Closing the Strait of Hormuz: Will This Lead to World War III?

The decision of the European Union foreign ministers on Jan. 23 to apply special sanctions on Iranian oil, to impose consequences for dealing with the Iranian central bank, and to seize its assets in these countries and prohibit trade with it or any Iranian institutions in gold or precious metals is part of a policy escalation in the Gulf to pressure Iran and others to give up its nuclear program and return to the negotiating table.

These sanctions were adopted by Washington more than a year ago to influence Iran’s financial strength, while Iran exports 2.5 million barrels of oil per day in addition to being the second biggest source for natural gas after Russia. The U.S. administration has pressured Iranian oil companies to get oil from other sources, including Saudi Arabia and Iraq, which have the biggest reserves in the world. Riyadh could meet the demand in place of Iranian oil; Iraq is not able to increase its exports at the moment. Washington even persuaded India to diversify, recycling its oil imports and reducing its dependence on Iranian oil; while India imports 21 million tons of Iranian oil each year, it has threatened to blacklist them like other purchasers.

This response explains the Chinese move to defend against European sanctions on Tehran, considering it is one of the biggest receivers of Iranian oil, receiving 20 percent of it, followed by Japan with 17 percent, India with 16 percent, Italy with 10 percent, South Korea with 9 percent and the rest of the countries taking a combined 28 percent. 20 percent of Iranian oil goes to EU markets, which now face a grave economic crisis related to inflated sovereign debt beyond the situation in Greece, Spain and Portugal, where stagnant GDP growth has entered a second phase after the initial breakout in 2008 as a consequence of the American economic crisis, which put pressure on the single European currency.

Catherine Ashton, high representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, justified these sanctions as an attempt to coerce Iran to return to the negotiating table again regarding its nuclear file without addressing the negative consequences of this decision on the EU’s countries’ economies, which are considered to be major trading partners for Iran. Meanwhile, the USS Abraham Lincoln has arrived in the Gulf, accompanied by a British frigate and a French ship, in response to the Iranian threat to block the strategic Strait of Hormuz, which would mean stopping the shipment of possibly more than 18 million barrels of oil every day. Any international economic deprivation of about 22 percent of daily oil imports would compel Washington to act on its threats to cooperate with its allies — France, Britain, Germany, etc. — to take military action against Iran. Russia and China would not stand idly by in the UN Security Council or in the Gulf waters, igniting a region weakened by 30 years of wars. The scope of the war would expand to include Israel, the rest of the Arab Gulf countries and even Turkey, to spare itself from a darker scenario.

The heat of various statements regarding plans for American-Iranian relations after the recent decline of Iranian military maneuvers rose with Iranian confirmations of other military maneuvers next month in the Strait of Hormuz. Some of the information released says that Washington has sent a secret letter to Iran via Turkey regarding an Iranian blockage of the Strait of Hormuz, saying it would be an unacceptable action that threatened global peace and stability. With Washington’s confirmation of that letter, and that they do not want to enter military engagement against Tehran, this threat made the Iranians consider military engagement more likely than ever before, although the Americans informed the Iranians that they are putting pressure on Tel Aviv to not start air strikes on Iranian nuclear sites and about 30 strategic sites.

Some think that Israeli behavior this time suggests a lack of seriousness in its story that it is entering into psychological warfare without real action. The truth is Israel has a certain desire to attack Iran, but the leaders of the strategic bodies in Tel Aviv have information about a leak of nuclear weapons to Iran, and that they obtained nuclear missiles from Ukraine and three to five nuclear weapons from Belarus in 2005 on the black market.

The Israeli website Debka revealed three months ago that on March 18, 2005, the British BBC announced that according to sources, Ukraine’s prosecutor general had smuggled nuclear weapons to Iran and KH-55 rockets, also known as X-55s, were involved. These have a range of 2,500 kilometers (1,553 miles), while the distance from Iran to Palestine is only 1,200 kilometers (746 miles), and these missiles can carry 200 kilotons.

Obama may be tempted to engage in military adventurism or gambling at this critical moment for him and his commitment to the global dominance of his country. He may decide to send 450 planes to strike Iran in addition to the massive aircraft carriers in the Gulf and the other forces surrounding Iran. The withdrawal of forces from Iraq may reduce the losses that could have arisen, but is it possible to avoid a suicidal Iranian response when it reaches the point of no return?

Some Americans think that this is an attempt to completely differentiate between the occupations of Iraq and Palestine, and Obama, if he decided to make war against Iran, would be digging his own grave, weakening his chances for reelection. It will not help him if the Jewish lobby turns against him. It would be the funeral march of his first and last term as president, just as Bush Sr. lost after his victory in Operation Desert Storm.

Strategic experts think that the success of Washington and its allies facing a military strike in Iran and reducing its nuclear and military capabilities, which have been financially exhausted for more than 20 years, and aggravating the economic conditions there will move the Iranian street and the opposition within it to topple the Ayatollah’s regime. This would coincide with an offset of Assad in Damascus, which would result in the United States’ dominance over the most important sources of energy in the world. Many countries are on the verge of depleting their oil reserves, including China, Japan, India, the Asian Tigers and the European Union. They depend on energy imports at the hand of the White House, which controls the biggest oil taps in the world and prices from the Persian Gulf to the Caspian Sea and Central Asia. This might explain the statements and actions of Russia, which moved quickly to refuse European sanctions on Iranian oil and intervention in Syria. The Kremlin understands that Western action against Damascus and Tehran stems from one agenda.

The length of the naval route for oil in the Hormuz is less than two miles of sea, so blocking it would not be difficult should Iran decide to do that. It has 50 fast war ships and missiles in Fasham near the mouth of the Strait of Hormuz, in addition to three submarines in Bandar-Abbas and helicopters and advanced radar stations.

Completing the Iranian triangle in the middle of the Strait of Hormuz is the island base of Arak, where dozens of high-speed war ships equipped with torpedoes and land-and-sea rocket pads are based, in addition to the rest of the naval bases, which Iran tested in the first maneuver in this strategic waterway. The New York Times recently confirmed this, recalling that Iran had spread thousands of sea mines in this passageway with the help of submarines and planes that could close the Hormuz and leave no option aside from war or tolerance with Iran regarding this sphere of influence in the Middle East. Meanwhile, Republican candidates battling for the nomination to the White House are harshly attacking Obama for withdrawing from Iraq so quickly, which would have been the most important base to respond to Iran.

Closing the Strait of Hormuz or preparing for a confrontation in the Gulf will surely lead to a rise in the price of oil and natural gas around the world, possibly doubling it, although places like Saudi Arabia, Russia and other countries could replace the lack of supplies passing through the Strait.

A probable military confrontation based on this scenario will have consequences for the rest of the Gulf countries, especially those that have American forces. Iraq would lose about 1.25 million barrels of oil through this artery without being able to increase its pumping through Turkey or the stalled line through Saudi Arabia. Trade in the Gulf will stop, especially the necessary imports in the countries that depend entirely on foreign imports. Iraq’s financial and security situation in this scenario will be very critical; this calls for special attention before the Iraqi government considers all the possibilities in the face of a confrontation between Iran and the West, which may be delayed until this summer. We ask God to protect our people from its evils and consequences.