“Eat your words but don’t go hungry
Words have always nearly hung me”
If the pen is mightier than the sword, then the blockade is mightier than the missile!
Blockades have been part of economic warfare throughout history.
The first on recorded is the Blockade of Athens (Peloponnesian War, 431–404 BCE), which followed the Battle of Aegospotami, when the Spartan navy blocked the Hellespont, cutting off essential grain shipments from the Black Sea, which forced Athens to surrender.
Another of note came in the Napoleonic Wars, 1803–1814, when the Royal Navy continuously blockaded French ports, restricting commerce and military mobility.
More recently there was our naval blockade of Germany during WWI. This was arguably the most important Allied strategy of the conflict, cutting off essential food and raw materials to the Central Powers. By reducing imports to 20% of pre-war levels, it fuelled widespread civilian malnutrition, which led civilian death estimated at between 400,000 to 1m.
The blockade was so effective that it was maintained until June 1919, months after the armistice, to ensure compliance with the Treaty of Versailles.
Given the above, the fact that Iran, and their supporting Houthis, have the ability to impose blockades that can impact C.30% of the worlds energy supplies, it beggars belief that the US high command didn’t see this coming.
‘it beggars belief that the US high command didn’t see this coming’
Despite Secretary of War Hegseth’s claims of a new type of American strategy, and his criticism of the “foolish political leaders and foolish military leaders of the past”, his promise of “the most lethal and precise air power campaign in history” this appears to be just samo samo.
History is clear, air power alone isn’t sufficient; it didn’t bring England down in 1940, Germany in 1944-45, or Viet Nam. More recently examples are the 1991 Desert Storm attacks on Iraq, Serbia in 1999 and 2003 “Operation Iraqi Freedom”.
All had one thing in-common; military leaders belief that the increasing might and airpower, and breakthroughs in technology would revolutionize warfare.
One example of wars being won from the air is supposedly Japan in 1945, but that also required a sea blockade, and the use of two nuclear devices. Not to mention an island hopping carrier led campaign from 1943 onwards.
Estimates for the cost of Trump’s war vary between $500m and $1bn per day. According to the WSJ, over $2bn of equipment, including fighter planes, K-135 tankers and 2-radar have been written-off.
The US military has requested $200bn of additional funding to fight the war, and that will likely increase if, or when Trump commits ground forces.
Trump has clearly underestimated Iran’s resolve, and the expected uprising by their citizens appears to be stillborn.
Elsewhere, both Russia and China appear content to see the US tied-down in Iran, using up its weapons and keeping its warships out of their way.
The messaging from the US is both confused and contradictory.
‘Trump has clearly underestimated Iran’s resolve’
Trump told the FT that his “preference would be to take the oil” in Iran, and saying of Iran’s crucial export hub on Kharg island: “We could take it very easily”. He then told the newspaper that, despite his threats to seize Iranian oil production, indirect US-Iran talks via Pakistani “emissaries” were progressing well.
On the Iranian side, their Iranian parliament speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said: “The enemy signals negotiation in public, while in secret it plots a ground attack.”
The White House had said that it is “very close” to meeting its objectives, and that the Iran’s regime is looking for an “exit ramp.“
As America’s objectives are opaque, it’s hard to judge if they have been met. What is clear is that they seriously underestimated the situation, and as I wrote some days ago, for Iran not losing is winning.
Strategically, aside from actually starting the war, the big mistake has been not securing sea-routes, in what is one of the world’s most strategically significant maritime corridors.
Whilst The Strait of Hormuz has never been truly closed, shipping has been disrupted. There was the so-called Tanker War in the 1980s, in which Iran and Iraq attacked oil tankers during their war. International naval forces, particularly those of the U S and western European states, intervened to guarantee ships safe passage.
Today, the Iranian navy has turned the Strait into a bazaar, allowing PMs and tanker owners to bargain over the toll they are willing to pay for “free passage”. This could become a money spinner in the way that the Suez canal is for Egypt, with suggestions that this access could be worth up to $80bn p.a.. There is also a proposed new law allowing tankers from favoured non-hostile nations such as India, Japan, Pakistan, South Korea and China to be waved through or offered discounts.
Aside from Hormuz, there is also the threat from Iran’s Yemini allies, the Houthci’s, of a blockade to the strait of Bab el Mandeb, which connects the Red Sea to the Indian Ocean and is the fourth-largest global shipping choke point. The strait is a pathway for ships carrying about 10%of the world’s oil and natural gas supplies.
It isn’t only just oil, there is also the passage for chemicals, helium, metals and fertilisers. Post-Covid this further proof of the impact caused by inter-connected supply chains “and how geography has blessed Iran with a unique chance to break these chains.”
As Europe found out in September 2022 when Putin cut off gas supplies, targeting energy infrastructure is becoming a specific, and in some cases the primary, target of attack.
Prior to that shutdown, EU imported C.45% of its gas and 27% of its oil from Russia. By 2025, this had fallen to 13% for gas and 3% for oil. What has been slow to change is the percentage of energy produced by renewable electricity which is at 25% up from 22%.
The failing is clear, the EU diversified the problem rather than curing it.
As we are longer a member state, the UK is dealing with this alone. One impact of the energy crisis is that it has injected a new lease of life into the right’s desire for more drilling in the North Sea and fracking, whilst continuing to rubbish the climate crisis
Robert Jenrick, the Reform MP, posted on X: “It is economic lunacy to ignore our rich energy reserves. Reform will unapologetically drill in the North Sea for oil and gas. We’ll get bills down and bring back good jobs.”
