Thread by @hthjones

THREAD - this one is worth your time.

Last Friday, the British-flagged Stena Impero was seized in Omani territorial waters by Iranian forces.

The ship remains impounded at the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas (just north of the Strait).

Then Foreign Secretary @Jeremy_Hunt said earlier this week "under international law, Iran had no right to obstruct the ship’s passage, let alone board her. It was therefore an act of state piracy"

The Royal Navy have since begun escorting vessels through the Strait, with two tankers accompanied yesterday, and another two this morning.

The Department of Transport have been liaising with ship companies and industry to reassure them that the Royal Navy will assist.

I understand that industry was briefed in full yesterday. I'm told the response from industry has been very positive.

Provided tankers are sensible, let the UK know where they want to go and when, it looks as though one warship is working just fine, using this convoy system seen in the images released by @DefenceHQ.

Provided industry takes the advice, one ship is plenty....

That said, HMS Duncan will be in the region any day now. For a short time, there'll be the luxury of two ships available in the Strait of Hormuz.

Note I say luxury. It is.

We can criticise the Royal Navy all we like, but one warship permanently based there is still one more than any other nation on earth bar the US.

Two therefore really is a luxury, even for a short time.

It's probably worth saying a bit about the "European-led maritime protection mission" that Hunt announced.

The latest impression I'm getting is that this plan is pretty much merging with the American plan 'Op Sentinel'.

Britain has been involved with meetings at @CENTCOM this week, and these are expected to continue next week.

Various European countries (France, Spain, Germany) have been interested in the UK idea, but making this a truly international effort makes sense.

It's important to get everyone on the same page.

After all, if we forget about the nuclear deal for a moment, the entire international community have an interest here.

The right to freedom of navigation must be protected. It's a VITAL shipping lane that needs to remain open.

If freedom of navigation is undermined, energy prices will rise worldwide, as will insurance costs for industry operating there.

This would have global consequences. It makes sense therefore that the effort to protect against this outcome is internationalised.

For the time being, the Royal Navy will continue doing what they're doing: protecting shipping exercising innocent passage.

Discussions will continue regarding some form of coalition. This may produce something, or it may not.

An interesting result of this situation has been the debate on Royal Navy hull numbers.

We've hardly discussed UNCLOS, the right to freedom of navigation, Iran trying to shift the precedent etc.

The focus instead has been almost entirely on defence spending.

This is a really fascinating response. We all know Defence in the UK needs more money. We can all see that.

But I'm not sure this particular crisis is a valid reason as to why.

Hear me out :)

The "look at what's happening in the Strait of Hormuz - we need more ships available" argument is a bit simplistic, and ignores all sorts of wider consequences, precedents, and optics.

Say we had an extra six ships. Both destroyers and frigates. Sitting in Portsmouth. Plenty of crew. All ready to go.

Ya know, the kind of situation lots of people would love to see.

Right now, in that situation, would we be sending more ships?

We'd be able to, but would we?

I'm confident that the answer is no.

Yes defence spending needs to rise. Yes we need more ships. But not for this reason.

The Strait of Hormuz is a shipping lane. NOT a war zone.

One warship, plus support, permanently based there - great. Prudent.

Sending the fleet because Iran seized a tanker - really? It would look like we were on war footing....

The last thing we'd want to do is militarise a shipping lane, even if we could.

I welcome debates about defence spending. But think about this:

Even with more defence spending. Even without *insert your scapegoat of choice* cuts. It would be wrong to just send more ships to the region.

We'd be changing the precedent in a deeply irresponsible way.

Always be cautious of simplicity. The world is rarely that clear cut.

And simply having more ships right now would not make the situation any better.

We have HMS Montrose. Soon we'll have Duncan. They'll operate together for a short period, and then Montrose will enter maintenance.

That's plenty.

Yes the surface fleet is too small.

But the situation in Hormuz isn't why it's too small.

It's never as simple as some of these op-eds portray it to be.

Henry out 🙂