Claims that the U.S. will end the war by seizing Iranian assets make no strategic sense. Targeting Kharg Island or removing the uranium from Isfahan with ground operations is just too risky.
These narratives are likely just a reflection of the U.S. searching for a symbolic win, rather than a practical military plan. But this conflict could be pushing Iran closer to nuclear armament. Iran’s ability to quickly build a bomb wasn’t enough deterrence, so building a bomb appears to be the only option left.
As the war escalates and moderates are sidelined (or killed), the Iran war will grow less coherent and much more dangerous.
Hey, everybody. Peter Zeihan here coming to you from the San Antonio airport. Today it’s the 17th of March, and there’s a lot of stuff going on in the news related to the Iran war that I find a little concerning. So I wanted to lay out what a few things are and are not, and hopefully some clarity will come out of this.
So there’s a lot of talk in US media, especially, being leaked out of the administration deliberately, like straight from the white House, that, in order to conclude the war, they need to remove the enriched uranium from the equation. And the idea is that this meu that’s a marine expeditionary unit with the USS Tripoli that is currently enroute from East Asia to the Persian Gulf, is doing so in order to participate with that.
So the two dominant theories are that the United States wants to put boots on the ground in a place called Kharg Island, which serves as the destination point for about 90% of the crude that Iran produces. It’s the sole loading facility that they have for super tankers.
It’s on the northern part of the Gulf, about 30km off the coast. The second theory is that they want to remove they being the United States government, wants to remove the enriched uranium that Iran has from contention. That stuff is in a place called Isfahan, which is about 40 miles inland. Neither of these really match the facts. In the case of Kharg Island, there’s a single pipeline.
There’s no bridge. So actually, if you wanted to take this out of the equation, you dropped one bomb on one pumping station on shore, and you cut it down with minimal damage, and it would be easy repair later. So there’s no need to put boots on the ground and car gets off. All that would do would be to open you up to potential counterattacks from the shore.
Now, the Iranians couldn’t, like, surge across the street then with ground troops, but they could continually attack any American forces there with drones, for example. And if you were going to have a ship supporting Marines on card, all of a sudden you’ve given them a big, fat, easy to shoot target. That was stupid, just monumentally stupid. But so would going after for harm because it’s behind one is one of the first places that we hit during the war.
We also hit them in July or sorry, June of last year. Sorry. It’s angry that time. I guess it is. You have been, This farm is under hundreds of tons of rubble, and it’s 400 miles inland. So the 2500 Marines that are with the Tripoli, there’s no way that they could land moved to his farm, somehow, magically excavate hundreds of tons of debris and then move the canisters of enriched uranium back to the coast.
That’s assuming that the canisters are over 90% purified already, which is highly unlikely. so the hardware that is now moving in, the conversations that are being deliberately had publicly just don’t match the facts on the ground. I wish I had a clearer idea of what was going on here, but it’s pretty obvious that the administration is looking for a way out and looking for a way to manufacture a success.
Just keep in mind that the position of this administration, and by this I mean the Iranian administration going back 35 years, has always been that if we get a new goal, we will be attacked. So we want a nuclear program that can create a nuke in a short period of time. You know, six months, but we don’t actually want to get the bomb.
So the idea is that the deterrent is the program, not an actual weapon, or at least that’s what they believed. Until June of last year and in June of last year, Israel, the United States attacked anyway. And so the conversation then was basically, do we now need to have the bomb? So we have an actual turn?
And regardless of how that conversation worked out over the last several months, this month with the new attack that killed, among other people, the Supreme leader and the conversation has changed. And now it’s like, of course we need a nuke. And everyone that the United States has are so far coming. I as assistance most recently Larijani all of these people by Iranian standards were moderates who favored negotiation with the United States as opposed to nuke.
So pieces in motion, not a lot of it makes a huge amount of sense strategically right now, but not a lot of how God makes a lot of strategic sense either.
