The U.S. military is considering putting armed personnel on commercial ships traveling through the Strait of Hormuz, in what would be an unheard of action aimed at stopping Iran from seizing and harassing civilian vessels, five American officials told The Associated Press on Thursday.
Since 2019, Iran has seized a series of ships in the strait, the narrow mouth of the Persian Gulf, as part of its efforts to pressure the West over negotiations regarding its collapsed nuclear deal with world powers. Putting U.S. troops on commercial ships could further deter Iran from seizing vessels — or escalate tensions further.
The contemplated move also would represent an extraordinary commitment in the Mideast by U.S. forces as the Pentagon tries to focus on Russia and China. America didn't even take the step during the so-called “Tanker War,” which culminated with the U.S. Navy and Iran fighting a one-day naval battle in 1988 that was the Navy's largest since World War II.
While officials offered few details of the plan, it comes as thousands of Marines and sailors on both the amphibious assault ship USS Bataan and the USS Carter Hall, a landing ship, are on their way to the Persian Gulf. Those Marines and sailors could provide the backbone for any armed guard mission in the strait, through which 20% of the world’s crude oil passes.
Iran's mission to the United Nations did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the AP about the U.S. proposal.
Five U.S. officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the proposal, acknowledged its broad details. The officials stressed no final decision had been made and that discussions continue between U.S. military officials and America's Gulf Arab allies in the region.
Officials said the Marines and Navy sailors would provide the security only at the request of the ships involved. One official described the process as complex, saying any deployment likely also would require approval of the country under which the ship is flagged and the country under which the owner is registered. So far, that has yet to happen and it might not for some time, the official said.
Earlier Thursday, Vice Adm. Brad Cooper, the head of the Navy's Mideast-based 5th Fleet, met with the head of the Gulf Cooperation Council. The six-nation bloc includes Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
While a statement from the GCC about the meeting did not hint at the proposal, it did say that Cooper and officials discussed “strengthening GCC-U.S. cooperation and working with international and regional partners.”
The Bataan and Carter Hall left Norfolk, Virginia, on July 10 on a mission the Pentagon described as being “in response to recent attempts by Iran to threaten the free flow of commerce in the Strait of Hormuz and its surrounding waters.” The Bataan passed through the Strait of Gibraltar into the Mediterranean Sea last week on its way to the Mideast.
Already, the U.S. has sent A-10 Thunderbolt II warplanes, F-16 and F-35 fighters, as well as the destroyer USS Thomas Hudner, to the region over Iran’s actions at sea.
The deployment has captured Iran's attention, with its chief diplomat telling neighboring nations that the region doesn't need “foreigners” providing security. On Wednesday, Iran’s paramilitary Revolutionary Guard launched a surprise military drill on disputed islands in the Persian Gulf, with swarms of small fast boats, paratroopers and missile units taking part.
The renewed hostilities come as Iran now enriches uranium closer than ever to weapons-grade levels after the collapse of its 2015 nuclear deal. International inspectors also believe it has enough enriched uranium for “several” nuclear bombs if it chose to build them. Iran maintains its program is for peaceful purposes, and U.S. intelligence agencies assess Tehran is not pursuing an atomic bomb.
The U.S. also has pursued ships across the world believed to be carrying sanctioned Iranian oil. Oil industry worries over another seizure by Iran likely has left a ship allegedly carrying Iranian oil stranded off Texas as no company has yet to unload it.
Associated Press writer Tara Copp in Washington contributed to this report.
© Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
32 Comments
Mr Kipling
As ever the US determined to star a conflict.
starpunk
It's not an 'unheard action'. That's what the US did in 1987 - 88. It got the USS Stark hit by an Iraqi missile (intentional or mistaken?) and it led to an undeclared naval war with Iran which was already involved in a brutal 8-year war with Iraq. The US and USSR were supporting Iraq in this war, especially since the Iranian regime never was/isn't now a friend or ally to anyone. So technically Saddam Hussein was a 'good buddy'.
Then in 1988 the war ended for all concerned. The Cold War ended in 1989. This week in 1990 Iraq invaded Kuwait and all of a sudden the US decided they didn't like peace and war hysteria brewed like wildfire. All of a sudden Saddam Hussein was 'worse than Hitler'. You know the rest.
RichardPearce
Somehow I don't think having American military personnel involved in smuggling operations is going to scare Iran into not enforcing the laws as is their international responsibility. And if the navigator or captain of a vessel they're on thinks that that exempts it from navigation rules, Iran will educate them.
Think that the US is having difficulty forcing Russia to allow them to turn Ukraine into a 'the only law that applies is that the US gets to do whatever it wants' zone? Wait until Iran turns the Persian Gulf into a no go zone for America's warships, and forcibly removes the illegal American military presence in Syria, and Iraq
Desert Tortoise
Not true. I was out there from 1988-89 and we were still running convoys through the Straits of Hormuz to deter Iranian missile attacks. The IRG nutjobs were still attacking NATO warships and neutral shipping. It was a wild situation that aside from the Iraqi missile attack on USS Stark, the USS Samuel B. Roberts hitting an Iranian naval mine and the US reprisal in Operation Praying Mantis hardly ever made the news in the US.
The Soviets were escorting their own tankers out of Iraq with their navy. They had to use their cruisers to tow their frigates from Vladivostok to the Persian Gulf because their frigate's power plants weren't durable enough to make the trip on their own power without breaking down. We'd see them towing them across the Indian Ocean.
