Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts

Monday, January 03, 2022

"D" Stands for "Diplomatic" - it's not Supposed to be a Letter Grade

Happy New Year everyone on The Front Porch!

2022 will be 18th year that we've been meeting together here at CDRSalamander ... come July my alter-ego will be legal to vote. Damn, time flies. 

So many of you I see here have been with us from the beginning. I've only had the pleasure of meeting a few of you IRL, but I do appreciate you taking time from your busy lives to visit here, see what I think you might find interesting, and add your flavor to the stew. Some of you I count as friends, and almost all friendly acquaintances. I really do appreciate all of you and enjoy our exchanges here ... even when you tell me I'm wrong. I learn more from you as a collective than anything else out there.

Here's to another great year, Lord will'n and the Creek don't rise.

So, what do we kick off the New Year with? We all know 2021 was just horrible ... and the peak of that horribleness was, at least for me, the national humiliation of our negotiated surrender and dishonorable withdraw from Afghanistan. I don't know about you, but I'm still working through that. 

So, in difficult times, it is helpful to return to the basics. Let's go back to JPME-1 and the levers of national power to see how the good-not-so-old-USA starts 2022 - D.I.M.E..

We already covered M-Military above. Like I said, I'm still working through it all, but I do know this - we are in the negative in ways we still don't understand. We haven't been humiliated like that since Vietnam. It will take a lot of hard work internally and externally to climb out of that pit.

E-Economic? COVID-19, supply chain issues, unknown inflationary byproducts from the unprecedented injection of trillions of fiat currency in to the system ... let's just say it could be worse, I guess. We'll give E a wash as the rest of the planet has their own problems.

I-Informational? No ... that ain't going that hot either. Even potential bright spots like the AUKUS were fumbled. Perhaps we call that a wash too ... if for no other reason than Russian and China seem determined to piss everyone off so that we don't seem so bad ... as long as you don't show pictures of Kabul at the end of August. In a moment of delusion, I might even give that a sliver of being in the positive. A net-sliver, but a sliver at that.

So, let's take a peek at D-Diplomatic.  President Biden has his team in place. I have been reliably informed that the adults are back in charge and many Smartest People in the Room™ are running things. 

What does "his team" have to say?  Let's check in with part of the establishment natsec academic-left  nomenklatura via Francis Gavin at WOTR

For reasons fair or not, another disappointing Eagles season has me thinking about reactions to the desultory foreign policy of the first year of the Biden presidency. 

...

Beginning with a curious decision to hold an unpleasant meeting with America’s most important strategic rival at the Hotel Captain Cook in Anchorage and continuing with the embarrassing self-own on the Australia-United Kingdom-United States (or AUKUS) pact — a promising strategic play that could not have been presented to the world in a more hapless, self-defeating manner — the Biden team has done far worse than expected. The military withdrawal from Afghanistan — which, grand strategically, was the correct move, but was carried out in a disastrous fashion — has come to reflect an administration that overpromised competence and consultation but has often delivered too little of either. ... there appears to be no overarching conceptual model to make sense of and act in the world, no sense of priorities and necessary tradeoffs. ... In a world of limited means and unlimited challenges, good grand strategy requires both a theory of how the world works and ruthless prioritization. Attempting to do everything only guarantees you will do nothing well. Slogans, such as “a foreign policy for the middle class,” offer little guidance about how the administration will make difficult, consequential choices about an uncertain future.

Things can't be that bad, can they? I mean, we've covered the sub-optimal SECSTATE Blinken and National Security Advisor Sullivan here before, surely in other important areas on President Biden's agenda he's got top people pursuing America's interest? Like Iran policy, right?

Gird you loins and take a reading of Jake Wallis Simons over at the UK's, The Spectator

One of the West’s great foreign policy failures of 2021 was the Iran nuclear negotiations, which remained bitterly unresolved as the clock passed midnight.

...

Not only has there been a dramatic failure to extract any concessions from Tehran – even a meaningful freeze on progress towards the bomb has remained elusive – but western negotiators have become enveloped themselves in an Asterix-style dust cloud of infighting, competing agendas and tension.

...

In truth, the project was all but doomed to begin with. Before he was even elected, Joe Biden telegraphed his desperation to re-enter Obama’s JCPOA deal. ‘The good news is there remains a better way,’ he wrote for CNN. ‘A Biden administration will make it a priority to set Iran policy right.’

The President might not have said in so many words that he would bend over backwards for a deal. But the Iranians are skilled at reading between the lines; and so are the senior members of his own administration.

Diplomatic sources have described Robert Malley, the US Special Representative for Iran, who is leading the negotiations in Vienna, as ‘the most dovish official we’ve ever seen’. In fact, the former head of the International Crisis Group – a think-tank devoted to dispute resolution, the very embodiment of the doctrine of softness – has bent over backwards so far that, as one official put it, he now speaks to Tehran from between his legs.

Of course.

Is there some light to be seen at the end of this tunnel? 

Is there any glimmer of hope? Traditionally, the Americans tend to let their negotiators and envoys run until they fall, then replace them. There is a palpable feeling in diplomatic circles that the clock is ticking for Mr Malley. If his head were to roll soon, the negotiations would be thrown into temporary disarray, and the ensuing delay would benefit Iran. But this creative destruction may allow a more serious player to lead the American delegation.

That, I’m afraid, is the best we can currently hope for. Believe me, reader, I wish there was better news. And so does the world.

And that is where we are. We have to let things get worse until we can get better.

Wonderful. 

So if 2022 could just take it easy while we try not to step on our crank some more ... that would be wonderful.

And so completes our New Year review of the four levers of national power. Two negatives, a neutral, and maybe a sliver of positive ... and that is the optimistic call.

At this point I'd like to take one of my hobby horses out of the barn. I want to review the academic pedigree of Blinken, Sullivan, and Malley in undergrad/grad - profession

Blinken: Harvard / Columbia - lawyer/government/politics

Sullivan: Yale / Oxford (Rhodes Scholar) / Yale - lawyer/academic/politics/government

Malley: Yale / Oxford (Rhodes Scholar) / Harvard - lawyer/thinktankie/government

What an incredibly narrow world view and perspective these people have - and it shows. There is little to no geographical, intellectual, or life experience diversity at all. Heck Blinken and Malley even graduated from the same high school class in Paris.

Where in their educational background have they ever been challenged? Have they ever found themselves alone in their beliefs, surrounded by those diametrically opposed to their world view? 

It is easy to roll your eyes when the rubes say, "East Coast Elites" but in the name of all that is holy, just look at it. The 17th Century Habsburgs were less inbred.

A funny backgrounder on Malley. He is what is known in my circles as a "red-diaper baby". He grew up in a hard-left household. His mother worked at the UN for the Marxist–Leninist/Arab-Socialist Algerian FLN right after they established a 1-party state and slaughtered 70-90,000 of their fellow Algerians who supported the French during that Cold War horror show. His father was a journalist who wound up running a leftist magazine in France (that's how he and Blinken were in the same high school class) that was so radical that in 1980 he managed to get himself and his entire family expelled from the country and returned to New York. Of course ... he wound up writing a book in the mid-1990s on the Algerian revolution, The Call From Algeria: Third Worldism, Revolution, and the Turn to Islam. ... and of course he was at law school with President Obama. 

Of course.

People are policy. If you wonder why things seem a bit off-frequency, look who is in government. Outside a polygamous cult in the mountains of northern Arizona, you'd be hard pressed to find a more culturally isolated group of people from the world around them.

When it comes specifically to Iran, if those are the three people around the table - do you really have a balanced view of the challenge at hand? Who is going to offer alternatives or different perspectives when these all come out of the same machine?  It is good to have one or two like this on your team - they are very good at research and writing - but … having a team of nothing but them?

Are these people and institution really giving our nation its best from our best? These are unquestionably book-smart people who test well, but are they doing anything productive with it? What is their track record since JFK started this trend in government 60-yrs ago with his "Best and Brightest?"

What, exactly, has this pedigree of people successfully accomplished as of late? If we keep selecting the same people from such a narrow spectrum of experience - and only those people - is it any wonder that we are surprised at developments? We miss when we're being played? That we are out foxed by much weaker nations?

Perhaps we need to start thinking that the "best" institutions and our "smartest" people - perhaps - might not be the best and only thing we need working our nation's challenges. 

Just an idea. I think the record speaks for itself. 

Monday, August 02, 2021

East of Suez Gets Interesting Again


While the Royal Navy's new aircraft carrier and her battlegroup heading east of Suez for a bit of showing the flag, with her Dutch and American friends along for comic relief, the Arabian sea the last week seemed to wake up.

The chief of Israel’s armed forces spoke with his British counterpart on Sunday, the Israeli military said, after London accused Iran of carrying out an attack on an Israeli-managed ship off Oman last week that killed a Briton and a Romanian.

Lieutenant-General Aviv Kohavi and Britain’s Staff General Nick Carter “discussed recent events in the region and common challenges faced by both countries,” said an Israeli military statement...

In case you were not up to speed on the MV Mercer Street incident.

Iran's ambassador has been summoned to the Foreign Office following a drone attack on an Israeli-linked oil tanker in which two crew, including a British national, were killed.

The ambassador was summoned this morning for a meeting with Foreign Office minister James Cleverly after the UK and US blamed Iran for the strike.

...

The UK and US have blamed Iran for the attack on the Israeli-linked oil tanker, in which two crew members - a British national and a Romanian citizen - were killed.

The attack happened last Thursday when the tanker MV Mercer Street was off Oman's coast in the Arabian Sea.

Unrelated ... or simply byproducts of a same bubbling stew? Not sure, but what is clear is that the eternal laws of geography and maritime security may take a nap now and then, but they do not sleep.

Britain said on Tuesday it would permanently deploy two warships in Asian waters after its HMS Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier and escort ships sail to Japan in September through seas where China is vying for influence with the United States and Japan.

Plans for the high-profile visit by the carrier strike group come as London deepens security ties with Tokyo, which has expressed growing alarm in recent months over China’s territorial ambitions in the region, including Taiwan.

“Following on from the strike group’s inaugural deployment, the United Kingdom will permanently assign two ships in the region from later this year,” Britain’s Defence Minister Ben Wallace said in a joint announcement in Tokyo with his Japanese counterpart, Nobuo Kishi.

It looks like they will base out of the already established logistics hub in Duqm, Oman - ~60 miles southwest of the unsinkable aircraft carrier that is Masirah Island. 

What will they do?

The UK will operate two Littoral Response Groups, one deploying to the Euro-Atlantic region and the other deploying to the Indo-Pacific.

This was outlined in the Defence command paper (essentially a defence review) published earlier this year.

“The Royal Navy will be a constant global presence, with more ships, submarines, sailors and marines deployed on an enduring basis, including to protect shipping lanes and uphold freedom of navigation. With support from partners in the Indo-Pacific, Offshore Patrol Vessels will be persistently deployed and a Littoral Response Group (LRG) in 2023 will complement the episodic deployment of our Carrier Strike Group; contributing to regional security and assurance. This will be enabled by the deployment of two Littoral Response Groups; the first in 2021 will be deployed to the Euro-Atlantic under a NATO and JEF construct, while a second will be deployed to the Indo-Pacific region in 2023. They will also be able to deliver training to our partners in regions of the world where maritime security is most challenging.”

Oman seems to be playing a tricky game. She is diplomatically very close to Iran, yet has a long standing security relationship with Britain and has been very helpful to the United States the last few decades. Where does this go? We'll have to watch.

Just an interesting sidenote: everyone is a student of history because you are living every day in its first draft.



Tuesday, December 08, 2020

Deadheading to Buy Time with Iran

 


Perhaps one day the full story will come out how Iran's top nuclear weapons scientist was taken out, but until then we'll just have to give a nod of respect to the Israeli's ability to execute superb clandestine operations in the Islamic Republic.

Tom Rogan at the Washington Examiner has a nice "Top-5 Takeaways" list you really should read in full ... but here's the summary:

1) Biden will not be able to return America to the JCPOA nuclear accord without significant complication
2) There was likely some U.S. intelligence support for this operation
3) Israel's covert intelligence presence on Iranian soil is growing
4) The attack will fuel Iran's paranoia and provoke retaliation
5) This attack doesn't portend U.S. or Israeli military action against Iran's nuclear facilities
Especially #4.

Just amazing capabilities for such a small nation. Having everyone around you trying to kill you does focus the mind a bit.

Wednesday, October 07, 2020

Not Our War; Not Our Problem

Today I want us to return to the same subject we covered last Wednesday; Turkish adventurism.

Russia is coming in to play, as is Iran. Turkey is embedding herself more and more.

I'm not an alarmist, but I don't like the odds here. The USA needs to make clear that nothing that derives from this is our concern nor that of NATO.

Monday, July 27, 2020

Iran's Performative Art

In the words of the great philosophers, "But why?"


This just continues to be strange.
Iran has moved a mock-up U.S. aircraft carrier to the strategic Strait of Hormuz, satellite images show, suggesting it will use the look-alike vessel for target practice in war games in a Gulf shipping channel...“We cannot speak to what Iran hopes to gain by building this mock-up, or what tactical value they would hope to gain by using such a mock-up in a training or offensive exercise scenario,” said Commander Rebecca Rebarich, the spokeswoman for the U.S. Navy’s Bahrain-based Fifth Fleet.
While the strangeness of this does not change and one wants to just mock it and move on, you also need to examine the Red Most Dangerous COA.

Iran is not a rich nation. It has a lot of challenges. What are they doing that makes this worth the investment? It can't just be for the performative art of it all, can it? 

What is the worst reasonably expected use of such a mock up? I hope we have some smart, imaginative, and skeptical eyes on this and what they are using it for.


Wednesday, April 22, 2020

Wednesday, March 25, 2020

Who will save a Navy for tomorrow from the zombies feeding it to vanity today?

We have learned nothing from our foolish habit of burning out Sailors and ships chasing fevered dreams pumped out by over-caffeinated and under-employed mid-level thinkers.

I'm screaming in to the void again over at USNIBlog.

Come by and bring you autotune machine with you.

Monday, January 06, 2020

One Simply Does Not Do "Throw Away COAs"

Over the weekend I pounded out a thread on twitter that got a lot of attention, so I wanted to bring it here for the good folks on the Front Porch who wisely stay away from that hellsite.

What prompted the thread was the story started, I believe, by a writer at NYT that the killing of Qasem Soleimani was "a mistake" because some careless staffer put that option in a decision brief as a poison pill to drive decisions towards what they wanted ... yet Trump picked it anyway to everyone's shock.

Though "garbage COAs" or "throwaway options" should be an urban myth, you do see it as a too-clever-by-half bureaucratic tactic by the immature, unprofessional, uneducated, or unethical who by some mistake make it in to a planning team. 

Both in the classroom and the staff room, those type of people or mercilessly culled or used as an object of scorn as an example of what not to do. I'm sorry, that simply is not what is done.

Like a religion, operational planning at the tactical, operational, and strategic levels have a myriad of confessions and variations on a theme. They do have some fundamentals in common.

Along those lines, I offered to set the record straight that at the highest levels, these things are not done. Sure, they do happen now and then - but that poorly of a led staff is the great exception, not the rule - and you can tell by the decisions they made.

Good people can disagree on if it was time to eliminate QS; but after the storming of our embassy, it was not a "throwaway."

Enough intro, you can read the unroll here, or just the repeat below. It has not been edited, put down warts and all.
It simply is not done.

Here is how it works. This is for a 4-star, you can scale up to a CINC.

Before the 4-star sees the slide deck, 50/50 chance the COS has looked at it (another 3 or 4 star). Prior to that, the at least two other 2 or 3 stars have approved it. Before that a whole gaggle of O6 types were involved in getting it ready for prime time.

Everyone in that series would have to give a nod to a "throwaway slide" containing something they would not want to, or would not be able to, execute. Best practices, based on preliminary direction & guidance, would allow 2 or at most 3 Courses of Action (COA) for the principal to choose from.

They run a spectrum usually based on increasing levels of effort/risk. All COA are what the staff recommend as valid and executable options. Below the above mentioned O6 (Colonel or navy Captain) is a whole bee hive of O3-O5s working. If anyone of them were a jackass enough to propose something we couldn't sell to OPS or PLANS - much less the O6 gauntlet, they wouldn't be on the planning group anymore. I had people removed from my teams for less.

It would help everyone if those who are so vested in hating Trump that they can't think straight would just check themselves for a bit. Say what you want about Trump, but there are some people of exceptional quality in his national security staff, both civilian & military, who are briefing options for him.

I am willing to have history prove me wrong, but I know enough about those people & have played that game enough to be willing to put down a paycheck or two that the "throwaway slide" is just made up, or is a bitter boy talking out of school because his/her preferred COA was not the one the CINC approved.

You see, that is a thing about COA - each one is there because in the chain of staff officers there are some who are convinced that their COA is the best option. The other COAs are sub-optimal garbage staff officers of lesser vision have proposed. Yes, even in staffs, crap is political and egos are in play. Good GOFO promote that friction though, as they want different and valid options to bring up to the Principal.

Heck, I was briefing my preferred COA to a 4-star once & his 3-star ground component commander (who I later briefly worked for when he got his 4th star - fun story for a different day) interrupted & challenged my/our ground force levels (he wanted more & different). I - just a middling navy O5 - looked over at the Principal, who just said, "Well, Sal explain to LtGen XXX what he doesn't understand about your COA." ... and he let me go back and forth with the GCC. (NB: the J3 told me the COA I was briefing was the one J00 wanted, so I knew I was OK to dance).

Anyway, the other 2 COA briefed that day were also valid & good COA, all depended on the Principal's desired effort/risk calculus. In that crowd, with a constellation of GOFO and senior civilian leaders, it would be career suicide - not to mention gross professional malpractice & unethical - to put anything up there that was "garbage" or "throwaway." 
Sure, the Principal may choose COA-C - and that will cause butthurt for those on the staff who really like COA-A & COA-B, but that does not make COA-C a throwaway ... unless of course, the person calling it that is a immature & unprofessional brat who by using that terminology, just advertises that they should not been on that high level of a staff to begin with.

So, at the end of the day, 99% this is either a made up story or was a leak by a disgruntled staffer who is butthurt their preferred COA was not chosen.

There is that 1% chance that history will prove me wrong and at the highest levels of the US government we have staffers who will produce and approve options for the CINC that are "garbage" and "throwaway" to the degree they would fail out of my NATO Operational Planning course.

Friday, January 03, 2020

Fullbore Friday

Somewhere there was a 19-yr old mechanic that made sure it was up and ready for flight.

Somewhere there was a 20-yr old ordnanceman that made sure the weapons were loaded and ready.

Somewhere there was a 30-yr old pilot and 40-yr old copilot who were on their game.

Somewhere there was a large group of intelligence professionals who kept an unblinking eye on their target, giving decision makers real-time, actionable details.

Somewhere there was an entire ecosystem of communications, IT, and satellite professionals that maintained a lashed up of legacy and cutting edge technology enabling world-wide, real time observation of the target over an extended period.

Somewhere there were senior uniformed and civilian advisers providing the Principal the pros and cons of action.

Somewhere there was a Principal who gave the order.

After thousands of deaths and untold tens of thousands wounded … one of the most blood soaked enemies of our nation was eliminated.

Fullbore to everyone.

Thursday, November 07, 2019

Israel vs Iran? There Must be a German Word

Is there a word, in German or any other language, that means the habit of always being ready for something you now is inevitable, but it never comes to pass because you are always ready for it; the only way for it to happen is to not be ready?

An variation of Schrödinger's Cat?

Who knows.

There is one thing we do know ... often conflicts long seen coming but never quite on the horizon ... all of a sudden are on your doorstep.

As such, keep this in your mind for a bit of pondering.

Via Michael Oren, Former Israeli Ambassador to the United States, writing in The Atlantic;
The senior ministers of the Israeli government met twice last week to discuss the possibility of open war with Iran. They were mindful of the Iranian plan for a drone attack from Syria in August, aborted at the last minute by an Israeli air strike, as well as Iran’s need to deflect attention from the mass protests against Hezbollah’s rule in Lebanon. The ministers also reviewed the recent attack by Iranian drones and cruise missiles on two Saudi oil installations, reportedly concluding that a similar assault could be mounted against Israel from Iraq.
...
And it’s not hard to imagine how it might arrive. The conflagration, like so many in the Middle East, could be ignited by a single spark. Israeli fighter jets have already conducted hundreds of bombing raids against Iranian targets in Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq. Preferring to deter rather than embarrass Tehran, Israel rarely comments on such actions. But perhaps Israel miscalculates, hitting a particularly sensitive target; or perhaps politicians cannot resist taking credit. The result could be a counterstrike by Iran, using cruise missiles that penetrate Israel’s air defenses and smash into targets like the Kiryah, Tel Aviv’s equivalent of the Pentagon. Israel would retaliate massively against Hezbollah’s headquarters in Beirut as well as dozens of its emplacements along the Lebanese border. And then, after a day of large-scale exchanges, the real war would begin.
A new war in the Middle East in an election year? No one wants one ... but there is always a chance we would get one.

Monday, July 29, 2019

How Things Can Get Real Stupid Real Fast

It is helpful to keep in mind that as difficult as it is to understand why your neighbors and family members make the decisions they do in the course of their lives, realize it can be equally opaque to understand why nations do the things they do.

History is, on balance, not just a story of struggle and progress – it is also the story of nations and leaders making decisions that both at the time and in hindsight, are reckless. With too much hope and too little appreciation of risk, nations can start down paths that lead places no one wants to go.

The ‘ole planner in me can’t help but take strange little articles in open source and play them out four more turns – about three different ways, flipping one or the other assumption/variable to see where they can lead. From Most Likely COA to most Dangerous COA – the exercise can be … a bit maddening.

The Austro-Hungarians could have used a better run of this exercise  early last century – and we sure didn’t do all that great of a job of it in 2003.

Along those lines, last night I simply could not get this little bit out of my head;
Iran has reportedly asked China for its support in the Gulf, as Royal Navy Type 45 Destroyer HMS Duncan arrived in the region.

Rezaei made the remarks on Sunday in a meeting with head of the International Department of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC), Song Tao, who who arrived in Tehran on Sunday, reports Iranian news agency Mehr news.

"We live in the energy region of the world. Any kind of insecurity and conflict in this region would carry harm to global peace and security,” Rezaei is quoted as telling Song Tao.
I don’t think the time is quite ripe for China to make its military statement on the global stage, but there is a non-zero chance that smart Chinese planners are doing the math right now on what a tottering former empire a bit over extended and with few friends might provide to a nation looking to make a point.

Weakness is not a good play for Britain right now. I really hope her European friends start to back her play, but I have my doubts.

When that fails, I’m sure C5F has the plans in place to backfill and form up with the Royal Navy.

That is something I hope the Chinese will see. Not only is the time not ripe for them to take the stage, we will not let the Royal Navy stand alone against anyone.

China should smile and say polite things to Iran, and then do nothing. They have that luxury, for now, they should continue to enjoy it.

Saturday, July 13, 2019

The Once, Past, and Future Strait of Hormuz & Gulf of Oman - on Midrats


From limpet mines on tankers, drone shootdowns, and the HMS Montrose just short of loading grape - the decades long story of Iranian posturing in their near seas continues.

A lot sounds familiar, but the economic and security environment has changed a lot in the four decades.

What is a constant, what has changed, and what should we expect to evolved in one of the most globally important areas of water?

Our guest this Sunday from 5-6pm Eastern to discuss this and more will be returning guest John Keuhn.

Dr. John T. Kuehn is the General William Stofft Chair for Historical Research at the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College. He retired from the U.S. Navy 2004 at the rank of commander after 23 years of service as a naval flight officer in EP-3s and ES-3s. He authored Agents of Innovation (2008) and co-authored Eyewitness Pacific Theater (2008) with D.M. Giangreco, as well as numerous articles and editorials and was awarded a Moncado Prize from the Society for Military History in 2011.

Join us live if you can, but if you miss the show you can always listen to the archive at Spreaker

If you use iTunes, you can add Midrats to your podcast list simply by clicking the iTunes button at the main showpage - or you can just click here.


Wednesday, June 19, 2019

Sorry, no Tanker War This Week

I'm not saying that I write talking points for the Vice Chairman ... but sometimes it helps if people think I do.

Details over at USNIBlog.

Put the war drums back in the Volvo.

Thursday, June 13, 2019

Everyone Just Calm the Frack Down

OK, fine. No DivThu again this week - we'll pick up next week.

However ...




First, the basics.
The U.S. blamed Iran for suspected attacks on two oil tankers Thursday near the strategic Strait of Hormuz, denouncing what it called a campaign of “escalating tensions” in a region crucial to global energy supplies.

The U.S. Navy rushed to assist the stricken vessels in the Gulf of Oman off the coast of Iran, including one that was set ablaze. The ships’ operators offered no immediate explanation on who or what caused the damage against the Norwegian-owned MT Front Altair and the Japanese-owned Kokuka Courageous. Each was loaded with petroleum products, and the Front Altair burned for hours, sending up a column of thick, black smoke.
Let's break that in to little bits.

1. No USA ships are involved.
2. No USA citizens are involved.
3. No USA territory or waters are involved.
4. All cargo was headed to Asia.

This. Is. Not. Our. Problem.

We don't know who did the attacking. No, I do not assume that SECSTATE saying Iran is responsible will do for the American or international audience. Let's see the evidence.

Even if Iran did do this - or their proxies - this is not our problem (unless Norway Article 5's the attack).

What is Norway doing? Japan? They are both our allies, but they have the lead on this - not us.

Who really benefits from this? It isn't Iran. It certainly is not the USA.

Everyone needs to take a powder and take a step back.

This talk of military action this soon is insanity. This is irresponsible.

At least right now.

This.
Is.
Not.
Our.
Problem.

Enough with stupid wars. At best, this might be worth a few dozen TLAM ... but only after Norway and Japan take their moves.

We are their ally, not their enforcer, not their daddy.

Everyone needs to back off.
UPDATE: So, IRGC clown show?

No deaths?

Perfect ... we can go nice and slow here.

Sanctions, sanctions, sanctions. Those are the first three things to do ... and let Norway and Japan lead the effort in the IC.


Monday, January 29, 2018

Does our broader Middle East strategy need "recalibration?"

Do you get the feeling now and then that our thinking about the American role in the Middle East is a bit ossified - that in some ways we are just going through the motions not so much from thought, but from motor memory?

Bruce W. Jentleson from The Century Foundation, has some thoughts on the topic worthy of your consideration.

I am not fully in line with some of his points as they come from the other sides of the world-view spectrum from me, but in general his call for a "recalibration" of America's position in the Middle East is spot on. His entering argument is a reasonable frame of reference for a conversation.
This reappraisal of interests and reassessment of strategy—here more broadly termed “strategic recalibration”—has four fundamental elements when applied to the Middle East.3 First, strategy needs to shift from regional dominance to regional balance. The United States must accept that Russia and China are global powers with interests in the region, and stop seeking to minimize their presence and assure American preponderance. Instead, a forward-thinking strategy should combine competition, collaboration, and complementarity. Second, in relations with traditional Arab allies, and Saudi Arabia in particular, the United States has to move beyond the “support our friends” mantra and be more assertive of its own interests where they differ on counterterrorism, domestic political reform, and overall regional security architecture. Third, even if U.S. policy toward Iran will continue to focus on containment, depending on the latter’s aggression, Washington should also seriously and creatively pursue diplomacy, and probe possibilities for substantial improvement in relations with Tehran. Fourth, even though the United States and Israel have faced divisive issues in the past, their greater divergence on the issues of Israeli-Palestinian peace and Iran, combined with political changes in both American and Israeli domestic support bases for the U.S.-Israeli relationship, poses significant challenges that must be addressed. The United States needs to maintain its commitment to Israel’s core security even as it supports a two-state solution.
His first point is best. The USA should act more like a mercantile republic, and less like an empire. Russia, China, and others have interests there. As long as they don't interfere in a hostile way with ours, why not accept that fact? What is the cost/benefit that we are willing to accept to keep them out if the nations of the area want them in?  

Russia;
Russia now clearly wants back into the Middle East. Syria is the most obvious example. Russia’s September 2015 military intervention in the Syrian conflict has had a number of objectives. These include direct, tangible objectives such as supporting the regime of Bashar al-Assad and solidifying an ongoing military presence in the region through expanded military basing in Syria. But Russia’s actions also have indirect, message-sending objectives such as taking a stand against yet another American-supported regime change and—along with its moves in Ukraine—demonstrating that it is back in the global geopolitical game. But Syria is not the sole focus of attention, as Russia has also been increasing relations with other major countries in the region.

Russian-Egyptian relations have grown closer since General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi came to power in his 2013 military coup. Moscow and Cairo convened their own tracks of Syrian peace talks as alternatives to the official United Nations (UN) Geneva talks, which were dominated by the United States. Egypt supported Russian efforts to block UN Security Council resolutions seeking to end the September 2016 Aleppo siege and the humanitarian crisis it caused. In October 2016, Russia and Egypt held joint military exercises, something the United States and Egypt had done regularly until 2011. More meetings have been taking place at the ministerial level in search of new economic and military agreements. Russia supplies close to 60 percent of Egyptian wheat imports; with inflation projected as high as 36 percent and Sisi trying to maintain bread subsidies to avoid food riots, this external economic support is vital to Egypt’s internal political stability.7 In March 2017, Russia deployed special forces to western Egypt. These forces then reportedly moved into Libya in support of Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar, head of the Libyan National Army, who had been receiving some U.S. support but now is referred to as “Moscow’s man.”8
China;
China’s Middle East role is also increasing. Oil is China’s principal interest in the region. It imports almost 60 percent of its oil, and over half of that comes from the Gulf. The United States imports just 28 percent of all the oil it consumes, with just 16 percent of imports coming from the Gulf. It has been estimated that by 2020 (albeit based on pre-Trump policies) imports will be down to 11 percent of total American oil consumption, which the United States could satisfy solely with imports from Canada and Mexico.18 Still, it is doubtful that the United States would choose that option. Even if it did, security of world oil supplies would still be a U.S. interest because of both its allies’ dependencies and the broader economic effects, including on financial markets, of such security. But given the shared interests in Gulf oil, and China’s arguably greater interest, the United States does not stand to lose much if anything by letting China take on some of the responsibility for, stakes in, and costs of assuring the security of Gulf maritime shipping routes. China already conducted joint navy exercises in the Gulf with Iran in 2014 that, while focused more on their bilateral concerns, did show the Chinese Navy’s oceanic reach (“blue-water capacity”).

China’s own natural preference is to free-ride on the U.S. Navy. It is not Trumpian economic nationalism or Rand Paulian isolationism to propose shared roles and shared costs. Indeed, having more than just American ships in those waters could provide further disincentive for terrorists or Iran to attack or otherwise disrupt Gulf shipping. Shared operations could be structured like the multilateral antipiracy operations off the Horn of Africa, with more informal complementarity than direct coordination. Much detail would need to be worked out, but this collaboration could be an example of collective interests taking precedence over zero-sum competition. Those concerned that expanded economic relations and military presence will bring China greater influence can take some comfort in the fact that U.S. leverage remains limited despite Washington’s far more extensive economic, military, and diplomatic ties.19
His conclusion should be, if nothing else, a conversation starter.
Given that Russia and China have interests in the region, and a number of regional states are interested in increased relations with them, regional dominance is simply not a viable strategy. Nor is it necessary for American interests. A combination of competition, collaboration, and complementarity is more likely to be effective. Traditional allies should not be abandoned, but the United States needs to be more honest with itself and with them—Saudi Arabia in particular—about the mix of shared and divergent interests, and be more assertive of its own interests where they differ on counterterrorism, domestic political reform, and regional security architecture. Opportunities as well as threats need to frame relations with Iran. To the extent that Iran’s aggression continues, containment needs to be the principal response. But the United States should pursue, creatively and seriously, possibilities for a breakthrough that would improve relations, and do so in ways that allow it to be consistent with commitments to regional allies. Further, the United States needs to maintain its commitment to Israel’s core security while supporting a two-state solution and, as warranted, pursuing diplomacy with Iran.

The makers and implementers of American foreign policy may well need to reappraise U.S. interests and corresponding strategies worldwide, but such a reappraisal, the essence of strategic recalibration, is especially crucial for the Middle East.

Sunday, August 21, 2016

The Farsi Island Incident and its Aftermath - on Midrats



The thankfully bloodless embarrassment that was the Farsi Island Incident is still making news after the January 12, 2016 seizure of 10 U.S. sailors by Iranian forces. 

Especially for our Surface Warfare community, there are a lot of hard, cold lessons here not just about the incident itself, leadership and professionalism – and institutional lessons about how conditions are set and organizations are sub-optimized to a degree that an incident - in hindsight – was just a matter of when vice if. 

Using his recent article at CIMSEC on the topic, our guest for the full hour this Sunday from 5-6pm Eastern to discuss the background leading up to the Farsi Island incident, its aftermath, and the lessons we should be taking from it will be Alan Cummings, LT USN. 

Alan is a 2007 graduate of Jacksonville University. He served previously as a surface warfare officer aboard a destroyer, embedded with a USMC infantry battalion, and as a Riverine Detachment OIC. The views expressed in the article and on Midrats are his own and in no way reflect the official position of the U.S. Navy.

Join us live if you can with the usual suspects in the chat room and offer up your questions for our guest, but if you miss the show you can always listen to the archive at blogtalkradio or Stitcher

If you use iTunes, you can add Midrats to your podcast list simply by clicking the iTunes button at the main showpage - or you can just click here.



Thursday, June 30, 2016

Farsi Island Investigation Released

The Navy released the redacted and declassified report on the Farsi Island incident.

You can find it all over at the FOIA website, but you'll have to poke around to find it (click "Read" on the circa-1998 style page).

I've included the Executive Summary below for your review.

I do have a pullquote for you to consider as well, from the bottom of page 75 and top of page 76;
As the boats approached, some crewmembers observed a flag and eventually identified the vessels as Iranian Revolutionary Gurad Corps (IRGCN). [redacted] ordered the RCB 802 gunners to back away from their weapons so as not to appear intimidating. At the same time, [redacted] ordered the RCB 805 gunners not to chamber rounds in their weapons because he believed the approaching boats had the advantage and he did not want to escalate the situation. RCB 805's Coxswain attempted to maneuver between the boats and RCB 802, but could not block both IRGCN patrol craft at the same time. Many crewmembers believed, contrary to their pre-deployment training and the CJCS Standing Rules of Engagement that they could not engage in serlf-defense unless the Iranians fired first.
...
As RCB 802 attempted to accelerate, the two Iranian boats maneuvered into its path and pointed their weapons at the crew; [redacted] directed RCB 805 to "go, go, go" via bridge-to-bridge radio. [redacted], seeing the Iranians charge their weapons and point them at RCB 802 crewmembers, refused to move RCB 802. [redacted] reinforced the need to move, but [redacted] refused, believing that he would have gotten a fellow crewmember shot. He later characterized the exchange as "this dumb conversation with [redacted] about how I am not going to drive."
I highly encourage everyone to read this. There is a lot to rage about from a leadership, seamanship, training, maintenance, and crew planning perspectives, but I'm not going to do that. I don't need to - and here is when things get positive.

I don't need to because the report does so for me. This is a good report. Open and clear eyed, and at my first reading in line with how things should be done. It is the only way we learn from these things, and it says a lot about the best parts of our service culture that we have this out in the open for all.

Read it. Learn from it. Be glad you serve in a navy that would publish this.



Now, let's revisit the decision a few years ago to classify INSURV so I wouldn't blog about them ....

Tuesday, January 19, 2016

Farsi Island Incident, One Week On

If you thought by now that Big Navy would let us know exactly HOW our two small boats found themselves hosted by the Iranians for a day, you are sadly left wanting.

Trust me, "Big Navy" knows, it just hasn't reached the point that it wants everyone else to know right now. No conspiracy, just the bureaucratic slug needs to slime its way to a decision.

Until then, there are still items coming out that will keep you up to date. If you are in a hurry, you can in a balanced way get an update from two places.

First, Marina Korin at TheAtlantic;
CENTCOM said the small boats stopped in the Gulf because of a “mechanical issue in a diesel engine” in one of the vessels. “This stop occurred in Iranian territorial waters, although it’s not clear the crew was aware of their exact location,” the statement said.

The two riverine command boats departed Kuwait at 9:23 a.m. GMT on January 12, the statement said. They were scheduled to stop and refuel alongside the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Monomoy at about 2 p.m. But at approximately 2:10 p.m., Navy command received a report that the sailors were being questioned by Iranians. By 2:45 p.m., the military lost all communication with the boats. ...
All weapons, ammunition, and communication gear on the boats were untouched, but two SIM cards appeared to have been removed from two handheld satellite phones, CENTCOM said.
Unaware in broad daylight. Ahem. That about sums it up, and tells me about all I need to know, but I'll let that card be revealed in due time, and the Navy's investigation take its course. That really isn't what is important anyway.

A more interesting take is from our friend Jerry Hendrix over at NationalReview;
Two thousand years ago, a Roman could wander the known world confident that he would be unmolested by local unruly elements, protected only by the statement “Civis romanus sum,” I am a Roman citizen. His confidence stemmed from a demonstrated assurance that any group that dared attack a Roman would trigger a response in the form of a Roman legion, which would deal swift and brutal justice. Juxtapose this image of a previous world-spanning hegemon with the image of ten American Sailors kneeling on the deck of their own vessel with their hands clasped together over their heads. It is an image of indignity and failure that is accompanied by the smell of rotting power.
...
This is where we find ourselves today, kneeling on the world’s stage, with our hands clasped over our heads, all the while trying to convince ourselves that this new position demonstrates our strength and earns respect. Civis americanus sum, I am an American citizen. Let the molesting begin.
Very much the undesired effect from what I laid out for you at USNIBlog last week.

If you are only interested in putting up political firewalls or get scope-locked in legalism and inner-focused bureaucratic processism, then you are missing the real story. It is how this impacts our image, reputation, and standing in a world that is encouraged by weakness, and only respects power.

That is the story.

Wednesday, January 13, 2016

How were the two boats captured by Iran? Not the story.

The story is best told in pictures and video.

That is what will impact out nation the most.

I'm reviewing over at USNIBlog.




UPDATE: New video out with a confession. Updates at USNIBlog.

Tuesday, January 12, 2016

BREAKING: Iran Captures 2 USN Boats

This is about all we have right now:
The Pentagon says it briefly lost contact with two small Navy craft in the Persian Gulf on Tuesday but has received assurances from Iran that the crew and vessels will be returned safely and promptly.

Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook tells The Associated Press that the boats were moving between Kuwait and Bahrain when the US lost contact with them.
Will update as meaningful information becomes available.

Update: NBC is reporting 10 Sailors captured. That is ~5 per boat. I have ideas what kind, but let's see.
Update II - Electric Boogaloo: USNINews is reporting that is was two "riverine" boats that experienced mechanical problems and drifted in to Iranian territorial waters. Both? Bad fuel, sabotage? About the only way that would happen. I'd wait for more info.
Update: III Some reports saying Iran will let the boats leave at dawn. If this turns in to a case of bad navigation or no sea anchors and towing lines ... well ... 'ole Sal will be ... well ... yea.
UPDATE IV: As per BBC;

Iran's Revolutionary Guards have released 10 US sailors held for entering its territorial waters in the Gulf, state television reported.

They were detained on Tuesday after one of their two vessels broke down during a training mission, the US says.
A statement read on state media said the group was released into international waters after apologising.
First, glad everyone only had a short, safe visit. Now we can move on to the, "How in the h311 ... " phase.