Greenert is certainly right to worry, especially as the U.S.S. John C. Stennis‘ battle group just passed through the strait. But in a sense, he should hope Iran tries to close the Strait of Hormuz. There are few mistakes Iran could make that would be worse for it in the long run.

Why? Because Iran would suddenly be responsible for sending world energy prices skyrocketing — perhaps to $200 a barrel — after a disruption of Gulf oil shipping. Washington usually has a hard sell when convincing other countries that Iran’s regional bellicosity and lack of transparency on its nuclear program merits a tough response. But when Iran hits the entire world in the wallet, the argument gets substantially easier.

Especially when making that argument in Beijing. The Chinese, in need of Mideast oil to propel their economy, often try to temper hostilities between the U.S. and Iran, lest regional instability stops the flow of crude. Usually that expresses itself in terms of restraining Washington. But if Iran is unilaterally responsible for the oil flow stopping, just watch Beijing move out of Washington’s way for harsher sanctions. Who knows: maybe China would even get on board with an American push to forcibly reopen the strait if Iran keeps it closed. (Although, as Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has observed, Iran probably lacks the naval capability to block sea traffic through the strait for extended periods.) The last time the oil flow through the strait was disrupted, during the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s, the Chinese armed Iran against aggressor Iraq.

If anything, Iran’s closure of the strait would probably play like its old enemy Saddam Hussein’s 1990 decision to invade Kuwait. Before the invasion, world governments might not have liked Saddam, but most of them didn’t consider him an implacable threat to regional stability (and, hence, their economic interests). Afterward, the world viewed him as a rogue who needed to be confronted.

And one of Iran’s biggest strategic assets is a perception that the U.S. bullies it. That narrative is already taking a beating, thanks to Greenert’s Navy and the Coast Guard, which have now saved two Iranian vessels in five days, even as Iran issues its threats. The more Iran acts as an aggressor — and in particular, in a manner that harms the interests of those outside Washington, Jerusalem, or the Arab Gulf states — the more it squanders its advantage.

None of this to say any military confrontation with Iran is desirable; it would probably be a bloody disaster, especially if the U.S. turned it into a full-fledged war with more expansive goals than re-opening the waterway. The point is that Iran has more to lose than to gain by closing the strait. Shutting it would be another sign of Iran’s tendency to shoot itself in the foot — just like with the crazy-if-true story about its elite Qods Force trying to assassinate a Saudi diplomat.

But outright confrontation may not even be the most lasting damage Iran sustains. China is one of Iran’s biggest trade benefactors. Now that Washington loosened Russia from Iran’s orbit, Iran doesn’t have any big, powerful friends left. Screwing with oil prices means screwing with China — which might make Beijing rethink its entire relationship with Iran after any crisis in the strait, from its economic ties to its diplomatic blocking and tackling over the Iranian nuclear program. Maybe it should be Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, not Adm. Greenert, who should have some restless nights thinking about the strait.

AbilShowdown at the Strait of Hormuz

ity of Iran to hinder shipping

January 24, 2012

BY aRHUT hERMAN

The build-up of the crisis in the Strait of Hormuz took another big step this weekend, when the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln entered the Persian Gulf together with British and French naval escorts — defying Iran’s warnings not to send another carrier there.

The Lincoln is there in case Iran tries to make good on its threat to close that vital international waterway in response to harsh new US and European Union sanctions against the radical Islamicist regime. What happens next in this high-stakes game depends on three people.

One of them is President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran. The second is Premier Wen Jiabao of China, who’ll have to decide whether his country is ready to join those sanctions — and by doing so, put the last nail in Tehran’s economic coffin.

The third is President Obama. How he responds to what happens in the Gulf could decide the future shape of the Middle East — not to mention his own re- election.

A dozen supertankers a day and one-third of the world’s seaborne oil pass through the strait. For Ahmadinejad, trying to close it (with mines, anti-ship cruise missiles, midget subs and swarms of suicide attack boats) is a war Iran is bound to lose, given America’s overwhelming military power in the region. Nor will his threats stop the EU from going ahead with sanctions.

No, his most likely intended audience is far to the east in Asia, where economies thrive or wither depending on the flow of oil coming out of the Gulf.

