Archive for December 4, 2009

Iran can shut down vital oil route: US navy

December 4, 2009

Iran can shut down vital oil route: US navy.

Iran announced in June that a home-made submarine, named Ghadir 948, had joined the naval brigade of the first naval zone.

As word spreads of an upcoming Israeli attack on Tehran, the US Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) confirms that Iran can easily seal off the Strait of Hormuz in the event of war.

According to a September assessment, if the United States or Israel decide to bomb Tehran’s nuclear sites, Iran’s naval modernization and maritime capabilities have reached a point where it can shut down the Strait of Hormuz, through which nearly 40 percent of the world’s oil supplies pass.

“Given the importance of the Strait, disrupting traffic flow or even threatening to do so may be an effective tool for Iran,” said the intelligence report.

The assessment, which was revealed by Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin on Friday, was first posted on the website for the ONI, but abruptly removed after about a week.

It notes that while Iran’s ability to shut down the Strait of Hormuz may be transitory, the impact would undoubtedly have far-reaching consequences for the already-fragile world economy.

“[World economies would suffer] a serious economic impact from a sustain closure of the Strait of Hormuz due to greatly reduced supplies of crude oil, petroleum supplies and (liquefied natural gas),” ONI said.

On the same note, the report adds that not only has Tehran acquired “increasingly sophisticated systems” from China and Russia, but the “modernization” of the Iranian navy is to an extent that would help the government carry out such a closure if need be.

The report was referring to a series of domestic accomplishments by the Iranian navy in maritime capabilities and seafaring technology.

In recent months, Iran has added a new generation of domestic submarines, battleships, frigates, vessels, and high-speed missile boats to its fleet in a bid to protect its territorial waters from foreign threats.

According to the ONI report, Iran’s possession of high-speed missile torpedo capable of 250 knots has especially worried the US Navy as it would render foreign warships, aircraft carriers and other battle group ships vulnerable.

The report comes as Mark Fitzpatrick, a chief proliferation analyst with the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, said that the chances of a full-fledged Israeli military action against Iran are much higher now.

“I am sad to say that Iran’s announcement makes a military attack on the facilities more likely. If so, it will be a more target-rich environment,” Fitzpatrick said.

Israel routinely threatens to bomb Iran’s nuclear sites, arguing that the country’s enrichment activities are an existential threat to Tel Aviv, which ironically is reported to have the Middle East’s sole nuclear arsenal and 200 nuclear warheads at its disposal.

In response, Iran warns that if Israel steps out of line, it will close the strategic Strait of Hormuz to maritime traffic, including the 15 or so supertankers that daily sail through to deliver the world’s oil supplies.

Rear Admiral Haibollah Sayyari, the commander of Iran’s Navy, said in September that the Islamic Republic will stage a stronger presence on the high seas “in a bid to protect the country’s shipping lanes.”

Iranian Naval Forces “are constantly making efforts to have an active role in international waters, in addition to defending the interests of the Islamic Republic,” Sayyari told Fars News.

“Therefore, it has a duty to block routes used by the enemy, should the necessity arise. It is also tasked with clearing waterways” used by Iranian vessels, he added.

Al Arabiya | Has Iran leapt into the unknown?

December 4, 2009

Middle East Views | Has Iran leapt into the unknown?.

Tariq Alhomayed

Iran has announced its intention to build 10 uranium enrichment plants, and to study the possibility of achieving 20 percent uranium enrichment on its own territory. This means that Tehran will move closer to producing enough highly enriched uranium necessary for a nuclear bomb, and so in effect Iran has chosen escalation, and to follow the policy of brinkmanship.

There are several ways to interpret the Iranian escalation, especially as Tehran was very confused and [attempted] to play down its threatening announcement, saying that it had said what it said as a reaction to the decision taken by the International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA] which condemned Iran for its lack of cooperation.

At this point it is true to say that the Iranian regime has tied its legitimacy to the nuclear project, and the Supreme Leader of Iran previously made reference to this. Therefore it is difficult [for the Iranian regime] to simply abandon this project, especially taking into account the domestic situation in Iran, which has become even more complex after Tehran announced its intentions to build the 10 [uranium enrichment] plants.

The opposition [in Iran] is waiting for the big question: what will the Iranians gain from an agreement [with the IAEA], and will this lead to an Iranian open-door policy to the West? If there is no open-door policy [to the West] this means a political and economic crisis [in Iran], but if there is an open-door policy, the reformists will say: If this is the case, why are we being accused of treason when the regime is running after the West? All of this means that the regime in Tehran is caught in a predicament according to the famous proverb “damned if you do, and damned if you don’t.”

There is another interpretation [of the situation] that says that Iran is pushing things to the edge of the abyss in order to obtain greater concessions from the West, and this is in order to promote itself internally. However this is very risky, and the proof of this is that nuclear experts told our newspaper that Iran’s threats are “empty” and of no value, and this of course indicates that Iran is not sincere in everything that it has told the western negotiators.

