Additional Thoughts on Iranian Naval Diplomacy

This is my response to several email responses who either suggest, imply, or outright state that I am a fool for suggesting in my last post that Iran is exposing weaknesses in the US Navy. You bet your fancy pants they are exposing our weaknesses, because they are exploiting the US Navy's inability or lack of desire to deter political influence from naval diplomacy being applied to our economy from a competitive state.

Two Iranian ships are exercising naval diplomacy near the Suez Canal. The Israeli's are freaking out, likely for valid reasons, but largely for reasons that aren't being well disseminated in the media. The impact to the oil markets as of earlier this morning was $.90 a bbl and the US uses 21 million bbl per day. The political influence inflicted by Iran has already cost the US around $19 million in oil futures in 24 hours - mind you from the naval diplomacy of a corvette and a tanker which is operating right next to a US Navy Carrier Strike Group.

Future prices are hedges and are influenced heavily by actions, and the perception of those actions. The increase in price of oil reflects concern over Iranian ships, and when you think about it, the challenge to influence investors is rooted in either ignorance to the dangers two ships represent to a global market or lack of confidence in the deterrence methods of maintaining stability in the markets. The "perception" aspect matters in this market, so the ability to influence perception is an important capability in this case.

Now, according to the US Navy's own strategy, the US Navy claims its global responsibilities include the stability and freedom of access to sea lines of communication, meaning the primary strategic justification for supporting the organization you belong to is to maintain stability for purposes of commerce. How do we reconcile the strategic justification of your organization juxtaposed with the political and economic influence being applied to us by the political influence through naval diplomacy of a couple Iranian ships? The key question here is whether the Navy is a deterrence to that Iranian political influence or not? I believe the US Navy should accept as a primary role to ALWAYS be a deterrence to the naval diplomacy of regimes like Iran.

If we extrapolate the influence Iran is applying to the global oil market, in the last 24 hours alone they have had at least $100 million impact - with a f-in corvette no less! Oh btw, who gets to sell oil at higher prices?

This little corvette and tanker just paid for itself many times over with a single deployment.

If the US Navy as an organization doesn't see a role for itself in the strategic politics of situations like this, then I'm thinking I need to question the value of our nations investment in naval forces. If the Navy as an organization considers itself too big to manage the complexities of strategic competition absent a shooting war, then taxpayers and Congressmen should rightfully ask whether the return on investment in the Navy by the taxpayer is worth it.

The strategic political competition in peacetime is being fought today in the information and communication space. Either the Navy learns to engage that fight during the information era, or needs to give up money to other instruments of national power that will engage that geopolitical competition.