The Strategic Implications of Iran Closing the Strait of Hormuz and the US Naval Response

Many discussions around Iran's potential to cause damage to the US Navy often revolve around hypothetical scenarios wherein assuming Iran would lose a direct confrontation with the US Navy, they would seek revenge by targeting civilian populations. However, the strategic implications of Iran closing the Strait of Hormuz and the corresponding US naval response are critical elements to consider.

The Capabilities and Response of Iran's Navy

Considering the American assumption that Iran would lose a pitched battle, the focus shifts to Iran's ability to inflict significant damage through unconventional means. Despite a significant disparity in conventional forces, Iran has shown a capability to cause damage and even sink naval ships.

Here are the key points regarding Iran's naval capabilities and the US response:

Iran's Damage Capabilities: Iran does have the capability to inflict damage, even sinking a naval ship. However, this is more about damaging rather than sinking ships, considering the robust defensive systems of US naval vessels. US Naval Response: A US naval response to such actions would be severe. This response would cause extensive damage to Iran's naval infrastructure and coastal defenses, significantly weakening Iran's naval and coastal defense capabilities. Economic Impact of Firing on the Strait of Hormuz: Should Iran choose to close the Strait of Hormuz, the resulting economic impact would far outweigh any short-term gains from a confrontation with the US Navy. Iran needs the revenue from its oil exports far more than it wants a fight with the US Navy.

The Strategic Command Structure

The core issue is not Iran's military strength but rather the command structure within the US. The previous administration required White House approval for any military action, including responding to hostile intentions. President Trump and Secretary Matis have partially addressed this by granting lower command levels direct approval for such actions. However, as the Strait of Hormuz is international waters, Iran gains a strategic advantage.

According to international conventions, Iran has the freedom to maneuver close enough to US naval vessels to prevent them from using their most effective weapons. The risk here lies not in the sinking of a naval ship but in the ability to inflict damage sufficient to render a ship temporarily out of action. Given the limited number of US naval vessels, this could become a significant issue.

The Strait of Hormuz and International Response

Despite rhetoric from Iran, a closure of the Strait of Hormuz would not be welcomed by many in the international community, including key allies and trading partners. The re-opening of the strait, should such action be taken, would likely involve a joint US-UAE-Saudi Arabia operation, negating any advantage Iran might gain.

Therefore, while the Iranian military may lack superiority in any single category, a long-term occupation scenario involving urban warfare could lead to unpredictable outcomes. The idea of a massive and prolonged conflict in Iran's cities is a dangerous proposition for any nation, including the United States.

Further meddling in Iranian internal matters, especially a potential military conflict, would be a significant blunder in the history of the United States.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while Iran does have the capability to inflict damage on US naval vessels, the strategic and economic implications of closing the Strait of Hormuz far outweigh any potential gains for Iran. The US's current command structure allows for more agility in response to such threats, and the international community would work together to counter any such actions by Iran.

Essentially, the best course of action would be to avoid a confrontation that could lead to prolonged and devastating consequences for both sides.