US Strategy on Hormuz Strait: Will Capturing Kharg Island Backfire?

US Strategy on Hormuz Strait: Will Capturing Kharg Island Backfire?

In recent developments that have captured the attention of global markets and political observers, the US President has publicly expressed his intention to potentially launch a comprehensive military operation to seize Kharg Island, the vital heart of Iran's oil industry. Although the specifics of the operational plan remain vague, public statements, including those made during a media interview, indicate that this strategic island on the Hormuz Strait has always been a "preferred option." However, these statements did not conceal concerns about domestic public support for such military adventures.

Conflicting Statements and Hopes for an Imminent Deal

In a striking contrast, these declarations were followed by others carrying a more optimistic tone. The US President indicated that an "excellent agreement" had been reached on the Iranian issue, adding that the relevant documents were in their final stages and could soon be finalized. Expectations are that this agreement might be signed in Europe, perhaps over the weekend, with the US Vice President in attendance. According to his statements, the opening of the Hormuz Strait would be contingent upon Iran signing this agreement, casting a shadow of hope over the stability of maritime navigation in this crucial waterway.

Seizing Kharg Island: A Pressure Tactic or a Strategic Trap?

Interpreted by many experts as a tactic of "maximum pressure," the threats to seize Kharg Island are seen as an attempt to force Iran into concessions in negotiations and accelerate the reopening of maritime traffic in the Hormuz Strait. However, the views of military experts and strategic analysts suggest that the execution of such a plan could backfire, pushing the United States into deeper quagmires of war.

The Strategic and Historical Significance of Kharg Island

Kharg Island is located in the northern Persian Gulf, approximately 26 kilometers from the Iranian coast and 483 kilometers northwest of the Strait of Hormuz. This island possesses an exceptional competitive advantage due to its deep waters, enabling it to accommodate supertankers that cannot approach Iran's shallow coastlines. Before the outbreak of military operations between the US and Iran on February 28th, Kharg Island was responsible for 90% of Iran's oil exports, representing the lifeline of the Iranian economy, which heavily relies on oil revenues. Consequently, the control of the island by any foreign power would be a devastating blow to Iran's energy trade and would intensify internal economic pressures.

Previous Military Interventions and the Current Situation

The period between March and April of this year witnessed a series of US airstrikes targeting military objectives on Kharg Island. At the time, the US President stated that all military targets on the island had been completely destroyed, with potential future strikes on oil infrastructure. Reports from US officials also indicated that the White House was assessing the feasibility of sending ground troops to the island. Following the aerial campaign, the US military did not launch further direct strikes on the island, but it maintained a comprehensive blockade of all Iranian ports and targeted oil tankers transiting near the island, maintaining a stringent maritime blockade.

The Impact of Current Seizure on the Iranian Economy

It is noteworthy that Iran's oil export volume has already been halved due to the ongoing impacts of the conflict. Therefore, even if US forces were to capture Kharg Island, the additional fatal impact on the Iranian economy in the short term would be limited.

Expert Assessments: Easy Capture, Prohibitively High Garrison Costs

Multiple defense agencies uniformly assess that the US military, leveraging its modern combat systems, could rapidly complete the landing and occupation of Kharg Island. However, this operation would not lead to a swift end to the war; rather, it could prolong the conflict and escalate battlefield risks. An analysis published by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies noted that occupying and garrisoning Kharg Island would not yield a decisive battlefield victory but would instead expand the scale of hostilities and extend the war's duration. Troops stationed on the island would be perpetually exposed to relentless Iranian missile and drone attacks, with the threat posed by FPV (First-Person View) kamikaze drones, extensively deployed and highly accurate in the Ukraine conflict, being particularly prominent. Experts added that any successful strike by the Iranian military against US forces stationed on the island would be immediately publicized with combat footage, utilizing images of US casualties for propaganda purposes to damage domestic public opinion and military morale.

Joseph Votel, former commander of US Central Command, explained that simply garrisoning Kharg Island would require between 800 to 1000 ground soldiers. However, this entire garrison would need round-the-clock logistical support, and the supply convoys would also require accompanying military protection. Votel frankly stated that the defensive environment for the troops stationed on the island is extremely passive, and the island seizure operation offers no practical tactical gain. Even with absolute US strength to take the island, this military decision remains highly irrational, with the overall costs far outweighing the benefits.