UK sailors captured at gunpoint

[swerve]

How feasible is a blockade?

Iran has only one refinery, and imports almost all of it's gasoline. We would be hurt if they shut off the crude, but they would be crippled.

Iran was importing 43% of its petrol last summer, not almost all of it. They have a lot of room to cut consumption. Petrol is heavily subsidised, ludicrously cheap, & used profligately as a result. There's also smuggling of petrol out of the country on a vast scale. In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised if some of the apparent consumption is "ghost" consumption, the same petrol going round a few times, collecting subsidies each time.

The government is currently trying to end imports, in order to reduce the cost to the exchequer, as the retail price is much less than the subsidised price. It's doing this by the ineffective means of rationing, as cutting the subsidy would be politically painful. Blockading their petrol imports might do them a favour. They could use the blockade as an excuse to abolish the subsidy, smuggling would cease, people would try to economise on petrol, the government would save billions, & the country would probably get by on domestic production.

BTW, Iran doesn't have only one refinery. From the US Energy Information Agency (http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/Iran/Oil.html - to pre-empt false accusations of making it up) "Major refineries include: Abadan (400,000-bbl/d capacity); Isfahan (265,000 bbl/d); Bandar Abbas (232,000 bbl/d); Tehran (225,000 bbl/d); Arak (150,000 bbl/d); and Tabriz (112,000 bbl/d)." New refineries are being built & the existing ones expanded.

Iran is able to import petrol overland, & via the Caspian Sea. Unless Russia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan & Turkmenistan co-operated, a blockade would raise their costs, but not cut off supplies. There's some scope for importing overland (at still higher cost) from Turkey, & more limited & at higher cost still, from Pakistan.

 

[qwerty223]

What are your thoughts on the factors holding US from attacking the nuke sites now ?

BigE seems to totally ignore the Chinese and Japanese. Since they are so rely on Iran Oil, what will they do if their survive too are in risk? :nutkick

 

[Rich]

BigE seems to totally ignore the Chinese and Japanese. Since they are so rely on Iran Oil, what will they do if their survive too are in risk? :nutkick

Good point. While we could survive an Iranian shutdown of oil other nations, some of which are allies, would be hurt pretty bad.

The Iranian people dont actually vote in elections that matter so their leadership isn't worried about public reaction. And anything negative is steered towards the office of their President. That's why he's there, in order to take the heat off the Revolutionary Council, which btw is the real power in Iran.

We could blockade inbound ships to Iran, especially petrol, and bomb their limited gasoline production. Such a move would escalate into a full scale regional war. I suspect even a blockade of gasoline would. Besides, they have a northern border which means the Russians would have to go along with it. Which they wouldn't!

However Putin does click his heels together every time the region flares up because Russia's energy profits then go up, because the price of energy futures goes up. Putin may not want a full scale war in the region but he loves having something simmering in the background because Russia is heavily dependant on oil/gas sales. Putin manipulates these with his actions and his words, thus keeping the prices artificially high.

He has played the Iran card like a maestro.

 

[type45]

In my opinion the only way to stop this happening again is for more heavily armed boats to be in the area in greater numbers. Possibly some Archer class or even some Clydes.
As for the Americans calling our rules of engagement. If they had fought back it would have been a blood bath. We would have 15 dead sailors instead of 15 alive hostages. It is just a shame the water was too shallow for HMS Cornwall to be close.
A solution? Blockades possibly but diplomatic negotiatons seem to be the only way. If we had our carrriers built we could send HMS Prince of Wales to the area with 35 JSFs which would pile more pressure on them but as they arnt even orderd yet that isnt really an option. An SAS/SBS rescue operation may have been possible in the first few hours but will be almost impossible now without loss of life on the British side. It could also turn into a disaster if anything went wrong. The SAS may be the best but they arnt supermen. I would advise diplomatic measures atm but naval or air blockades could be an option if the situation esculates. I just wish we had a government with a spine. If this was 20 years ago Mrs Thatcher would have been in office and I feel things would be very different.
I am very unhappy with Russia at the moment however due to there lack of support at the UN.