The most important of those is China, which imports 35 percent of its oil needs through the Gulf, including 12 percent from Iran. In exchange, Beijing has given Tehran advanced missile technology, turned a blind eye to Iran’s acquisition of key nuclear-weapons technology from Chinese sources and blocked any tough UN anti-Iran sanctions.

But now Beijing is under pressure from the United States and Europe to end its oil imports from Iran and join the campaign to halt Tehran’s relentless hunt for a nuclear bomb. In December alone, it cut that import total by nearly half.

But Wen and his colleagues worry about what happens if they go on an Iran-free oil diet. Before he commits to the full court press of sanctions, Wen has been meeting with Arab leaders around the Gulf to make sure oil from the Saudis and the Arab Emirates will make up for any shortfall.

Meanwhile, his other eye is on the Strait of Hormuz, as is Japan’s. Any major disruption there will make them think twice about supporting any sanctions, even if it means Iran gets its bomb.

Here’s the dangerous part — and where President Obama comes in.

Even if Iran loses a military confrontation with the United States in the Hormuz Strait, it wins. Tehran can hope that disrupting tanker traffic, even for just a few weeks, and driving up oil prices in the meantime, will convince China and the rest of Asia that sanctions are as deadly a threat to their economy as to Iran’s.

The only way to prevent that is for President Obama to make it clear that, by closing the strait, Ahmadinejad will doom the Islamic Republic. Only if China and the rest of the world believes such a closure could never happen again, will Iran’s threat to international stability finally come an end.

But will Obama do it? There are no easy military solutions for regime change in Iran. Certainly Ahmadinejad is betting that our commander-in-chief won’t use a confrontation in the strait as a pretext for taking out Iran’s nuclear sites, let alone regime change.

Indeed, Obama would know that forcibly reopening the strait would be enough to make him look like the reincarnation of Dwight Eisenhower in time for the 2012 election. But that “victory” might also be enough to panic both Asia and possibly Europe, and wreck any effective sanctions.

Then the world and the Middle East becomes a very dangerous place. A nuclear-arms race in that volatile region becomes inevitable, and Iran — home of state-sponsored terrorism and the yearning for a second Holocaust — looks more impregnable than ever.

The fate of the strait hangs by a thin thread of oil. It’s up to our president and the Navy to make sure that oil flows — and that any regime threatening to cut it never does.

Arthur Herman was a Pulitzer Prize finalist in 2009. His new book, “Freedom’s Forge,” is due in May.

FROM; http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/showdown_at_the_strait_of_hormuz_ZWlYSnTlgapPXXOuCf73OK

SEPTEMBER 2012

WAR GAMES SHIPS

The U.S. is leading its largest-ever war games near Iran by sending battleships, aircraft carriers, minesweepers and submarines into the Persian Gulf.

25 countries are participating in the 12-day war games exercise with the United States, Britain, France, Saudi Arabia and the UAE deploying the largest number of warships. Fleets of warships will flood the Strait of Hormuz, the important waterway through which 40 percent of the world’s seaborne oil passes, as a show of force to deter Iran from trying to close the straits or retaliate against U.S. assets in the region, even in response to an unprovoked Israeli strike.

Despite the unprecedented scale of the operations, chances of a U.S. or Israeli strike on Iran have lessened considerably in recent weeks, as American refusal to back an Israeli strike have turned the tide of war-hawks in Israel. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu remains one of the few still advocating harsher postures, and he is increasingly isolated.

A torrent of military and intelligence analysis rejecting the need or viability of a preventive strike on Iran have come out in recent days. A report by dozens of former government officials, national security experts and retired military officers released Thursday concluded military action would spark an uncontrollable regional war and have counterproductive results. Antiwar

FACTS & FIGURES

Following the reports of the armada of U.S. and British ships amassing in the Persian Gulf, a top commander in Iran’s Revolutionary Guard warned Sunday that “nothing will remain” of Israel if his country is attacked. Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari said Iran would close down the Strait of Hormuz and strike U.S. bases in the Middle East. Prison Planet

Retired U.S. General John Abizaid has previously described the Iranian military as “the most powerful in the Middle East.”