‘Reform will unapologetically drill in the North Sea for oil and gas. We’ll get bills down and bring back good jobs’
Jenrick’s like him, is simple: producing more of our own oil and gas will lower household energy bills. We can add to this a second myth; producing more oil and gas in the North Sea creates our “own special supply”.
The facts are different, because the oil would be sold on international markets at international prices, primarily because, as a country, we don’t have the ability to extract, refine and use oil.
As a result, the only benefit for households would be via the taxes and levies on oil and gas profits, which, could in principle be redistributed to households.
Analysis suggests that household bills would fall by between £16 and £82 per year, C.1% to 4.6% of the current average household energy bill of £1,776, according to UK regulator Ofgem.
Maxing out the North Sea achieves little other than digging a deeper fossil fuel hole, further exposing ourselves to geopolitical shocks.
A far more efficient options, both financially and for the planet, is maximising renewables by reducing the role of gas in electricity production.
Research shows that by setting the price of electricity via renewables could save households between £105 to £331 per year through lower wholesale energy costs. These saving would be ongoing savings not one-off.
To date, policy costs such as support for renewables have been added to electricity bills, however, in the government’s 2025 autumn spending review, these costs will be moved into “general taxation”, saving the average household up to £110 annually.
‘The battlelines are already being drawn with net zero becoming the new Brexit’
This is a positive step toward dealing with inequality. Energy bills impact far more on lower income households while taxes directly reflect people’s ability to pay.
Spain is a perfect example of what renewables can achieve; their energy prices are 32% below the European average due solely to investment in wind and solar power.
Unsurprisingly, it is Reform is capitalising on the crisis by promising new oil and gas exploitation in the North Sea, accompanied by an immediate abandonment of net zero targets. Its deputy leader, Richard Tice, blames the climate crisis on “the power of the sun” and “volcanoes”, has pledged to lift the ban on fracking.
The battlelines are already being drawn with net zero becoming the new Brexit.
The anti-net zero charge comprises Nigel Farage’s Reform party, the Conservative party, some business interests, and the UK’s right-wing media.
Currently, they are out-of-step with the electorate, where >60% favouring climate action. Worryingly, experts warn that the same techniques that won the Brexit referendum for “Leave”, which started out as the underdog, are now being brought to bear on the climate.
‘they are out-of-step with the electorate, where >60% favouring climate action’
The campaign will be Brexit redux; the same people, blaming climate action for everything that’s going wrong – the cost of living, the economy – even though it’s clearly the problem. They will simply present scrapping net zero as a panacea, the answer to all your problems. Once again, it will be sold as the establishment versus the people.
Farage has been openly looking for what he can present as the next fault-line. Lat year, he told the Sun on Sunday: “This could be the next Brexit – where parliament is so hopelessly out of touch with the country”.
This time, it might be Farage that is out-of-touch.
Sam Alvis, associate director of energy and environment at the Institute for Public Policy Research thinktank, said: “People see that lots of aspects of climate action are just common sense, like renewable energy. They want homegrown clean energy, it’s popular. There is a lot of good faith in climate action – the UK public is actually very green.”
The latest YouGov poll shows that voters priority is still immigration (23%) followed by the cost-of-living (16%). On a more forensic basis, the wealthy racists who vote Reform (56%) and Conservative (37%) find immigration more troubling and the cost-of-living less so (5% and 10%). The less well-off supporters of labor, LibDems and Greens priorities are the opposite.
Climate change is fifth overall, although, much to my amusement 0% of Reform voters are concerned by it!
On a personal level, I find the cynicism of both right-wing parties breathtaking. They simply have no interest in the majority, and what legacy we leave our children and grandchildren.
There goals appears to be profits, power and a romanticised return to Edwardian England…..” And is there honey still for tea?” (1)
Unfortunately honey is for the few. The CPI INDEX 01.1.8.2 Jams, marmalades and honey 2015=100; after flatlining until 09/21, it reached 145.8 in June ’23, and is now around 132.
Source: https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/timeseries/l79w/mm23
“Moving up and so alive in her honey dripping beehive, beehive..”
Notes: “The Old Vicarage, Grantchester”, by Rupert Brooke
Today, we consider another of Trump’s follies. This one does look like it could be one too many.
Of course, the overall mistake was allowing himself to be played by Israel. On a more macro level, even I an aware how easy it is to block some of the shipping routes in the Gulf, and the impact of doing so.
I can only assume his military people were so convinced of their ability to bomb Iran into submission that they saw it as a non-issue. It’s the old, “it’s different this time” mistake, because it rarely is.
In fairness to PM Starmer his handling of the situation has been first-class.
On the right Dumb and Dumber (Farage and Badenoch) after dimming their enthusiasm to be involved in the shambles, are using the energy situation to demand – how can Dumber demand anything? – we reopen the North Sea.
The right-wing press are on the case, drumming-up all manner of falsehoods, but when did they ever stop a good story?
This is shaping-up to Brexit II; the people against the elites, against the establishment. It’s “The Blues Brothers”, “we’re getting the bank back together”. Nigel is cleaning-up the “£350 million a week extra for the NHS.”
Surely people won’t fall for it a second time?
Lyrically, we start with “Wordy Rappinghood” by Tom Tom Club, and end with one of my favourites, “Just Like Honey” by The Jesus and Mary Chain.
I was hoping for honey for tea, but I can’t afford it!
Philip.
@coldwarsteve
Philip Gilbert is a city-based corporate financier, and former investment banker.
Philip is a great believer in meritocracy, and in the belief that if you want something enough you can make it happen. These beliefs were formed in his formative years, of the late 1970s and 80s
Click on the link to see all Brexit Bulletins:
The post The Times They Are A-Changin’: If the Pen is Mightier Than the Sword appeared first on USNewsRank.