Iran War Ceasefire Over in All But Name
Now what?
WaPo (“Attacks in Strait of Hormuz, Gulf region imperil fragile U.S.-Iran ceasefire“):
A sharp escalation in attacks in the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf is threatening the shaky ceasefire between Iran and the United States as the two sides struggle to make progress in talks on a lasting end to the war.
Iran accused the U.S. of ceasefire violations and issued new warnings Tuesday after two U.S. destroyers, closely followed by two merchant vessels, came under attack Monday morning during successful transits of the strait, in an expansion of U.S. operations in the waterway.The United Arab Emirates reported an Iranian assault on an energy hub that caused a fire. And Oman’s state media reported an attack in the country but did not identify a perpetrator.
Iran fired cruise missiles and drones at the U.S. naval and commercial vessels but did not land any hits, said Adm. Brad Cooper, head of U.S. Central Command. Iran also sent six fast boats after the commercial ships, he said, but U.S. forces fired on and destroyed the vessels. He would not say whether the exchange of strikes meant the ceasefire was over.
In a separate incident, President Donald Trump said Iran hit a South Korean tanker in the strait. “Perhaps it’s time for South Korea to come and join the mission!” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post Monday. South Korean officials met Tuesday to discuss their response to the incident, according to Yonhap, South Korea’s state news agency.
Iranian officials issued new warnings following the flare-up in hostilities. Parliamentary Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf accused the U.S. of ceasefire violations, saying “we know full well that the continuation of the status quo is intolerable for America; while we have not even begun yet,” in a post on X.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said events in the strait “make clear that there’s no military solution to a political crisis” in a separate statement. “The U.S. should be wary of being dragged back into quagmire by ill-wishers,” he said, adding: “Project Freedom is Project Deadlock.”
Earlier, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the predominant branch of the Iranian armed forces, warned any U.S. vessels in the strait would be considered “a legitimate target.”
“The Strait of Hormuz will not be opened by the tweet of the President of the United States; the management and control of this waterway is in the hands of Iran,” Ahmad Vahidi said in a post on X.
Iranian officials said over the weekend that U.S. attempts to “interfere” with Tehran’s “management” of the strait would qualify as a ceasefire violation.
The ceasefire is over in all but name. Iran is firing at our ships and we’re sinking theirs.
BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner states the obvious: “It would not take much for the situation to escalate further.”
As the US-Iran ceasefire teeters on the brink of collapse, residents in the Gulf are now wondering if a full-scale resumption of hostilities is inevitable and if so, what form it will take.
With the US attempting to break the blockade that Iran has imposed on the Strait of Hormuz and with Iran lashing out at both shipping and onshore targets in the UAE it would not take much for the situation to escalate further.
Iran retains a large number of its missiles and drones, including some reportedly dug up from where they were buried to evade airstrikes in March.
The IRGC Navy is also thought to possess powerful anti-ship missiles which pose a serious threat to any US Navy warship escorting merchant vessels past Iran’s coastline.
President Trump has threatened dire retaliation if a US warship is hit.
This all reinforces the fact that it will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to prise open the Strait of Hormuz by force.
While a ceasefire with a guarantee that the Strait returns to its prewar state would seem to be the best deal in the offing for either party, neither side seems willing to take that deal. A prolonged ceasefire with American sailors and Marines seems rather clearly to Iran’s advantage, as it degrades US combat power and gives them time to regroup and reconstitute.
I haven’t the foggiest what comes next. We seem to be about out of useful military targets to hit from the relative safety of the air and sea. And we clearly have no desire to launch a ground invasion.
This must be fake news. Both Trump and Hegseth said we have destroyed their military capabilities saying they were “totally defeated” and “we own the skies (except maybe the part that missiles fly through).
Steve
I see this project as more of an evacuation of large U.S. flagged commercial ships than the breaking of a blockade. Two have been successfully evacuated, and a few more may follow using a route shown to be relatively mine free along the coast of Oman.
There are about 900 other large ships stuck in the Gulf, as well as the issue of when ships will be able to enter the Gulf without payment to and/or permission from Iran.
The question no one seems to be asking:
With all the wealth and military assets the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman have, why does the US believe that it has to expend its treasure and risk its people in this region?
US military accompanies commercial carrier through Strait of Hormuz
U.S. deploying ‘umbrella’ of defense and tech assets to shield ships in the Strait of Hormuz
Cost:Benefit. I wonder that may be.
@Scott:
I wonder how they talked Maersk into risking a ship.
@Scott: At 2 or 3 ships per day the cost per ship will be huge. Traffic is normally over 120 per day IIRC.