A bipartisan group of ambassadors, retired generals and foreign policy experts is warning against a U.S. or Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. WSJ

Not a war of weeks or months, but a “generations-long war” is how no less a figure than former Mossad chief Efraim Halevy describes the consequences of open conflict with Iran. In comparison with Iraq and Afghanistan, both countries with relatively small populations which were already in a state of relative powerlessness before they were invaded, Iran commands the eighth largest active duty military in the world, as well as highly trained special forces which operate in countries throughout the region and beyond. The Nation

U.S. wars of “invasion, aggression and occupation” are no longer sustainable economically and socially, veteran war critic and U.S. scholar Professor Bill Ayers, says. He adds that if NATO, the U.S. or Israel attack Iran, it would lead to a catastrophe. RT

ISH/HJ

US Leads Unprecedented War Games Exercise in Strait of Hormuz

The aggression show of force is the biggest such military exercise ever taken in the Persian Gulf, escalating tensions in an uneasy region

by John Glaser, September 15, 2012

Battleships, aircraft carriers, minesweepers and submarines from 25 nations are swarming into the Persian Gulf, in the largest such military exercise ever undertaken in the region, as concerns of a looming Israeli strike on Iran still linger

Countries leading the massive war games exercise inlcude the United States, Britain, France, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Fleets of warships will flood the Strait of Hormuz, the important waterway

through which 40 percent of the world’s seaborne oil passes, as a show of force to deter Iran from trying to close the straits or retaliate against US assets in the region, even in response to an unprovoked Israeli strike.

Despite the unprecedented scale of the operations, chances of a US or Israeli strike on Iran have lessened considerably in recent weeks, as American refusal to back an Israeli strike have turned the tide of war-hawks in Israel. The Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu remains one of the few still advocating harsher postures, and he is increasingly isolated.

“We do not believe it would lead to regime change, regime collapse or capitulation,” the report says, adding that an attack would increase Iran’s motivation to build a bomb, in order to deter further military action “and redress the humiliation of being attacked.”

The US has made it clear to both Israel and Iran that a military strike is not imminent. “I suspect the Americans have given quiet assurances through indirect channels that they have no intention of moving into Iranian national waters,” Scott Lucas, an Iran expert at Birmingham University in England, said.

“Both sides have good reasons to avoid a conflict – they have other issues to deal with right now.” Still, the war games do a good job of escalating tensions in a very uneasy region.

October 5, 2012

Military strategists appear to have missed a foreseeable outcome in their efforts to pressure Iran.

As the temperatures are rising in the Mideast, as reader chatter about Turkey’s involvement in Syria attests, a Financial Times article describes how the success of economic sanctions against Iran have strengthened its ability to make credible threats to restrict oil shipments.

Market participants have long discounted the idea that Iran would restrict the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz, a comparatively narrow channel though which 35% of the world’s oil supplies pass. Threatening cargo ships would also interfere with Iran’s own oil shipments, far and away its biggest source of foreign exchange, and critical food imports.

But that dynamic has now changed. As the Financial Times notes (hat tip Scott):

Sanctions imposed over Iran’s nuclear programme have grown tighter, and the effects are being felt across the country. Fears are rising that Iran’s leadership, facing increasing domestic unrest over spiralling inflation, has less and less to lose through brinkmanship in the channel now that its own oil income is being squeezed to a trickle. For years, oil traders were inured to rhetoric from Iran that it stood poised to shock world energy markets by blocking the seaway in retaliation for sanctions or an Israeli attack. They were sceptical it would engineer a crisis in a region so critical to its own economic survival. But Iran’s plummeting oil exports mean that a cornered Tehran could see a confrontation in the strait as less an act of self-immolation and more a calculated gamble.

It’s a bit disingenuous to put responses to sanctions in the same boat (no pun intended) as a military attack. Israel and the US have been saber-rattling at Iran for years; it’s hard to imagine that Iran would not engage in an aggressive retaliation, and either blocking the strait or launching strikes on cargo ships is a blindingly obvious move (it’s not as if Iran’s enemies aren’t going to be interfering with its shipments at that point). Readers have also pointed out that Saudi refineries are within easy strike distance.