 

[adsH]

In my opinion the only way to stop this happening again is for more heavily armed boats to be in the area in greater numbers. Possibly some Archer class or even some Clydes.
As for the Americans calling our rules of engagement. If they had fought back it would have been a blood bath. We would have 15 dead sailors instead of 15 alive hostages. It is just a shame the water was too shallow for HMS Cornwall to be close.
A solution? Blockades possibly but diplomatic negotiatons seem to be the only way. If we had our carrriers built we could send HMS Prince of Wales to the area with 35 JSFs which would pile more pressure on them but as they arnt even orderd yet that isnt really an option. An SAS/SBS rescue operation may have been possible in the first few hours but will be almost impossible now without loss of life on the British side. It could also turn into a disaster if anything went wrong. The SAS may be the best but they arnt supermen. I would advise diplomatic measures atm but naval or air blockades could be an option if the situation esculates. I just wish we had a government with a spine. If this was 20 years ago Mrs Thatcher would have been in office and I feel things would be very different.
I am very unhappy with Russia at the moment however due to there lack of support at the UN.

Well one thing certain! We do need more Ships, Technology is great (Coming from an IS guy) But there no way Technology can help here!
Shrinking RN Budget won’t help either! Oh by the way. I feel there’s a freeze on public spending scheduled down the line.

 

[adsH]

We don't actually import Iranian oil so the only effect would be a slight hiccup in the rise of cost per barrel. OPEC would take the opportunity to pump a little extra to take advantage of the price bump so total global supply would be the same. Japan and China would be in a world of pain though as they would have to get supplies elsewhere. The Gulf States could easily up capacity for a short term until the situation is resolved. We don't need to blockade Iran to bring it to it's knees. One bomb in the national refinery will send that nation back to the stone age. It's amazing they would allow themselves to be so vulnerable...

Just a thought matey!

Does OPEC have the capability to compensate for a massive shortage in the global market, this is a time issue. Plus you've got the real power bearers 'Market Specs’.

Russia still has Infrastructure/logistic issues. If Iran is restricted successfully, where would its customers get their energy supply, the Market possibly? In short it’s complicated! Demand exceeding supply, of this magnitude would wreak Havoc!


The answer has to be Strategic rather than Tactical!

 

[Dave H]

Type 45,

Interesting mention of Maggie Thatcher and the supposed lack of spine of the current lot. I am a fan of Maggie but lets not let time cloud events, it was the Thatcher administration that almost decimated the RN surface Fleet with the proposed pre Falklands cuts, Invincible would go, the assault ships flogged off. In fact it was Maggies NATO only and anti submarine warfare priority thatlimited much of the navy to a too specific role (admittedly the Soviet subs were a threat). The early 1980's plan for the Type 23 was a no helicopter, simple design suported by a tanker that shipped the AS helos, so the lack of surface and deep strike capability for the navy goes back to Maggie, the prevous labour govts all the way to the 1960's.

Had Galtieri not done Maggie Thatcher a favour she might well have been seen as a one term failure post 1983 election, which would have been in doubt without the Falklands factor.

Im not a fan of the current lot but spineless? Im not sure. Blair has committed troops to war zones, in the case of Iraq against much UN opposition and much opposition within his own party, certainly his own reputation has suffered. Add afghanistan, Sierra Leonne etc and the good and bad points cancel each other out. The good is that the UK forces have had more combat experience than most Nato allies, the bad that basic kit and training is now lacking. Would the Tories have put more money in? Possibly but if you think about it Blair has seen through many projects that an Old Labour politician might have cancelled, eg Typhoon, Trident, Astute, JSF and hopefully the carriers.

