by Eric Martin
I have been arguing since early 2005 that the Bush administration would not attack Iran, and thus far I have been right – this despite the periodic resurfacing of rumors of an imminent military strike. Our vulnerabilities are as substantial now as they were back then (overstretched military with little spare capacity to respond with ground forces if Iran retaliates, precarious position of troops in Iraq within range of Iranian proxies/forces, supply lines stretching through Iran-friendly regions, etc.). There are even some new concerns, as the debilitatingly high price of oil would only get higher. Much.
Despite this, as the saying goes, I only have to be wrong once. With the clock ticking on the last days of the Bush administration, and with Obama well positioned to take the reins in the White House come January (a prospect that makes many Iran hawks quite nervous), if something were to happen, it would have to be soon. Thus, indicators of a shift in military posture vis-a-vis Iran will take on a different hue over the next 3-4 months.
I can’t attest to the veracity of the information in the following link, and would advise ingesting the appropriate grain of salt with intake. Nevertheless, if true, these are some awfully loud sabers-a-rattling:
Operation Brimstone ended only one week ago. This was the joint US/UK/French naval war games in the Atlantic Ocean preparing for a naval blockade of Iran and the likely resulting war in the Persian Gulf area…
The lead American ship in these war games, the USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN71) and its Carrier Strike Group Two (CCSG-2) are now headed towards Iran along with the USS Ronald Reagon (CVN76) and its Carrier Strike Group Seven (CCSG-7) coming from Japan.
They are joining two existing USN battle groups in the Gulf area: the USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN72) with its Carrier Strike Group Nine (CCSG-9); and the USS Peleliu (LHA-5) with its expeditionary strike group.
Likely also under way towards the Persian Gulf is the USS Iwo Jima (LHD-7) and its expeditionary strike group, the UK Royal Navy HMS Ark Royal (R07) carrier battle group, assorted French naval assets including the nuclear hunter-killer submarine Amethyste and French Naval Rafale fighter jets on-board the USS Theodore Roosevelt. These ships took part in the just completed Operation Brimstone.
The build up of naval forces in the Gulf will be one of the largest multi-national naval armadas since the First and Second Gulf Wars. The intent is to create a US/EU naval blockade (which is an Act of War under international law) around Iran (with supporting air and land elements) to prevent the shipment of benzene and certain other refined oil products headed to Iranian ports. Iran has limited domestic oil refining capacity and imports 40% of its benzene. Cutting off benzene and other key products would cripple the Iranian economy. The neo-cons are counting on such a blockade launching a war with Iran.
The author warns that such a blockade could provoke a response from China and Russia:
The large and very advanced nature of the US Naval warships is not only directed at Iran. There is a great fear that Russia and China may oppose the naval and air/land blockade of Iran. If Russian and perhaps Chinese naval warships escort commercial tankers to Iran in violation of the blockade it could be the most dangerous at-sea confrontation since the Cuban Missile Crisis. The US and allied Navies, by front loading a Naval blockade force with very powerful guided missile warships and strike carriers is attempting to have a force so powerful that Russia and China will not be tempted to mess with. This is a most serious game of military brinkmanship with major nuclear armed powers that have profound objections to the neo-con grand strategy and to western control of all of the Middle East’s oil supply. […]
Kuwait has activated its "Emergency War Plan" as it and other Gulf nations prepare for the likelihood of a major regional war in the Middle East involving weapons of mass destruction.
Speaking of Russia, the author even suggests that the recent eruption in South Ossetia was timed so as to limit Russia’s options in the Gulf. A bit too much of a "bank shot" for me, to use a K-Drumism. However, if there is any truth to the depiction of the movement of naval assets in and around the Gulf, this is something to keep an eye on. Even with your salt shaker in hand.
Hi Eric,
This one I don’t believe.
Firstly, the original article by “Lord Stirling” doesn’t have a single source to cite or link to imbed for it’s claims.
Secondly, “Lord Stirling” himself is a fake, a fraud, a mountebank. I’m Scottish, he’s not. I’m not a noble – neither is he. There hasn’t been an Earl of Stirling for 300 years and Burke’s Peerage has no listing for the fellow. He comes from Indiana. If he’ll lie about that, his veracity in other, unsourced, matters cannot be trusted.
Regards, C
Thanks C. Duly noted.
It’s just a Naval exercise, and they are common. Operation Valiant Shield in 2006 was a huge Pacific Fleet exercise, and there were even Chinese observers. It didn’t mean that World War III was looming with the communist nation.
Figures. Thanks LT.
I’m from the government and here to help. =)
“Lord Stirling” himself is a fake, a fraud, a mountebank. I’m Scottish, he’s not. I’m not a noble – neither is he. There hasn’t been an Earl of Stirling for 300 years and Burke’s Peerage has no listing for the fellow. He comes from Indiana.
I suspect that “Lord Stirling” is a pseudonym based on the American general during the Revolutionary War who laid claim to the title (apparently without much right)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Alexander_%28American_general%29
Operation Brimstone was an exercise.
Is the conjunction of three carrier groups in the Gulf a scheduled exercise, one that’s been planned and announced for some time?
Reality check:
The Lincoln carrier group was in the Mediterranean last week. If it hasn’t gone through the Canal, then it’s not “in the Gulf area” as the story has it, but it may have. The Mediterranean – to – Arabian Sea is a regular deployment.
The Reagan group just left Japan, after having visited Hong Kong, the Philippines, and Korea. Doesn’t sound to me as if they’re heading to the Indian Ocean, much less the Gulf; this was the same sequence as their last deployment. But we’ll see.
The Roosevelt group might be relieving the Lincoln group in the Mediterranean, if indeed it is continuing eastward after the Brimstone exercises.
As far as I can tell there is not currently a carrier actually in the Gulf, as there was for much of 2005-2007. The Nimitz, Stennis, Truman, Enterprise, Eisenhower, and Washington are all in their home ports or almost there.
That piece also claims this: “DEBKA, the Israeli strategy and military site, states that Israeli military officers are advising the Georgian armed forces in combat operations and that 1,000 Israelis are in-combat on the side of Georgia at this time.”
Apparently they’re invisible Israelis.
“Is the conjunction of three carrier groups in the Gulf a scheduled exercise, one that’s been planned and announced for some time?”
Yes. All exercises are scheduled long in advance. They have to be, because otherwise there’s no way to get everything coordinated in time, making sure all the groups are fit and ready, that all the sailors and soldiers are prepared, etc.
Brimstone has been wellpublicized. The Roosevelt is said in that video to be heading afterwards “to the Middle East.”
My question was not about Brimstone, which was obviously named and planned ahead of time, but about the alleged Arabian Sea/Persian Gulf exercises.
My greatest fear is for what might happen shortly after the election.
Carrier exercises in the next month, given recent developments in the administration’s relationship with Iran (opening of an interest section office, etc.), might just be domestic political cover for talks.
The Georgian government is fueling the perception of Israeli involvement.
Jonathan Edelstein, whose Head Heeb blogging I miss, in comments at Helena Cobban’s:
This came in response to the citing of a Ha’aretz article that begins:
This clarification to the minister’s statement that the training is provided by a “private Israeli group” (technique for deniability) is not likely to be provided by many other news sources.
The Ha’aretz article does not provide any information on what Yakobshvili is minister of; Y. sounds very, very like the Iraqi Minister of Information on April 7-9, 2003.