Saudi Arabia and Abu Dhabi have opened new pipelines that will considerably reduce the importance of the Strait of Hormuz, but they won’t be operating at full capacity for 18 months. And even then, the new facilities don’t neuter the Iranian threat, but merely make the effects somewhat less severe. So Iran still has considerable leverage as well as motive to act. And remember, even though Iran has always insisted it would respond fiercely to an onslaught, as opposed to be an aggressor, it has means for applying pressure that fall short of an attack. Again, from the FT:

Fearing Mr Ahmadi-Nejad could seek a diversion through international sabre-rattling, policy makers say that Iran could easily find ways to disrupt world energy supplies without a direct attack. Some argue it could board every supertanker transiting its territorial waters under other pretexts, such as inspecting for weapons smuggling. Others fear it could even use proxies to fight its war, with terrorist organisations carrying out attacks. Those actions would both slow oil flows and push up prices. Tehran would win a double victory: continuing its own remaining oil sales while benefiting from higher prices. Amrita Sen, senior oil analyst at London-based Energy Aspects, says that domestic pressure and economic collapse could force Tehran back to the negotiating table over its nuclear programme. “But, on the other hand, it also makes more likely a provocative action by Ahmadi-Nejad.”

Since the West does not have a good direct response to this basic problem, it is sending more men and material into the region:

Seeking to counter Iran’s influence, many nations are building up their military presence in the Gulf. September’s drills involved dozens of warships from, among others, the US, the UK, Japan, France, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Italy, Australia and Canada. Lieutenant Greg Raelson, a spokesman for the US fifth fleet, which often keeps one of its aircraft carriers in the Gulf, stressed the Strait of Hormuz was critical to “fuel economies around the globe”.

And protection does not come cheap:

It is almost impossible to calculate the cost of policing the Gulf but Sherife AbdelMessih, chief executive of Future Energy Corporation, provides a back-of-the-envelope approximation: that the US spends roughly $90bn on its Bahrain-based fifth fleet or about $15 per barrel that crosses Hormuz.

Now we know why Obama is so keen to talk about fracking. It solves more than one problem.

Iran government reads RAND: The risks of confrontation and the Strait of Hormuz

Posted by Allen McDuffee on October 8, 2012 at 10:59 am

Last week, the RAND Corp.’s Alireza Nader wrote that Iran’s continued threats to close the Strait of Hormuz are ”a pivotal part of a military strategy based on psychological and asymmetric warfare.” Blocking the strait would cut off 90 percent of the Persian Gulf oil supply to the world and would carry with it implications for regional security and the global economy.

An Iranian submarine participates in the Iranian navy’s Velayat-90 war games in the Strait of Hormuz in 2011. Iran is amassing anti-ship missiles while expanding its fleet of fast-attack boats and submarines.(Reuters )

Today, the Iranian government shared that RAND analysis with its population through its state-owned Fars News Agency, perhaps to show how strong the Iranian regime is against the U.S. — and how U.S. experts know it.

Fars reworded the Nader piece very closely:

The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Navy may be able to inflict damage on US forces. It operates hundreds of small and relatively fast attack boats, some armed with sophisticated anti-ship cruise missiles.

Iran could also fire missiles at US warships from its 1000 mile-long coastline. An even more controversial Iranian move would be scattering mines either near the Strait or in the Persian Gulf, which could slow or stop shipping as the US Navy tried to clear the waterway.

Iran might instead seek to repeat the strategy used by Hezbollah in the 2006 war with Israel – holding ground by bleeding the adversary. It may hope to emerge as the political and psychological victor by hitting a few US warships, perhaps even a carrier, causing high oil prices, and increasing international pressure – all tactics designed to force the United States to stop its strikes.

Just by threatening to close the Strait, Iran increases pressure on the United States to restrain Israel from attacking Iran. Other key players – including major oil importers such as China, Japan and India – would be reluctant to support military action because of heavy dependence on Persian Gulf oil.

However, Fars did leave out the parts of Nader’s analysis in which Iran is also vulnerable, should a military confrontation take place in the Persian Gulf.

But the Islamic Republic would also pay a heavy price for fighting in the Persian Gulf. Its forces could be destroyed without first inflicting substantial damage, which would humiliate the regime. Despite military rhetoric, Iran’s naval forces are poorly matched against the U.S. Fifth fleet.

Iran is also heavily dependent on freedom of navigation through the Persian Gulf to export its own oil, especially important given its increasingly troubled economy. Most Iranian exports and imports flow through the Strait. Iran may be more dependent on the Strait than other regional players, such as Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates, both of which are building pipelines to bypass the strategic waterway.