We are limited to what can be done in Iraq unless a coallition assisted, labour and conservative Governements are both responsible for some shocking defence decisions, 1960's cancellation of the carriers, the 1980's budget driven adoption of the F2 Tornado as our "premier" fighter...ummm.

What do you expect the Russians to do? Why should they abck us, they dont need to and we are still an industrial and military rival to them.We wont sell Iran arms so why should Russia miss out on providing jobs for its workforce? That is exactly how we would see it in a different set of circs.

 

[Thumper]

As for the Americans calling our rules of engagement. If they had fought back it would have been a blood bath. We would have 15 dead sailors instead of 15 alive hostages.

I agree, resistance would have been stupid, but lets not paint with such a broad brush. There are plenty of British on BBC HYS that suggested the same thing. Americans do not have a monopoly on stupidity.

 

[Scott]

Make that another vote concurring that resistance would have resulted in the death of the Brits.

I would not call Blair spineless, but it is interesting to imagine the outcome if the players were Thatcher & Reagan instead of Blair & Bush.

 

[Ares]

I dont know if this is exactly true in terms of actuality but there is reports circulating around that "Operation Bite" a joint UK/US Strike against Iran's nuclear facilities will occur on April 6th from 4.a.m

 

[Waylander]

I don't think that such data is available in the net...

 

[Tasman]

I dont know if this is exactly true in terms of actuality but there is reports circulating around that "Operation Bite" a joint UK/US Strike against Iran's nuclear facilities will occur on April 6th from 4.a.m

Did the reports start on April 1st?

What is your source for such reports? I'm sure that America's CIA and Britain's SIS would be interested!

Cheers

 

[Todjaeger]

Adjustment of boarding tactics and support

I do feel that currently, the best way for the UK to get the 15 sailors & marines back is through diplomacy. Iran does seem to be inflating the incident with mention of possible trials, claims of seizure in Iranian sovereign waters, etc. This as has been mentioned, could be in response to events in Iraq involving detainment by coalition forces of Iranian officials/agents. Another possibility is that it is in response to US/coalition specwarries operating in Iran. I recall mention, on public newscasts no less, that some of the US info on the Iranian nuclear program and specific locations involved was gathered through the use of aerial reconnaissance flights and special forces operating in Iran. I can see how that might irritate Iran, having US Army Rangers and Green Berets, USN Seals, USMC Force Recon or USAF Air Commandoes running around inside their country.

For the future though, the coalition might wish to revisit the different boarding tactics and equipment used by the various navies involved. Different tactics would render what the Iranian boats did difficult or impossible, or a search for more capable ships for littoral action might be started. I'm not talking about an LCS style or scale vessel. More along the lines of a FAC, like a Dvora or Super Dvora. Something with shallow draft so that is can stay close to RIBs, yet carrying enough firepower so that small arm equipped vessels are no threat. A 57mm gun and a few Hellfire missiles I would imagine would be sufficient.

Another option would to constantly have an armed helicopter airborne nearby any RIBs while they are deployed. This could be good in allowing approaching FACs to be detected sooner, as well as giving the option to engage the FACs before they can threaten the RIBs.

Continuing to send out RIBs with small arms-equiped personnel, and not have some type of anti-boat or anti-ship capability always immediately available sounds like the recipe for a repeat.

Of course, robust ROE would be needed, and these ROE would need to be made crystal clear to all who might become involved. For example, if the ROE allows for the destruction of a FAC that approaches at high speed once it comes within 200m of a RIB and/or boarded vessel, make sure that everyone knows, the FAC will be blown up.

-Cheers

 

[radiosilence]

Some interesting info. regarding the captured Brits.

