As the noose tightens around the neck of the Iranian regime, analysts are increasingly talking about the inevitability of military confrontation in the Gulf sometime this year.
Following the footsteps of the US, last week, the EU went against the interests of some of its members — namely Greece and Italy — and imposed an oil embargo on Iran. Iran's central bank was also sanctioned, dealing another major blow to Iran's waning economy. Although the EU imports less than 20 per cent of Iran's overall oil export, Iranian officials considered the punitive measures as tantamount to a declaration of war. In retaliation, Iran has threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz — which if implemented could disturb 20 per cent of the world's oil needs.
Preventing this amount of oil from reaching the international market would lead to an unprecedented rise in oil prices at a time when western economies are struggling to recover from the worst financial crisis in decades. The prospect resulting from the probable shortage in oil supplies was so bleak to the extent that made US President Barack Obama forward a rare message to Iran's Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, warning against any attempt to close the Strait of Hormuz. Obama's threats were supported by dispatching the American nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson and its escorts to the Gulf. The Vinson joined the USS John C Stennis carrier strike group, which has been operating in the US Fifth Fleet since last summer. According to the Pentagon, US forces in the region will be further reinforced next month when the USS Abraham Lincoln, currently steaming westward from the Pacific, reaches the Indian Ocean. This accounts to the heaviest US naval presence in the region since the invasion of Iraq in 2003. The buildup of US forces in the Gulf taken against Iran's biggest military exercises, carried out a few weeks ago, made many believe that the breakout of hostilities between the two countries is becoming a matter of "when" rather than "if".
From a military point of view, when the parties of any given conflict amass too much military power in a limited space of land or sea, the chances of war increase dramatically. Yet, from a political viewpoint, if the parties of the conflict lack the will or the desire to get involved in any sort of hostile action, war becomes highly improbable — no matter how much military power is mobilised. This seems to be the case for both Iran and the US; and as such all the ongoing muscle-flexing turns to be no more than a classic usage of the "gunboat diplomacy".
After the ill-fated venture in Iraq and Afghanistan and the economic and financial crisis, which has hit the economy badly, the US does not seem to be having the stomach to get involved in another costly military confrontation. The US has just completed the withdrawal of its troops from Iraq and is planning to retreat from Afghanistan. In an election year, it is very improbable that Obama is in the mood of sending his forces back to the region. Since he became president three years ago, Obama has adopted a defensive foreign policy with the aim of stopping the erosion of US power; political, economic, and moral. It is very likely therefore that he will continue with this approach for at least this year.
Wounded tiger
Iran, on the other hand, rhetoric aside, does not seem also interested in a military confrontation with the US, no matter how vulnerable and weak Washington might look like after its failure in Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran might think that it has won by waging a war of attrition against the US in these two countries — by proxies though — nevertheless it seems very careful not go too far in infuriating a wounded tiger. In fact, over the years, rationality and pragmatism have been the Iranian revolutionary regime's most effective diplomatic tools. Iran might at times give the impression that it is prone to suicidal behaviour. In reality, Iran has always acted in a rational way. In most cases it has adopted an extremely cautious foreign policy, making it even predictable. Iran knows that a single modern US carrier air wing, such as those currently positioned in the Gulf, could inflict huge damage on its military capabilities. It is aware that this air wing is larger and more capable than the entire air force of many of Nato member states. Indeed, throughout history, deterrence has possibly been the greatest obstacle to war. In brief, America lacks the will and the desire to go to war. It looks very tired of fighting and wishes to rest. Iran, by contrast, lacks the capability to challenge America even if it wanted to. Until this situation changes, there will be no war in the Gulf.
Dr Marwan Al Kabalan is the Dean of the Faculty of International Relations and Diplomacy at the University of Kalamoon Damascus, Syria.