War With Iran: US and Iranian Ships Are Already Locked in a Deadly Game of Cat and Mouse

Joseph Sarkisian
in
World,
Iran
3 weeks ago

War With Iran US and Iranian Ships Are Already Locked in a Deadly Game of Cat and Mouse

Both the Iranian and American navies, along with a spattering of naval assets from other nations allied with the U.S. are playing footsy in the Persian Gulf as of late, as Iran continues to lay amphibious mines while the U.S. grudgingly sweeps them up.

This obnoxious game is the latest in an attempt by the Iranian navy to show force, and America’s attempt to make that force look moot in comparison. But the scales are tipped in Iran’s favor, as their mining and naval warfare capabilities in general are superior to the United States’ within the Gulf region and Strait of Hormuz.

Sea mines have come a long way since the last time you saw a picture of them, which was probably the World War 2 vintage. Nowadays, mines come in all shapes and sizes, some of which can be disguised as floating waste, driftwood, or attached to other objects. U.S. efforts to find these mines are excruciatingly tedious, as investment in this technology has been unnecessary until now and is therefore severely lacking, akin to the metaphoric mental image of a Marine slogging through mud with a knife, prying up mines as he moves under concertina wire at a snail’s pace.

Even if U.S. efforts to sweep the Gulf of floating mines were successful, they would still contend with Captor mines, which sit on the sea floor and launch a projectile when they sense a ship is approaching. Iran purchased these sophisticated systems from China, who tends to lead the way in sea mining technology. The EM52 system, for example, is capable of picking up the distinctive acoustic signature of an American ship and then launching its payload accordingly.

None of this bodes well for the U.S. Fifth Fleet, but the almighty Navy has been beefing up its abilities elsewhere, mostly in order to fend off Iran’s terrifyingly adept ability at waging guerrilla naval warfare. The U.S. has started outfitting its aircraft carriers with short range, rapid-fire missile batteries that can simultaneously target numerous fast-moving vessels from long-range. Not to be outdone, the Iranian navy began rolling out a fleet of super fast, super stable speedboats in 2009 that are capable of an astonishingly fast 72 knots, or about 83 mph.

The U.S. has plenty of cause for concern, as simulations have shown the Navy taking on heavy losses in a high seas battle with Iran. The question is whether the U.S. will be able to outfit its major vessels with spiffy new technology in time for a potential high seas grudge match, or if Iran will simply outpace U.S. efforts given their obsessive compulsion to study U.S. strategy and counter it since the early 1990s.

With any luck, tensions will calm, cooler heads will prevail, and talks about Iran’s nuclear program will bear fruit as the U.S. realizes that it cannot demand such lofty concessions without giving of itself first. However, the way things have been moving, it doesn’t appear that this path of common sense has been adopted by either side.

Picture Credit: roberthuffstutter

ONLY HALF OF THE MINES WERE FOUND DURING GAMES

OCTOBER 15, 2012

NAVY WAR SHIP - BELOW

Below the flight deck of the USS Enterprise, one of the aircraft carriers that participated in the mine hunting exercise in September. Photo by Dan Sagalyn

A major international naval exercise last month in and around the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea, led by the U.S. Navy with more than 30 other nations participating, located fewer than half of the practice mines laid at sea.

This outcome of the highly publicized military drills — not publicly known until now — underscores how difficult it may be for the United States and its partners to detect and incapacitate waterborne explosive devices that Iran has threatened to plant if its nuclear facilities come under attack.

Out of the 29 simulated mines that were dropped in the water, “I don’t think a great many were found,” retired Navy Capt. Robert O’Donnell, a former mine warfare director for his service, told the NewsHour. “It was probably around half or less.”

Navy officials, though, said the drill was constructive and asserted that focusing on the number of mines detected alone would paint an incomplete picture.

“We enjoyed great success,” said Cdr. Jason Salata, the top public affairs officer for the 5th Fleet. “Every platform that was sent to find a shape found a shape. We stand by that.” Salata asserted that “there were no missed mines, each platform that had an opportunity to find the mine did so.”

The drill, dubbed International Mine Countermeasures Exercise 2012 or IMCMEX, brought together countries from all over the world at a time when tensions with Iran have been heating up. Tehran has threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important choke points through which 20 percent of the world’s oil flows.