A failed American attempt to abduct two senior Iranian security officers on an official visit to northern Iraq was the starting pistol for a crisis that 10 weeks later led to Iranians seizing 15 British sailors and Marines

Better understanding of the seriousness of the US action in Arbil - and the angry Iranian response to it - should have led Downing Street and the Ministry of Defence to realise that Iran was likely to retaliate against American or British forces such as highly vulnerable Navy search parties in the Gulf. The two senior Iranian officers the US sought to capture were Mohammed Jafari, the powerful deputy head of the Iranian National Security Council, and General Minojahar Frouzanda, the chief of intelligence of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, according to Kurdish officials

link

 

[Thumper]

I read the article twice. There are no credible sources cited nor did he present any circumstantial evidence that this is the case. That article would never have passed muster in any credible newspaper.

 

[Tasman]

I read the article twice. There are no credible sources cited nor did he present any circumstantial evidence that this is the case. That article would never have passed muster in any credible newspaper.

I agree Thumper. I'm staggered that a newspaper would make such a claim without citing any sources. :frown

Cheers

 

[merocaine]

apart from Kurdish sources but perhaps they dont count

"They were after Jafari," Fuad Hussein, the chief of staff of Massoud Barzani, told The Independent. He confirmed that the Iranian office had been established in Arbil for a long time and was often visited by Kurds obtaining documents to visit Iran. "The Americans thought he [Jafari] was there," said Mr Hussein.

Mr Jafari was accompanied by a second, high-ranking Iranian official. "His name was General Minojahar Frouzanda, the head of intelligence of the Pasdaran [Iranian Revolutionary Guard]," said Sadi Ahmed Pire, now head of the Diwan (office) of President Talabani in Baghdad. Mr Pire previously lived in Arbil, where he headed the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), Mr Talabani's political party.

 

[Tasman]

For the future though, the coalition might wish to revisit the different boarding tactics and equipment used by the various navies involved. Different tactics would render what the Iranian boats did difficult or impossible, or a search for more capable ships for littoral action might be started. I'm not talking about an LCS style or scale vessel. More along the lines of a FAC, like a Dvora or Super Dvora. Something with shallow draft so that is can stay close to RIBs, yet carrying enough firepower so that small arm equipped vessels are no threat. A 57mm gun and a few Hellfire missiles I would imagine would be sufficient.

Another option would to constantly have an armed helicopter airborne nearby any RIBs while they are deployed. This could be good in allowing approaching FACs to be detected sooner, as well as giving the option to engage the FACs before they can threaten the RIBs.

Continuing to send out RIBs with small arms-equiped personnel, and not have some type of anti-boat or anti-ship capability always immediately available sounds like the recipe for a repeat.

Of course, robust ROE would be needed, and these ROE would need to be made crystal clear to all who might become involved. For example, if the ROE allows for the destruction of a FAC that approaches at high speed once it comes within 200m of a RIB and/or boarded vessel, make sure that everyone knows, the FAC will be blown up.

-Cheers

This is certainly a concern for the crews of all warships operating in the area.

A report in the Hobart Mercury Newspaper on Saturday, 31st March, quoted the Captain of HMAS Toowoomba, which is in the same area as HMS Cornwall, as saying that his crew have reviewed security procedures since the incident. Hopefully that will include the despatch of the ship's helicopter to work with the RHIBs, along with thorough reconnaissance of the area in which the RHIBs are operating.

I imagine that a similar review has taken place in every ship in the force.

Cheers

 

[Waylander]

I've got a question.
Are the naval helicopters used in the RN normally equipped with AShMs during those missions or are they just using door gunners like we do?

 

[Tasman]

I've got a question.
Are the naval helicopters used in the RN normally equipped with AShMs during those missions or are they just using door gunners like we do?

Good question Waylander.

Dave reported in Post 57 that the Lynx helo on Cornwall only had a GPMG mounted and that is the case as well with the Seahawk on HMAS Toowoomba. The main weapon carried by the Seahawk is the Mk 46 torpedo which is an ASW weapon. The Anzac class frigates were supposed to carry a Seasprite helo equipped with the Penguin AShM but as you probably know the RAN Seasprites have run into major problems and have never entered operational service. We could certainly do with them in the Gulf right now!

Cheers