The Royal Navy could be asked to take a leading role in reopening the Strait of Hormuz, but a new analysis warns the service is already “stretched to breaking point”, raising questions over how much it can realistically deploy.
Writing for the Foreign Policy Research Institute, Dr Emma Salisbury, a Non-Resident Senior Fellow in its National Security Program and Associate Fellow at the Royal Navy Strategic Studies Centre, said Britain would bring “considerable expertise” to any multinational effort, particularly in mine countermeasures, but warned capacity is a growing concern.
The proposed “Hormuz Coalition” would aim to secure one of the world’s most contested waterways, where threats from mines, drones, missiles and fast attack craft remain acute, with Prime Minister Keir Starmer cautioning that reopening the strait is “not a simple task” and would require broad international support.
Salisbury notes that while the Royal Navy has deep experience in the Gulf, including operations during the Iran-Iraq “Tanker War” and later conflicts, its current posture is far more constrained, with no permanent naval presence following the recent withdrawal of the last ship from Bahrain.
Recent incidents underline the limits of that approach, with HMS Montrose close enough to hear communications during the 2019 seizure of the tanker Stena Impero but unable to intervene in time, highlighting the gap between presence and protection.
She writes that the fleet is now “qualitatively capable, quantitatively stretched to breaking point”, as commitments across the North Atlantic, High North and home waters compete with potential requirements in the Gulf.
The situation is compounded by delays to the Defence Investment Plan, which is meant to turn the government’s accepted Strategic Defence Review into funded programmes, but has yet to appear amid reports of a significant funding gap. Without that clarity, Salisbury argues, the UK risks committing to operations without the capacity to sustain them, even as it retains strengths in areas such as air defence, anti-submarine warfare and maritime security.
The central issue, she suggests, is no longer identifying what needs to be done, but whether the government is willing to fund it.
We shouldn’t be trying to fix what the Pedophile-In-Chief has broken. British servicemen shouldn’t be sacrificed to save Trump’s ass.
Putting that aside for the moment, what would be the Royal Navy’s response if something happened in the Falklands or Diego Garcia, or Gibraltar?
Stretch to the limit, but what are we going to do about it, we are British, we will do absolutely nothing until it is too late.
John Healey is in Saudi Arabia presumably discussing what we propose to do.
We’ve got naff all to send so its all a pointless discussion.
Send HMS Indefensible the latest in stealth ships.
No he will be there to try and flog them more typhoons and type 26s!😁
It’s beyond me why anyone thinks we should be doing this. We should send a MCM unit on a Bay class and a single T45. Let the rest of the world get of its arse for once and come and help.
The UK can lead such a force without contributing all the ships.
MV Hartland Point is currently in Gibraltar, MV Hurst Point is in the Med off Cyprus, RFA Proteus is in Gibraltar.
It’s beyond me why anyone thinks we should be doing this. We should send a MCM unit on a Bay class and a single T45. Let the rest of the world get of its arse for once and come and help.
The UK can lead such a force without contributing all the ships.
I would really love to know from these commentators that bang on about the lack of permanent UK presence in the gulf where exactly they think that permanent presence would have been if it’s still there.
If we still had ships there then they would be trapped and an open target for Iranian missiles and drones. The US pulled its warships out as well at the same time as us.
Yup, lets make the UK do everything because our leaders hate the word NO.