The surprising mine-detection result came in what one senior Navy official told the NewsHour was “one of the most significant and strategically important exercises of the year.” It was also the largest exercise of its kind ever held in the region.

Being able to find and destroy sea mines is critical to maintaining stable world oil prices and global economic growth.

“The Strait [of Hormuz] remains a vital sea lane of communications to us and our partners,” Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said earlier this year. “We are determined to preserve freedom of transit there in the face of Iranian threats to impose a blockade.”

“I just felt that they should have done better,” said O’Donnell, clearly disappointed with the outcome of this key measure of performance. “That’s the point of the exercise, to do mine-countermine [operations] in an area, and to find the mines.”

Now a consultant, O’Donnell was invited by the Navy to observe the September exercise firsthand as it unfolded.

The Navy declined to provide data on how many practice mines were located during the two-week naval drill but did not dispute that less than half were found. However, a spokesman insisted that the figures do not tell the whole story and that the event was “‘not just about finding” the dummy mines.

“Numbers alone do not tell the story of IMCMEX’s effectiveness and success,” said Lt. Greg Raelson, a media officer with the 5th fleet, stationed in Bahrain. “We operated ships, helicopters, divers, and unmanned undersea vehicles with accuracy and effectiveness, confirming our ability to respond to maritime mine threats in the undersea environment. Because of this exercise, we were able to enhance partnerships and further hone the international community’s ability to ensure the safe and free flow of navigation.”

However, some analysts with extensive experience in evaluating Navy mine exercises say the rate of success in detecting practice mines is critically important.

“I would be surprised if the post-exercise analysis didn’t include some kind of a scoring mechanism of how well did we do against this set” of imitation mines, said Scott Savitz, a senior RAND engineer who, in a prior job, led Navy-contracted teams to analyze counter-mine exercises. The central point of a mine-hunting exercise is “to find them all, because in the real-world scenario you want to minimize the subsequent mine risk,” he said.

“You want to try to ascertain how well you are doing. You need a find a certain number of mines and a certain number of attempts to hunt or sweep them in order to get anything statistically meaningful,” Savitz said. “If we get zero or one or two, it doesn’t tell us much. It’s not granular enough.”

During the exercise, the military’s top commander of U.S. Naval forces in the Middle East stressed two key objectives for the drill: To practice working together with other countries, and to find simulated mines.

On board the USS Ponce, the command ship for mine hunting operations in the Persian Gulf, sailors practice using surveillance equipment. Watch this video to see the unmanned aerial vehicle called Scan Eagle land by snagging a cable with its wing. The camera in the aircraft feeds back video to sailors who watch for threatening boats.

“This exercise is about getting the mines of out the water, and making sure people can sail through the Strait of Hormuz,” Vice Adm. John Miller, the commander of the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet, told reporters in Bahrain as the exercise was getting under way. “And what it’s really about is the opportunity to operate together in an international coalition and to make sure we can complete all the tasks that need to be completed.”

The top U.S. combatant commander for the region last month said the exercise was intended to realistically simulate possible military scenarios.

“We train as you do the real thing,” said Gen. James Mattis, the commander of U.S. military forces in the Middle East said while onboard a command-and-control vessel, USS Ponce, during the exercise. “You’ve got to train the same way that you operate every day at sea.”

One of the Navy spokesmen asserted last week that the military did not intend to go after all the mock mines laid for the exercise, much as an individual might focus a session at the gym on selected pieces of equipment but skip those that are unnecessary.

“My trainer builds me a workout,” said Salata. “Perhaps my trainer does not want me to work on some of the equipment. Maybe I don’t have enough time to get to all of the equipment. But based on my expectations, and the objectives of the session, I still may have an amazing workout and enjoy great success.”

Likewise, in terms of last month’s exercise, he said, “the number of shapes found vs. the number of shapes laid does not tell a clear story.”

Savitz, the RAND engineer, said a selective approach to testing counter-mine readiness might indeed have been appropriate for last month’s drill.

“If the goal is to do some of the monkey bars and then…we have something else that is in a slightly different environment and we are going to be testing your skills in that,” he said, the exercise approach might have given participating nations “a broad sampling of all of the parts of the decathlon” and “that may make sense.”

Navy spokesmen said that following the exercise, a key measure of achievement would be to see how many countries partake in the next drill.