Another interpretation is that Iran is escalating matters betting that the West, and particularly the US, is unable to undertake a military showdown [with Tehran] due to the economic conditions, and Washington’s position in Iraq and Afghanistan. As a result of this, the US will not allow Israel to conduct military operations [against Iran], and therefore this gives Iran the opportunity to buy time.

All of the above are reasonable interpretations [of the situation], but the question is: does this mean that Iran is in a position of strength?

I think not! There are two clear features in Iran and they are chaos and confusion; and the Iranian regime has taken a leap into the unknown. It is true that Obama has shown more flexibility towards Tehran, but it is [also] in his power today to use this against Iran, and he will have international support [in this]. This would lead to international resolutions that result in harsh sanctions being placed on Iran, and matters may even develop into military confrontation or action by Israel [against Iran].

Israel is waiting for the green light to attack Iran, as Tel Aviv wishes to move on from the complications that it is facing in the region, and this is not to mention its concerns over Tehran’s intentions. Iran is a very big fish to catch for whoever wants it in these troubled waters.

Therefore the Iranian escalation is a leap into the unknown, rather than an operation with calculated consequences.

Iran builds navy to hold vital strait – UPI.com

December 4, 2009

Iran builds navy to hold vital strait – UPI.com.

TEHRAN, Dec. 3 (UPI) — As tensions with Iran rise again, the Islamic Republic is reported to be expanding its naval power in the oil-rich Gulf and the Arabian Sea to be able to command the chokepoint Strait of Hormuz, the only way in or out of the Gulf.

Closing that strategic waterway to maritime traffic, especially the 15 or so supertankers that sail through it every day delivering the world’s oil supplies, would trigger an economic crisis that could cripple the painful efforts to recover from the global financial meltdown of 2008.

The U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence reported in a recent study that came to light a few days ago that overall operational control of naval and coastal missile forces in the region is now in the hands of the increasingly powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps., which has its own naval arm.

Tehran has threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz if Iran comes under attack by U.S. or Israeli forces over its nuclear program. That would cut off some 40 percent of the world’s oil supplies.

According to the naval study, the Revolutionary Guards have expanded their naval capabilities in recent years with ships and technology from China, North Korea and Italy and now deploy some of the fastest naval vessels in the region.

On July 29, Rear Adm. Haibollah Sayyari, commander of Iran’s regular navy, which now has responsibility for operations in the Arabian Sea east of the Strait of Hormuz, said the Islamic Republic will stage a stronger presence on the high seas “in a bid to maintain the country’s might.”

According to the semiofficial Fars News Agency, Sayyari made the announcement when he inaugurated a new jetty for naval speedboats and a military airfield at the Jask naval base on the Gulf of Oman at the eastern approaches to the Strait of Hormuz.

This was just one of several bases the Iranians have expanded or built in the last two or three years along the eastern shore of the Gulf, which Iran controls from the Strait of Hormuz all the way to Iraq’s narrow outlet to the sea in the northern end of the waterway.

Iran also controls several small but strategic islands that dominate the shipping lanes in the southern waters of the Gulf.

Batteries of anti-ship missiles, primarily Chinese-designed C-801 and C-802 missiles, have been deployed on these islands that could be used to block the strait.

But sea mines are seen as the most potent threat to shipping, and the Iranians are believed to have a significant number of these in their arsenal.

“The real nuclear option for Iran does not involve nuclear weapons,” Texas-based global security consultancy Stratfor noted in a recent assessment of the Iranian threat.

“It would involve mining the Strait of Hormuz and the narrow navigation channels that make up the Persian Gulf.”

Iran used mines extensively during the 1980-88 war with Iraq, with both sides attacking oil tankers to throttle each other’s economies.

That sent oil prices and insurance rates soaring. But the strait was never closed and shipping activity continued.

If the strait was closed, or threatened enough to curtail shipping, the economic consequences would be immense.

The impact, Stratfor observed, “would be immediate and dramatic. The nastiest part of the equation would be that in mine warfare it is very hard to know when all the mines have been cleared. …

“There is possibility that the strait could be effectively closed to supertankers for a considerable period. The effect on oil prices would be severe.”

But it is the danger of precipitating just such an economic crisis that is a principal reason why Western analysts believe Israel is unlikely to unleash threatened pre-emptive air and missile strikes against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.

Iran would respond by trying to close the strait, even though it depends on the waterway as much as everyone else.

Israel “would be held responsible for a potentially disastrous oil shortage,” Stratfor noted.

“Only the Americans have the resources to even consider dealing with the potential Iranian response, because only the Americans have the possibility of keeping Persian Gulf shipping open once the shooting starts.”