America’s allies, especially but not only the Europeans, have very good reasons to be angry with the Trump administration. In addition to Donald Trump’s meaningless insults and shocking threats (especially to take Greenland), they are rightly outraged that the United States, along with Israel, launched the latest campaign against Iran without consultation or warning. Their first response to requests for help escorting ships through the Strait of Hormuz has been a version of “You made your bed, now sleep in it.” Even the Saudis, who are no friends of Iran, are reported to have temporarily cut off access to American air bases in anger over not receiving information from the Americans about the recent decision to guide American ships through the strait.
It’s all understandable, but a big mistake from the point of view of their own interests. The basic situation is this: America’s blockade of the sea route, although delayed (it only began on April 13, six weeks after the war), is effective. Despite its small number of minesweepers, and possibly using previously unknown or secret systems, the US Navy is confident enough to have guided two US merchant ships and sent two of its most valuable destroyers through the sea route. Iran’s photos on the ships failed. The question now is which side will yield the most in the difficult and chaotic negotiations.
The United States would like its allies to provide frigates to escort oil tankers through this cleared route. Frigates, similar to the escort destroyers of World War II, are typically smaller than destroyers. A US Arleigh Burke-class destroyer can displace around 10,000 tons, similar to a pre-World War II ship, whereas a European FREMM frigate can displace just over 6,000 tons. Escorts have been a mission for the fleet for generations in fact, going back some way to the age of ships. And unfortunately, the US Navy has been unable to continue acquiring frigates.
Why should Europeans help? One bad reason is that Trump, who has no sense of guilt for failing to consult with allies, will come out of this episode angrier than ever, especially with Europeans. Unfair and unjust, no doubt, but that’s what they’re dealing with. An angry Trump, especially if he feels humiliated in some way, is likely to do things faster and stupider than before, including withdrawing more troops from Europe, or effectively if not blowing up the NATO alliance.
There are other reasons for sending frigates, however. All seafaring nations have a strong interest in maintaining freedom of navigation through international waterways, of which the Strait of Hormuz is one of the most important. If Iran fails to charge any kind of tax or fee for passing through, the regulation is shot, and that is a dangerous thing. Those allies may not like Trump’s handling of the problem, but it must be addressed.
Moreover, European and Asian nations are more interested in experiencing this crisis than the United States. Yes, oil can be fished, and yes, the Americans are already feeling the consequences of shutting down the flow of oil from the Persian Gulf. But the fact remains that the United States is a major exporter of oil and natural gas, that it exports the largest amount, and that it is quietly enabling the massive growth of Venezuela’s oil sales as well. Trump’s contention that the closure of the canal hurts other countries more than the US will not hold for long, but so far, it has proved correct.
Finally, hate Trump if you want, but Iranians are more of a problem than Americans. Negotiations, agreements, limited strikes, sanctions, interim agreements—none of them have stopped, or could stop, Iran’s drive to develop nuclear weapons, its relentless efforts to overthrow its neighbors, or its attempts to destroy the state of Israel. Long-range missiles made in Iran could hit European capitals. Nor has there ever been a group of moderate Iranian leaders who want to abandon the fundamental politics of the Islamic Republic of hostility against the West and Israel, and want to expand its empire by using violent means. The differences have been between the most patient and the least, the cruder and the subtler, the least compromise and the hard-core fanatics. The underlying ideology, however, has been constant.
Would it be dangerous to send frigates? Yes. But here we enter one of the ways in which Western strategic culture has been influenced by the Cold War tendency to conflate strategy with deterrence. Most advanced nations understand the need for some form of violent response to terrorists or insurgents, usually as a function of special operations forces. For most military forces, their main purpose has been to prevent war by coercion rather than to win war by fighting. That reason of military power is no longer enough.
The war in Ukraine has convinced many in Europe that deterrence may not be enough. The Iran crisis should too. Navies must be built to ship in harm’s way. The idea put forward by France and England, in particular, that the European flotilla should play a role only when the shooting is over, is futile. The shooting won’t stop entirely for a long time, and the latest fighting is certainly just one round, if a very intense one, in a conflict that has continued since the 1980s. There will probably be others.
In the dark world we have entered, the independent maritime nations of the world must be ready to take risks that they previously did not accept. In this case, the United States’ having done most of the heavy lifting means it would be wise for America’s angry and mistreated allies to support it. Wagging a finger and curling a lip is emotionally satisfying in a way, but it’s a luxury that can only be afforded before it goes down in history, not now. Pique is not a policy, and sometimes the craft of government needs to swallow hard and help someone you have every reason to despise.