“So how do we see success in this case? Well, the biggest tell will be the participation interest for next year’s exercise, which is already being planned,” Raelson said.

But others see coalition-building as just one piece of a fruitful military exercise.

Former Navy Lt. Cdr. Stephen Burke, who served aboard ships in the Persian Gulf when it was infested with mines during the U.S. war with Iraq in 1990-1991, said 5th Fleet officials are “putting the spin on it” when they emphasize the 30-nation participation without detailing how well those countries did at finding mines.

When the U.S. Navy is “trying to get people to participate, you don’t get them to participate by telling them that they don’t do very well,” Burke said. “It was a big love-in exercise to get them to keep coming back and to build a coalition.”

Mine-hunting is quite challenging, he emphasized.

The less-than-50-percent success rate in the exercise shows “it’s very difficult to detect shapes on the seabed and discriminate between rocks and other debris from the actual mines you are actually trying to go after,” Burke said. Well aware of the tall order involved, the Navy likely laid “10 shapes in order for the probability of finding at least one of them,” he surmised.

Meantime, U.S. naval forces are trying to build a wide coalition of foreign navies to show resolve in confronting Iran, he said.

“They are trying to get everyone — especially the partner nations that may not have a robust capability — to come away from the exercise feeling good about themselves for having accomplished something positive,” Burke said. “So it’s like seeding a lake for fishing. You put more fish in there than you expect your customers to catch, but you want them to all go away having caught a fish.”

That said, setting an objective of maximizing international partner participation “in and of itself is not bad,” Burke said, given a perceived political need to signal to Iran that the international community is determined to keep the Strait of Hormuz open.

Raelson, the 5th Fleet media officer, emphasized the collaborative military successes involved.

“Each ship, unmanned underwater vehicle and helicopter that was tasked with finding a practice mine in a particular geographic operating area did. The use of shapes enabled participants to use their individual capabilities in their three regional environments while proving interoperability, compatibility and information exchange,” he said. “It was not the intention to utilize the inaugural IMCMEX to validate effectiveness by assessing individual nations’ capabilities and nor would it be appropriate for us to comment too deeply on tactical performance.”

O’Donnell said the exercise appears to have been useful, but the United States and its military partners should look to future counter-mine drills to more fully prepare for real-world threats.

“All in all, I guess that the exercise was a success since so many nations participated and they were able to communicate with each other,” said the retired Navy captain. “Next time, though, I think they should do a better job of finding the drill mines that were there.”

Editor’s note: This is the last article in the series focusing on the Strait of Hormuz and Iran’s threat to mine the chokepoint. Watch the broadcast report here:

Hunting for Mines in Persian Gulf as Tensions Between Israel and Iran Build

And see previous stories:

Iran Watching as U.S. Military Launches Exercise in Strait of Hormuz

As Israel’s Threat to Bomb Iran Looms, U.S. Vows to Keep Aircraft Carrier Strike Group in Persian Gulf

Jellyfish, Sea Snakes and Beetles: The Challenges of Hunting for Sea Mines

USS Porter underway with Enterprise Carrier Strike Group

U.S. Naval Forces, 5th Fleet Public Affairs

Courtesy Story

Courtesy Photo

Aircraft carrier USS Enterprise (CVN 65), guided-missile destroyers USS Porter (DDG 78) and USS Nitze (DDG 94), and guided-missile cruiser USS Vicksburg (CG 69) transit back to their homeport of Norfolk, Va. Enterprise was deployed to the U.S. 5th Fleet area of responsibility conducting maritime security operations, theater security cooperation efforts and support missions for Operation Enduring Freedom. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Scott Pittman/Released)

By Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Alex R. Forster
Enterprise Carrier Strike Group Public Affairs

USS PORTER, At Sea – When guided-missile destroyer USS Porter (DDG 78) and the rest of the Enterprise Carrier Strike Group departed Norfolk, Va., March 11, they were prepared for their deployment.

The crew had trained and prepared for many months to be able to provide maritime security, stability and an important naval presence in the U.S. 5th and 6th Fleet areas of responsibility.

What the Porter’s crew faced in the early hours of Aug. 12, however, was a challenge nobody had expected. That morning, everything changed.

"I will never forget the sound. It was incredible. After that, nothing was the same," said Gunner's Mate Seaman Aaron Wells-Wood, who witnessed what would prove to be a life-changing moment for many of the sailors aboard Porter that day.

