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?
NIL. It’s np longer possible.
DG, we’d give to them and pay for it…
Gibraltar, anything for a youth movement scheme.
Falklands, anything to make Daddy Trump happy for his Mini-Me in Argentina.
And what do you think is going to happen to Gibraltar?
The apes steal all the food and everyone needs to be evacuated..
I think the donkey’s flip flop bar is safe for now 😆🍻
So putting aside the entire subject of the article… 🤦🏻♂️
Well Gibraltar we’d invoke NATO Article V just like Denmark would have over Greenland.
If the USA decided to take Deigo Garcia or the Falklands, do you seriously think that at any time since WW2 that the RN could have stopped them? 🤷🏻♂️
Up until the early 60s could have put up a reasonable challenge but industrial capacity on US side would have given a clear advantage very quickly, could have challenged but not sustained any attempt.
In other words we could have sacrificed more men and ships back then in a futile cause… 🤦🏻♂️
It was a hypothetical question and something we would never have done/followed through with especially to a nation that has had us by the crown jewels financially since WW2.
So a pointless question.
BTW you seem ignorant that at $900 billion, only Japan owns more US Treasury Securities (ie US Government debt) than the UK. We hold more American debt than even China…
But he isn’t a Pedo unlike your Biden, Clinton’s, Liebour party and Islam/Muhammed countries.
The FBI has allegations he attempted to rape a 13 year old, he admitted himself that he used to deliberately burst into teenage girls changing rooms, mentioned more times in the Epstein files than any other individual and of course he has a rape conviction.
Whereas by comparison there are no allegations, no evidence against Biden or Clinton.
Were you stupid before you joined the Trump cult or is an effect of becoming a member?
(BTW it’s spelt “Labour” and there’s no such thing as “Muhammed countries”. Maybe you should learn English before demonstrating to everyone your lack of education.)
Unfortunately, it is no longer about keeping the Epstien Files out of the news. POTUS has made an enormous error of judgement and Europe will be required to police the Straits to prevent the collapse of the Worlds Economy. HMG needs to wake up to the fact that the rolling back of the Defence spend and reaping the Peace Dividend is well and truly over…
You do realise HMG can’t rock up to the local IKEA and buy a flat-pack frigate that can be assembled in an aftertnoon?…
The USA screwed the Straits, and if Trump wants to avoid wipe-out in the midterms he needs them open, because Americans loathe high gasoline prices, and they’re already on the rise. Which is why he’s panicked and started threatening to commit war crimes by attacking power and desalination plants.
The one silver lining of any global recession is that it might be enough to dethrone Trump before he starts flinging nukes around.
I’m well aware, however, I don’t want the world to burn because Trump has made an error. It has to be rectified and part of that rectification is keeping the oil and gas moving through the Strait. That will require Naval assets from a number of Nations.
If Trump stays in power for his full term I think there’s a damn good chance the world will literally burn given his reckless use of the military in his first 14 months. So Trump being impeached, then convicted and removed from power would be worth an energy crisis.
Another silver-lining is that this is accelerating countries movement away from fossil fuels.
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.
Speak for yourself
Its fine Sir Tit in charge is putting a clear funding in place to reach 2.5% military spending once he has clear legal clarification on any possible scenario that might arise and that includes a contracted cleaner slipping on the toilet floor and injuring themselves in peace time.
As disappointed as I am with Starmer he is 100 times better than what is on offer from the Tories or Reform
In Defence terms debatable, world is clearly in a terrible state and they have done virtually nothing to even attempt to fast track any additional funding to assist with the MOD. Other departments have had money thrown at them with virtually no thought.
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.
Hms Argyll doesn’t look too bad, actually, to be reactivated! Just as old as the Chilean Navy ones, still in service! Perhaps we should ask the Chileans to come to rescue the RN!
What about bringing the Albion back to life as a Multi Role Support Ship/Mother Drone ship? Stuff she or the Bulwark has done before. Should be plenty of spare equipment left around to fix her up? Spend a few quid. What a resource or what a waste!
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.
Unfortunately Jim the outlook is not good whatever view you take on this. Personally I think the Iranian regime should have be been confronted years ago by the West and not appeased, which in effect is what we have done whilst they have obviously armed themselves to the teeth.
The question regarding a permanent U.K. presence can be best summed up in that we have in recent years invested in permanent naval support facilities both in Bahrain and Oman because we recognise the importance of the region to the U.K’s national interest whilst simultaneously reducing the RN to the point where we have no ships to deploy to the region. That’s not the present Government’s fault and nor is the war but I have not heard one word from our PM that he is going to rectify our obvious military deficiencies indeed I read yesterday we are trying to negotiate a deal to sell Batch 1 Rivers in 2028 with of course no mention of replacements.