The US Navy was escorting US flagged tankers out of Kuwait and trying to shoot at mines with door guns mounted on our helicopters ( ! ) The Dutch and British were escorting tankers flagged to their respective nations. The Belgians and Dutch were busy sweeping mines. The Italian and French navies were there too. And the IRG nutjobs were out there in Boghammers and anything that floated shooting at all of these navies.
Rodney
Time for Iran to man up. They are colonial imperial invaders.
wallace
Desert Tortoise
Iran Air Flight 655 was a scheduled passenger flight from Tehran to Dubai via Bandar Abbas that was shot down on 3 July 1988 by two SM-2MR surface-to-air missiles fired by the USS Vincennes, a guided-missile cruiser of the United States Navy. The missiles hit the aircraft, an Airbus A300, while it was flying its usual route over Iran's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf, shortly after the flight departed its stopover location, Bandar Abbas International Airport. All 290 people on board were killed
Eastman
somebody say to US boys go back home and take care about own business at home.
world is getting tired from your provoked wars here and there all the time.
its ENOUGH.
time to STOP.
RichardPearce
Something that the American public isn't likely to have heard is that Iran is one of the top 5 nanotechnology powers. They also adopted a 'just in time, mass produced out of off the shelf components' approach to military procurement (out of necessity at the time, but have continued it well past the point where they could have switched to the NATO style of military procurement) meaning that if things go HOT with American forces, everything fired at the American ships, planes, drones, missiles, and their bases and launch sites will be top of the line from day one, and what's being fired by them a week later will have been modified, tweaked, upgraded, or redesigned based on what worked, or didn't, on day one.
In real terms, it'll play out like the 'shock and awe' phase of the first Bush's war on Iraq, but with NATO forces playing the Iraqi military.
TaiwanIsNotChina
You're right the F-35s and the destroyers will scare Iran into abiding by the sanctions.
TaiwanIsNotChina
As soon as Iran goes home from Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen, you might have a point.
TaiwanIsNotChina
Top of the line crap is still crap.
Blacklabel
ever since the newly woke Navy got their sailors captured by Iran under Obama, the mystique was gone as it relates to them being an Iran deterrent. nobody is scared of our Navy under Democrat "leadership".
EFD
This is really an obtuse statement from someone with no knowledge but a lot of "opinions".
Superlib
I've got no problem with it.
As for the "warmongering" claims, these are commercial ships. Do you think some US troops are going to order a ship full of pants to attack Iran? If Iran leave commercial ships alone, they'll never see a US troop.
lincolnman
MAGA-world is certainly consistent....disparage and insult out own military and security services, giving "aid and comfort" to our enemies...
I have quite a few Navy friends at Yokosuka, Atsugi, and White Beach - and the Seabees at Camp Shields - am sure they'd be glad to "discuss" how "soft" they are with you...in you're interested....
Just make sure your health insurance is up to date...
funkymofo
ever since the newly woke Navy got their sailors captured by Iran under Obama, the mystique was gone as it relates to them being an Iran deterrent. nobody is scared of our Navy under Democrat "leadership".
"There's another side of this," said Schanzer. "They understood that there was a change in the rules of the risk/reward calculus, but they also seem to understand that there was less of a policy with regard to their regional activity from Yemen to Iraq to Syria."
So while Iran has dropped the very visible, US-centric naval run-ins, it's picked up on recruiting militias, deploying its armed forces to Syria, and supplying anti-US and anti-Israel militant groups.
Per your article.
So they stopped the meaningless harrassment for internal political points, but increased their actual ability to harm the US and its allies because Trump was, as usual, completely unable to understand anything beyond immediate optics. Big win.
wallace
Blacklabel
I know your previous Commander-in-Chief insulted the military but what grounds do you have for your insults? The military is serving and protecting you and your country and has earned your respect.
TaiwanIsNotChina
Literally released without anything in exchange. Fact is, Trumpy baby wants to surrender to enemies far older and more important than Iran.
Cards fan
I miss the days when we had strong presidents who were tough on Iran and would shred nuclear deals with them, allowing them to enrich uranium to make nuclear weapons. lol
Blacklabel
so the "words are violence" people actually threaten physical violence (of course done by others) simply over a disagreement in policy or opinion? Tells me all I need to know.
overdue for a name change in the woke culture.
Blacklabel
so did Iran attack or capture any US military during the 4 years of the reign of the orange pumpkin?
if so, what happened when they did?
cuddly
I miss the days when we had strong presidents who were naive enough to make deals with Iran that everyone knew would be breached by Iran. lol
Cards fan
They didn't breach the deal, but nice try.
Blacklabel
So when were you a squid, shipmate?
ever been haze grey and underway?
cuddly
Sure--some people believe Iran, I get it.
Fighto!
Some really over the top Iran cheerleading rhetoric going on here.
Seems prudent for the US to protect their commercial shipping. We are talking Billions of dollars of trade passing through this area.
Blacklabel
actually they did breach the deal. Even the UK says so
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/18/iran-admits-breach-of-nuclear-deal-discovered-by-un-inspectorate
Cards fan
Not a matter of believing them. It's a matter of you proving your claim.
wallace
Trump and his Doha agreement released 5,000 Taliban terrorists.
https://congressionalintegrity.org/fact-sheet-donald-trump-made-the-afghanistan-withdrawal-deal-released-5000-taliban-prisoners/
Superlib
After Trump pulled out.
Blacklabel
and Afghanistan is Iran, how exactly?
Arent they like entirely different countries?
wallace
Blacklabel
It is an example of what happens when you make a deal with terrorists or a terrorist state.