While completing a transit of the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important and strategic waterways, Porter collided with a 160,000 ton, Japanese owned merchant tanker.

While no one on either ship was injured during the collision, it required the crew of Porter to set general quarters and, in the moments after impact, take action to maintain and preserve the ship's ability to sustain operability and combat damage.

In those key moments, Porter’s crew rose to the occasion, proving that the training they had undergone throughout their Navy careers had been worthwhile.

"I'll say it simply - there was no way that a husband, wife, mother, father, brother, sister, son or daughter wasn't going to come back home to their loved ones," said Damage Controlman 1st Class Sean Connolly, one of the first sailors on scene to combat the damage caused by the collision.

Awarded a Navy Achievement Medal for his actions that day, Connolly is quick to mention that he is but one of many sailors who performed exactly as they had been trained.

"As with most things in the damage control world, the unexpected can happen fast, often too fast to stop and think about what to do. That's where training comes in, and it paid off here," said Connolly.

The actions of Connolly and his fellow sailors aboard Porter ensured that Porter would be able to steam, under her own power, to a pier in the United Arab Emirates where the repair process would begin.

Technical representatives and Arleigh-Burke class engineers and specialists arrived from across the Navy to assess the damage. The repair process they would then undertake would become the most extensive voyage repair, a name given to repairs performed while deployed, ever completed.

For more than a month, Porter sailors, Naval Sea Systems Command and Navy Regional Maintenance Command engineers and civilian contractors worked day and night to get Porter back up and running as intended.

"Because of where the ship was damaged, a lot of cables had to be cut to remove the damaged steel. This meant that we had to figure out a way to return and restore vital equipment functions and power. It was no easy task," said Electrician's Mate 3rd Class Casey Schneider, part of Porter's combat systems electrical division, who was closely involved in the repairs.

After the repairs were complete, and Porter was operational again, the decision was made for the ship to return home with her strike group.

“The teamwork and resilience the crew of Porter showed in overcoming the initial shock of the collision and working to get the ship into shape to safely sail again was awe-inspiring,” said Rear Adm. Ted Carter, commander, Enterprise Carrier Strike Group. “As the Commander of the Enterprise Carrier Strike Group, I could not be more proud of what these young men and women accomplished in the hours following the collision as well as the weeks following during which Porter was rebuilt for duty. It is a testament to the quality of our force and what makes the U.S. Navy so formidable.”

For many sailors, the memory of the collision in the Strait of Hormuz, and what it ultimately led to, still lingers.

"I will never forget that night and how surreal it seemed at the time. But, I also know that the actions of everyone aboard saved lives. Not just one or two, but everyone's. We came together and that's important. I'll remember that more than anything else," said Wells-Wood.

The crew of Porter came together on that early morning in August. Now, the men and women of Porter are coming together once again; only this time, they are coming together with the strike group they deployed with … and the mission is to return home.

Connected Media

USS Porter underway...
Guided-missile destroyer USS Porter (DDG 78) transits...

USS Porter underway...
Aircraft carrier USS Enterprise, right, guided-missile...

USS Porter underway...
Guided-missile cruiser USS Vicksburg (CG 69),...

USS Porter underway...
Aircraft carrier USS Enterprise (CVN 65), guided-missile...

USS Porter underway...
Aircraft carrier USS Enterprise (CVN 65),

Read more: http://www.dvidshub.net/news/96318/uss-porter-underway-with-enterprise-carrier-strike-group#ixzz29huzgV8q

THIS BLOG CONTINUES ON PAGE 119

2011 INDEX

2012 INDEX

JAN, FEB, MAR, APR 2012

MAY, JUNE, JULY, AUG 2012

SEPT, OCT, NOV, DEC. 2012

http://www.greatdreams.com

http://www.earthmountainview.com

[edit] Traffic Statistics

[edit] Etymology

[edit]

Operation Praying Mantis

[edit] The downing of Iran Air 655

[edit] Collision between USS Newport News and tanker Mogamigawa

[edit] Tensions in 2008

[edit] 2008 US-Iranian naval dispute

Iranian defence policy

Naval activity in 2008

Collision between USS Hartford and USS New Orleans

Tensions in 2011–2012

NEWS