Finally, what this war demonstrates is that those commentators who think we can solely focus on just the NATO/European theatre are a danger to the U.K. national security because whether we like it or not our economic and political interests extend well beyond. That is not a recommendation for the U.K. to have a capability to undertake large scale unilateral action far from home but the necessity to have the ability to project power with allies (excluding the US if necessary) when and where it is needed. That requires for example a Navy that can deploy as a contingency a single destroyer to defend our sovereign bases in the Med or elsewhere without having to withdraw our ship from long-standing NATO commitments.
Do we have a spare T45 other than the one at Cyprus to send?
France has mobilised drastically more than we have, I dont think we are in any danger of getting heavily involved as we clearly have zero capability to do so.
Yup, lets make the UK do everything because our leaders hate the word NO.
Strange but I seem to remember Keir Starmer saying ‘No’ to Trump; now what’s your point?
👍🏻
The Royal Navy is on the verge of disarmament, except for its aircraft carriers and submarines, so I don’t think any of them will remain unsold within a few years. It’s true that disarmament has been underway for many years, but this government is going to break records and won’t order a single additional ship, aircraft, or tank. Its task is to disarm the country, and it’s accelerating its mission. When the acquisition program is published, it will likely focus more on retirements and sales.
8 T26s, and 5 T31s and 2 more Astute boats are in build and to be delivered, and T45 upgrades. I’d hardly call that disarming.
Far too late to protect UK interests in the collapsing world order.
30 years of arrogant disdainful snooty UK Parliaments, and general staff more interested in protecting their pension pots.
I’d just call it an over reliance on the Americans. And a failure to realise regeneration defence doesn’t happen overnight. We aren’t the only ones to have cut back to much. People want more NHS spending etc, And governments know defence isn’t a vote winner. 100,000 people don’t protest down Whitehall when defence cuts have been announced. Add in huge debt after the 2008 financial crisis, Brexit, COVID. And its easy to see why defence spending hasn’t been the priority it always should have been. We should never have dropped below 2.5% is an absolute peacetime minimum for a nation of our standing in the world. I’d have it written in law that no party can undo.
🤡
UK has no business in intervening to open international waters from Iran. UK should respect human rights and intervening will open UK to persecution in international courts.
As we can see by UN, International Court, NGO’s and media silence, Iran has the right to control international waters………
Iran is an enemy of the United Kingdom and has even been involved in attacks on British soil. So, as far as I’m concerned, let it fall. It’s another thing entirely that the clown Trump has gotten himself into a mess and wants others to get him out of it, but I certainly will never defend the criminal Iranian regime.
The UK was instrumental in bringing down the lawful government of Iran. Why should they be friends with perfidious Albion FFS 🙄
🤡
Exactly what crimes do you think the U.K. could be accused of by helping to open up an international waterway? What human rights would we be violating by allowing the free movement of vessels?
🤡
Where 2+2=5, I think the Norgies firming up their finances to buy 5 T26, actually helps the PIP get published because the costs of the UK T26 can be spread over a longer period and instead MoD operating costs can be defrayed because you have that spare£800,000 – to a £Bn/ship, in the accounts; it also allows the BAE yard to operate for longer before the necessity of the T83 needs to come on line, after all the T45s can not be knackered given all their time alongside and their systems can be upgraded: a win/win for the Govt and Defence.
Of course, my maths are terrible and people might disagree with me.
It would be good to hear on the Denmark AH140s and even if any luck with the Sweden AH120s.
Silly question but why do they order things in 5s amd 8s? If rule of 3 applies why not 6 T31s and even 9 T26s…while their prices are down?
Very true on potential future orders.
I always thought it was rule of 4 and yet, the Trident fleet has been pushed beyond and some have said 5 should be ordered, which can, sometimes, allow 2 to be deployed.
When you think of the DD/FFs, rule of 5 would really have helped at the moment except for the fantastical clusterfc)k that is the designing of equipment and the dead hand of Govt interference.
Where on earth 7 Astutes comes from, I have no idea. Happy to be educated.
A very good point I think you’re on the money there.
At breaking point with not a real stress in sight. Frankly, the RN was at breaking point just operating at a peace time tempo.
Punishable complacency, if you ask me. Those responsible (some of whom are still in British politics) should have their pensions withdrawn.
An unspeakable state indeed.
Woeful…and pitiful. Well done PM David Cameron, the very worst of the very worst.
Yeah Dave has a lot to answer for. It would not have even been so bad if he had actually cut the budget deficit because then at-least we could borrow now. But he massively increased the national debt, doubled foreign aid spending, screwed the economy, gold plated HS2 and the only thing he actually cut was defence.
