don’t have to convince people to do suicide missions. 🤦🏻♂️
Larger tankers and larger targets and so easier to hit. Doesn’t matter if they are sunk or not. Premiums go up with each hit on a tanker, causing shipowners to reconsider whether it’s worth the risk.
It’s hilarious you unquestionably believe everything that comes out of the Pentagon. I bet you still haven’t recovered from the shock of the sudden and unexpected Fall of Saigon. 🤣
So 8% of Iran’s ballistic missiles have succeeded. Well that’s enough to put off shipowners, just as it was enough to destroy the $1bn each THAAD radars in the area.
Your figure of 400 is also out of date, they fired that many in the first week out of the thousands they had.
Doesn’t really matter now. Trump has chickened out again 🌮 with his empty threat against Iranian power stations is now trying to redefine victory in order to extricate the USA from the war. 😂