Can you bomb the Hormuz Strait open?

Come Monday morning, Asian and European leaders had a clear message for the White House: after getting labelled freeloaders and cowards, then blindsided by this new war, they won’t now rush their navies through a wartime Strait of Hormuz. Weird, huh?

• Germany’s 🇩🇪 defence minister noted “this is not our war, we have not started it”
• The UK 🇬🇧 , Italy 🇮🇹 , South Korea 🇰🇷 and 🇦🇺 Australia variously sent their regrets, while…
• Japan 🇯🇵 and Denmark 🇩🇰 have hinted at a little wiggle room (they’ll take a look).

But the US president still insists “numerous countries” are on their way, so it’s worth first reflecting on a question posed by Germany’s defence minister: what can a few European frigates do that the vast US navy cannot?

President Trump’s latest argument is basically the US is doing the heavy lifting to dislodge a regime that’s held the region hostage for decades, while it’s the rest of the world that’s now heavily dependent on Hormuz (which supplies barely ~2% of the US energy mix).

Plus the unspoken bit is Trump wants to a) share the burden and risk, b) dilute any blame, c) deter further Iranian attacks, and d) avoid a deeper US quagmire.

But even if other capitals agreed… what’s actually needed?

We’ve semi-been here via the 1980s Iran-Iraq War, when the two neighbours hit tankers to starve one another’s war machines. And sure, that map still looks the same: two, 2-mile-wide shipping lanes through a Strait that’s 33km (21mi) wide at its narrowest.

But we say we’ve semi-been here before because today is a little different…

• This is now broader than just Iran vs Iraq
• Iran’s asymmetric capabilities are sharper (drones, mines, fast-boats)
• The stakes are now higher (almost double the Hormuz oil throughput), and
• It’s all driving an uninsurable market freeze, not just jitters.

Yet still, our world has some experience escorting tankers via Hormuz. We’d now need…

• Mine countermeasures: newer warships are meant to replace America’s newly-decommissioned minesweepers, though two of those three new Gulf-based ships are now in Malaysia. Plus you’d need…
• Air and electronic warfare superiority to swat away drones and missiles, and
• You’d also need over-the-horizon hits on those Iranian asymmetric capabilities.

And on that last point, hitting asymmetrical capabilities is inherently tricky — that’s the point: you can make and launch a drone, suicide boat, or mine from just about anywhere: the $1k mine that disabled a $90M US destroyer in 1988 was ~100km from Hormuz!

And with Iran’s daily drone launches still holding at ~70+ after two weeks of war, you’ve potentially got to pacify vast stretches of Iran’s 1,200km Gulf coast to end that threat.

So this is not just about turning some magical key then unlocking Hormuz.

But those European and Asian powers still need that sweet sweet Hormuz oil, and the US itself still gets hit indirectly via market prices, so what are the other options here?

Beyond the jokes to just Mad Max Hormuz’s 20mbpd of oil through the desert…

• The Saudi pipeline to the Red Sea is maxxed out diverting an extra 3-5mbpd, and
• The Emirati line out to Oman (beyond the Strait) barely had 0.5mbpd to spare.

Everyone else? The main Iraq-Turkey pipeline is tiny (~0.25mbpd) and has been defunct for more than a decade (thanks ISIS). The other is plagued by Baghdad-Kurdish tensions.

Plus Iran is already targeting regional pipelines (including an Azeri line that supplies Israel), while other pipeline names you might’ve heard are all still just pipedreams.

So even with these lines redirecting a ~quarter of the Hormuz oil, and another quarter still reaching China and India with the regime’s blessing, you’ve still got ~half the Hormuz throughput stranded behind an asymmetrical threat that’s tough to halt.

And it turns out nobody — whether the US or its allies — likes the idea of risking a mass naval platform to a $1k mine or drone that some guy just built in his garage. Weird, huh?

Intrigue’s Take

So… what are the options right now? You could broadly split them into three buckets:

• First, you keep grinding out the status quo and hitting more targets until maybe the regime collapses, though the odds of that seem to be receding as the regime equates mere survival with success (but see some breaking updates below).
• Second, you escalate by trying to (say) take Kharg Island, escort tankers through the Strait, and/or pacify entire swaths of Iran’s Gulf coast until the regime crumbles, though you could risk edging closer to a quagmire than a success.
• Or third, you de-escalate via some negotiated offramp, though that risks validating the very idea the world should be held hostage by theocratic thugs, and seems unlikely while this war just radicalises those theocrats even further.

There’s evidence the White House is exploring all three buckets, and might even end up pursuing a mix of all three: say, continued pressure paired with limited naval escorts and coastal strikes in hopes of pushing Tehran towards some face-saving off-ramp.

But in the meantime, the Iranians have now started targeting the region’s oil production (not just logistics), so they’re clearly banking on getting Trump to blink first.

Sound even smarter:

• In breaking news, Israel just announced it’s killed both Iran’s Basij paramilitary chief (G Soleimani) and powerful natsec figure (Larijani).
• Hormuz-dependent nations across the Indo-Pacific keep announcing new measures to conserve fuel — Sri Lanka is now giving everyone Wednesdays off! On the supply side, Asia will lean more into coal as this Hormuz crisis drags on.