In fairness, Cameron was handed a really poisoned chalice, in the shape of the 2008 financial crash. That scuppered public finances across the Western world for many years afterwards. We were not the only country to take a hit on defence expenditure. Though Osborne did push through a lot of odd and counter-productive financial policies.
I think you’ll find Blair has claim to that title.
With not much available are any of the B2 Rivers reconfigurable for any MCM work or just too small? They’re no T91 sloop but could they potentially have a 40/57mm gun and radar upgrade, some sort of hangar for Wildcat/Peregrine/drones and maybe carry a navalised Rapid Sentry with LMM-STARSTREAK?
The USN has that ‘rule of 3’, at least on paper, which they maybe got from us originally.
If I remember their wording, it’s:
1/3 operational at sea
1/3 alongside for crew rest and training
1/3 in maintenance
In our case, the endless quest for economy leads to 3:3:2 for the T23 ASW FF and the T26, 2:2:1 for the T23 GP FF and T31 and, in an austere case, probably 3:3:1 for the Astutes, because the budget likely didn’t stretch to an eighth one and the Astute build progress was so slow, an extra one would have delayed the Dreadnought programme still further.
That is an accurate and balanced summary Robert, I go along with that. In an ideal world, the PM would just overule the Cabinet and backbenchers and insist on 3/4/5% of GDP for defence. But with the citizenry clamouring for lower taxes, higher wages, a better NHS, etc., that seems a very high bar. Certainly, no PM has accomplished an increase in defence spending for many decades, though Boris and Sunak did give it a little bounce.
The DIP will tell us if Starmer/Reeves have managed to put the promised £14bn on the table.
Morning-yes but the comparison is often made with what the French get for their smaller budget which, on the face of it is far superior in terms of numbers than the Brits Defence structure
btw love your “Pen name ” and golly-smashing post!
Cheers from D’Urban
Two things that have seriously impacted the Royal Navy’s ability to maintain fleet numbers. First-despite being told at the time by men that knew what they were talking about that the engines taken for fitment in the Type 45 were not fit for purpose, the decision to fit them was allowed to proceed! Can any of the many experts on this forum give a rational explanation for this massive blunder that reduced the availability of the Daring class to an average of one out of six(along with other factors)?? One has to suspect that the ships were deliberately sabotaged by a person in high places in the pay of our enemies or is this just conspiracy gossip??? Second-the Astutes whose lives are spent 99% of their time submerged in the most corrosive environment known to man-the salty sea!! Anything, no matter what, will eventually fall to the marine environment, but the UK has been building subs for over a century-surely anti-corrosion technology must be at a pinnacle point with plenty of materials and systems available. How come they have suffered corrosion issues severe enough to take them out of service almost from day one?? I am a rank amateur in this field but would appreciate comment from you Naval chaps in clarification
ps-my parents had a house on the Natal south coast with aluminium windows that succumbed to white rust!!
Regards from Durban
Not even close to enough ships since the Pedo islamic loving left have cut our defence down to embarrassing levels. They’ve broken the UK and allowed some nutters in the middle east to control world shipping lanes.
🤥 & 🤡
Hmmm, get trump and netanyahu out of there and the problem could well go away. It wasn’t a threat before they started the war!
This chat is hilarious. The sudden understanding that years of labour and Tory rule has left the uk defenceless and our PM is not only a liar but an odious coward, add in the hatred of a US PM finally doing something to stop Iran getting a nuke and everyone is jumping up and down name calling and making excuses.
Still our PM seems to love Ukrainians (hmm I wonder why) so we’ll keep supporting the biggest Nazi state in Europe, arming them and selling our own kit to stay afloat.
Who we gonna call now in a crisis – Ghostbusters?
Trolling on an epic scale, do you get a bonus?
So are you one of Putin’s paid stooges in Russia or simply one of his useful idiots over here? 😂
Douglas-the USA doesn’t have a PM. And I would bet that no one on this forum regards the Ukraine as a Nazi state.
2026 is starting to look like the RN’s Annus horribilis. Under Strength – Under Manned – Under Armed – Over Stretched & Under Funded.
Hopefully this is the Lowest Ebb however I do not hold out much hope if the Starmer-Reeves-Healey Triumvirate is still in place in 2027.
Those that are currently serving need our full support to help them through this “Windy Corner”.BZ 1SL
I am very proud of our Navy, they are overstretched. Several vessels are up north protecting Norway I believe. We don’t have the number of ships to send to the gulf as well. We also require ships to protect us as well. We are an Island nation, we have to protect ourselves and our territories. BUILD MORE SHIPS, we have become known as the shrinking navy. Too much on unmanned and drones. What happened to the good old warship, frigate and minehunters