Steve
The zombie Iranian military – “obliterated,” “totally defeated,” “they want a deal so bad,” sure is a thorn in the side of our Imbecile In Chief who would rather focus on the ballroom, the arch, and continuing the grift. I didn’t think it would be possible for a president to make a bigger foreign policy blunder than Bush had with his idiotic invasion of Iraq, but Trump has done it. He started his assault on the world economy with his (illegal) tariffs, and iced the cake with his (illegal) war on Iran. Hell of job, Trumpie!
ETA – As was the case with the pandemic, Trump simply cannot resist going in front of the cameras every day and offering his ignorant and preposterous thoughts.
900 ships currently trapped. About 66 days of Iranian, then Iranian+US blockades, which have reduced the usual Hormuz 100-150 ship a day traffic by north of 7,000 ships so far. Minus the two ships the Navy busted out.
Now, I’m no math whiz. . .
@Michael Reynolds:
Apparently neither is Whiskey Pete…
Meanwhile the premium gas required in my BMW motorcycles is well north of $5 per gal.
But Hestgheth says the cease fire is not over.
Unless you can drink him under the table, you can’t contradict him.
@Eusebio:
At least 2 of the 5 U.S. flagged ships in the Gulf were heavily involved in moving material around for the U.S. armed services.
“Jacob Kaarsbo“
@Scott:
These countries are learning that their military capabilities are not up to their needs. They are now looking to Ukraine for help (hardware and technology) as a more useful ally than the Putin aligned U.S. There are Ukraine engineers in the gulf now training them to use and manufacture Ukrainian stuff. (See my link in the previous post).
ETA: Ukraine now has, arguably, the strongest armed forces in Europe, which would put Russia at number 2.
https://bsky.app/profile/jkaarsbo.bsky.social
Note that Kaarsbo is Danish, based in Denmark.
ETA:
UA (Ukraine) was in a different font that did not display, so, e.g. :
“will win” should have been “UA will win.”
It should have been obvious that the way for the US to deal with the closed Straits was, with the cesefire, to slowly begin a process of escorting ships, increasing the numbers over time.
While quietly making it known to Iran, perhaps via Pakistan, that if they were fired upon, the US Navy would respond, bot directly and by “inspecting” ships carrying cargoe to and from Iran.
Instead, Trump being Trump, the US had to jump straight in to announcing a blockade, and then attempting to escort merchant ships.
Rather foolish.
That’s not to say escorting would neessarily have been accepted by Iran; but it would probably have had a better chance.
And would set up escalation/negotiation options with four cards in the US hand to play:
1) Direct military response re attackers
2) Exrended military response re Hormuz area
3) Informal blockade
4) Formal blockade
@Scott:
The GCC states quite simply lack the sort of ships required for escorts; they could assist the US Navy, but not substitute for it.
And even re assistance, I doubt they have sufficient experience in integrated operations exercises that NATO and Japan, for example, have with the USN.
Same applies to air operations, I suspect.
The real worry is going to be running a sizable convoy through, and getting a hit by a saturation strike by drones plus missiles plus light boats.
It seems likely to be difficult to secure the Straits without rather large land force operations on the northern coast.
However, it should be evident to any rational actors in Iran that Iranian control over the Straits in the longer term won’t be acceptable to the GCC or to various other interested parties, beside the US.
Iran may try and trade it away, sensibly. But if they attempt to keep it, and especially if they levy tolls, it’s liable to produce responses Iran may not like. Nobody in or out of the Gulf will be happy at getting their goods subjected to illegal Iranian surcharges.
@Scott: Thanks for that piece, it explained what’s being attempted which should’ve been easy for Pete Hegseth to describe, but he failed to do so.
An attempt to cast a shield over some part of the waterway which they hope Iran can’t penetrate and an ask for some volunteer guinea pigs. Not at all hard to relate…it just wasn’t.
With people so inarticulate, self-absorbed, or otherwise distracted they are unable to communicate effectively actions have to do all the talking.
@JohnSF:
Me: I know this one! What is every policy decision El Taco has ever made?
Alex Trebek: Correct! We’d also have accepted “What is the only kind of policy decision El Taco is capable of making?”
@JohnSF:
I can see a kind of Modified Trolley Problem.
Say Iran does a saturation attack with drones and missiles directed at the USN escort ships, plus a few missiles and drones directed at the merchant vessels. Does the USN commander defend his ships or the ships under escort?
@Kathy:
You are with your child next to you on an airplane and the oxygen masks drop. Who do you put the mask on first?
