Last September I produced a brief survey of major conflict across the globe in which I wrote the following about the conflict with Iran and Israel, one which is now referred to as the 12-Day War: "[T]here is every reason to believe that the conflict between Israel and Iran is not over and that the United States may be drawn in again."
It appears the next phase of this war is about to begin. In fact, by the time you read this, attacks may already have begun.
It puzzles me that the rest of the world has treated the run-up to this second phase of the war as a non-event. Although the vast build-up of U.S. military forces has been covered in the media, other stories concerning the U.S. Supreme Court overturning tariffs imposed by the Trump administration and the ongoing fallout from the Epstein files are covered with equal if not greater weight. The financial markets have been barely roiled except for a relatively small uptick in oil prices.
The reason for this complacency appears to be twofold:
1. Many people believe that President Trump will go TACO, the informal acronym that stands for "Trump Always Chickens Out." The assumption is that, as he has done on so many other fronts, the president will not follow through with his initial threats, just as, for instance, he's done time and time again regarding the level of tariffs he announces and then retracts or reduces dramatically when it becomes clear that world financial markets are tanking. By extension, he supposedly 1) will stop short of an attack on Iran by announcing a deal that gives the United States far less than it has asked for and 2) will then declare victory.
2. The second pillar of this complacency is that most people apparently believe that the Iranians will NOT follow through with their threats should another conflict arise or at least will not be very successful in their execution. Those threats include attacking U.S. bases in the region, attacking any country that assists the U.S. and Israeli war effort, attacking U.S. naval vessels, and, most important, closing the Strait of Hormuz through which passes 20 percent of the world's exported oil and liquefied natural gas. Such a closure would not only affect Iran, but other major oil and natural gas exporters including Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.
In the spirit of the old adage that no plan survives first contact with the enemy, here's why these expectations may turn out to be too optimistic:
First, every pronouncement coming out of the government of Israel suggests that nothing less than a full-out attack on Iran will be satisfactory since the Iranian government will not agree to demands laid out by Israel that include limitations of Iran's ballistic missiles and an end to its assistance for groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah. The Iranians have so far said they want negotiations limited to the country's nuclear program. The United States has also indicated that missile limits and aid to Iran-aligned militias should be included as part of the negotiations.
The last conflict, the 12-Day War, began with an Israeli strike. I believe that if the United States does not strike first or in tandem with Israeli forces, Israel will simply start the war and ask for its ally, the United States, to offer assistance. This assistance will almost certainly be offered by Trump.
Second, both the Israeli and U.S. governments have made it abundantly clear that their preferred outcome is regime change in Iran. Whether the Iranian government believes them, I cannot know. But if it does, then this next phase of the conflict will be considered an existential threat to the regime. There will be no reason for the Iranians to restrain their response since the regime will figure it has little to lose by fighting all out. It should come as no surprise that the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic and the ruling clique have no desire to see the inside of an American jail (where the now deposed former president of Venezuela is residing).
If these two suppositions are correct, then complacency in the financial markets and capitals around the world will likely give way to panic. It is doubtful that Iran will overpower the United States and Israel militarily in the emerging conflict. But Iran can inflict a lot of damage with its missile and drone fleet. Iran's most potent weapon, however, is the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Oil prices would skyrocket. The longer the strait remains closed, the more the world economy would seize up from both lack of fuel and high prices for what fuel is available.
Iran does not actually have to control the strait to prevent passage of tankers. All it needs to do is make it unsafe for oil tankers to pass through the strait. And it has the drones, missiles and patrol boats to do so. Insurance will become unavailable and that will put a stop to tanker traffic. No shipping company is going to ship 2 million barrels of oil—the amount carried by a typical large crude oil tanker—worth more than $132 million at today's prices without insurance.
Of course, the U.S. navy could escort tankers through the strait. But then those navy vessels and the tankers would become targets for Iranian missiles and drones using "swarm attacks." Ships need to destroy all incoming attacks to avoid damage. The attacker only needs one missile or drone to get through to create a lot of damage.
It's possible that the United States might be able to neutralize such threats. But it's hard to imagine a tanker captain and crew wanting to test whether such neutralization will work every time. Nor is an insurance company likely to write insurance for a tanker passing through the Strait of Hormuz under such conditions.
My hope is that this conflict is averted and an arrangement is arrived at that allows all parties to walk away permanently. Hope, however, is not a plan. And given Donald Trump's entertainment background and flair for the dramatic, we should not be surprised to see events unfold as they would in a Hollywood movie in which it is an iron law that once a gun is shown to the audience, it must be fired before the end of the film. Therefore, I think the world needs to plan for a less than felicitous outcome.
Kurt Cobb is a freelance writer and communications consultant who writes frequently about energy and environment. His work has appeared in The Christian Science Monitor, Resilience, Common Dreams, Naked Capitalism, Le Monde Diplomatique, Oilprice.com, OilVoice, TalkMarkets, Investing.com, Business Insider and many other places. He is the author of an oil-themed novel entitled Prelude and has a widely followed blog called Resource Insights. He can be contacted at kurtcobb2001@yahoo.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment