U.S. President Donald Trump requested European allies contribute to a military operation to secure the Strait of Hormuz, but former intelligence officials warn of significant risks.
Strait of Hormuz and Trump’s “Bad Strategy”
Former U.S. Navy intelligence captain Steven Horrell criticized President Trump’s approach, calling the demand for allied support a “really bad strategy and really bad geopolitics.” He argued that avoiding war altogether would be the best way to keep the strait open.
Three Possible Operations in the Strait of Hormuz
Horrell, with 30 years of experience in naval intelligence, identified three potential military operations in the Strait of Hormuz, each carrying substantial risk.
Offensive Operations Against Iranian Capabilities
The first option, destroying Iranian capabilities threatening shipping, is not guaranteed to succeed even with complete destruction of Iran’s fleet. Threats include fast attack craft disguised as civilian vessels, drones, ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and potentially unmanned underwater vehicles.
Horrell referenced the Houthis and the Red Sea, noting that achieving 100% interception success was not possible in past operations.
Escorting Tanker Convoys
Escorting tanker convoys is also flawed, as demonstrated in 1987 during the Iran-Iraq War when the first Kuwaiti tanker convoy, escorted by the U.S. Navy, struck a naval mine.
An escort vessel must simultaneously scan for threats on, under, and above the water, a task Horrell described as “extremely difficult.”
Mine Countermeasures: The Most Difficult Option
Mine countermeasures, the focus of Trump’s request, are the most challenging. There are various types of mines—bottom, anchored, and drifting—with triggers responding to contact, magnetic signatures, or pressure waves.
Mine clearing is a slow, painstaking process using small fiberglass vessels vulnerable to attack. The clearing of 1600 mines laid by Saddam Hussein off Kuwait during the first Gulf War took six months and involved multiple nations, occurring only after active fighting ceased.
U.S. Capabilities and Allied Assistance
The U.S. recently retired four Avenger-class mine countermeasures ships, replacing them with modules on littoral combat ships (LCS), a move many experts consider a downgrade. European navies possess greater mine-clearing capabilities, explaining Trump’s request for their assistance despite claiming the U.S. “doesn’t need” allies.
The premature retirement of the Avengers, six months before a potential conflict with Iran, indicates a lack of planning. The location of two of the three Independence-class LCS vessels on the Pacific further highlights logistical concerns.
“You Can’t Take Allies for Granted”
Horrell positively, but cautiously, assessed a joint statement from the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, and Japan expressing “willingness to contribute to appropriate efforts to ensure safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz.” He believes the statement suggests a preference for diplomatic solutions, like the Black Sea Grain Initiative, rather than military action.
He emphasized that five years of dismissing allies, abandoning support for Ukraine, and failing to consult before considering war with Iran has led to a lack of willingness to assist. American alliances, he stated, have always been a source of strength, but Trump has amplified isolationist voices that were previously marginalized in U.S. policy.