@JohnSF:
Escorting hundreds, even thousands of ships through the strait would require more ships than the Navy can keep manned and on-station while still dealing with the China threat. 140 ships a day – setting aside the backlog – that’s not a job for a handful of escort destroyers.
And I’m not sanguine about the capacity of even the mighty destroyers to stop every drone, every missile, every sea-drone the Iranians may fire, let alone the mines they may or may not have already laid, and the additional mines they can lay from a rowboat. And let’s not forget nearly-unstoppable ballistic missiles which wouldn’t be able to target a speedy destroyer but might be able to score a near-miss or a hit on some massive, slow, un-maneuverable tanker.
Trump isn’t whining for European destroyers just be a dick, the USN could use the help.
@charontwo:
I can be evasive and say I don’t have children (which just happens to be true). Or I could evade responsibility and give the answer printed on every safety card placed in every airplane: secure your oxygen mask first, then help those around you who cannot do it on their own.
The thinking is that in a worst-case scenario*, you’re more likely to pass out while helping a child put their mask on, and said child might not be able to put yours on in time. Whereas an adult should be able to secure theirs and then help the child with no more damage than they passing out, if that much.
The worst-case scenario is explosive decompression, meaning oxygen levels drop at once, over high altitude terrain like a mountain range. In such a situation, the pilots cannot descend to 10,000 feet fast enough, as they have to clear out of the mountainous area first.
Now, if someone were shooting in my direction, and there was a child nearby, I’d safeguard the child first.
*Emergencies almost always consider the worst case scenario.
Updating: It seems a Pentagon timeline shown on TV today mentions more mines being laid in late April. So, there are mines. The USN is going to escort LNG/LPG carriers and very large crude carriers – ships that move at half a destroyer’s speed and are as agile as heavily-drugged cows – through missiles and drones and a minefield? 140 plus ships every day?
@Kathy:
I knew you know what is on the safety card, the obvious analogy is the destroyers get protected first.
ETA: In any case, we have very few destroyers, the world has lots of merchant ships. With some of the destroyers in area committed to protecting the aircraft carriers there are at most 3 available for the Strait of Hormuz escort or shielding.
@charontwo:
If the destroyers protect themselves first, lots of merchant ships will wind up with holes and fires.
I don’t know whether Iran can even pull of something like this. What I mean is the destroyers are engaged in self preservation at the same time the undefended ships come under fire. Maybe they don’t have enough drones and missiles for this. Maybe not even for one attempt. Call it more of a thought experiment.
@Michael Reynolds: Heggie is carefully avoiding the term “escort”, using “guide” instead, I believe that indicates the Navy is highly reluctant to put a lot of ships in close proximity to Iran. The “shield” mentioned in Scott’s post above may be all air-ops of some kind.
Note: Some outlets are misinterpreting Rubio’s statement of today as “major combat operations against Iran are over”, but what Marco said was the operation Epic Fury is over. Now it’s “Freedom” something or other. Looks like a dodge for the 60 day congressional limit to me.
@Kathy:
This is just an academic discussion, the ships will not sail because
A) They will not take the risk
B) The insurance cost would be prohibitive
Those U.S. flagged ships were a one-off special case. From the transcript of my Jacob Kaarsbo link above:
Quote from 16:54 to 19:19 in that transcript.
If that was the scale of deployment regarded as necessary to get four ships through, two of which were warships, it shows how unrealistic are the demands for the navy to escort convoys on a routine basis. Indeed now Trump has announced the suspension of “Project Freedom”, it may have been nothing more than an exercise to test the nature and extent of Iranian responses.
Trump has TACO’d on Operation Whatever The Fuck, his escort operation. Cuz negotiations, dontcha know. Or maybe someone pointed out that escorting or guiding or whatever they want to call it, hundreds of ships through a minefield plus drones plus missiles, is not going to work.
The Iranian government are murderous scum, the Ukrainians are heroes, but they share in this David vs. Goliath 2: The Droning moment, in which story the number two military power, and then the number one military power, are both stymied by countries that were wildly overmatched.
The phrase ‘pitiful helpless giants’* comes to mind. What is the point of being a global superpower if you can’t beat Iran?
*Nixon: If, when the chips are down, the world’s most powerful nation, the United States of America, acts like a pitiful, helpless giant, the forces of totalitarianism and anarchy will threaten free nations and free institutions throughout the world. Totally worth 58,000 dead Americans and between one and three million Vietnamese, Dick. Not to mention helping to cause the Killing Fields. Dick.
@Ken_L:
I have seen the Iranian response described as “disproportionate,” with the speculation being sending a message: “bring it on.”