A previous FDI paper noted that President Trump has declared that he does not want a war with Iran. That comment, which the President has now made several times, has been reported on TV and by news outlets that have not previously treated his administration, or him, favourably. It led the Iranian Ambassador to the UN, Majid Takht Ravanchi, to state that he, too, believed that the President did not want a war with Iran. That did not stop Mr Trump from initiating a cyberattack on Iran, however, including a “crippling” attack on a spy group with ties to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and another against Iranian computer systems used to control rocket and missile launches. According to one source, the attack was so devastating that Iran would find it difficult to recover from it. That cyberattack has changed the dynamics in the relationship completely.
As troubling as that attack ought to be for Tehran’s strategists, at least equally worrying should be the president’s recent comment that the US should not have to automatically protect all tankers that pass through the Strait of Hormuz. Oil tankers have already been attacked, presumably by Iranian forces or agents, although verifiable proof of that is not readily forthcoming.
Six tankers and an unmanned US drone have been attacked since May. In the case of the attack on the US drone, President Trump authorised US forces to attack Iran but rescinded that order before the attack could take place. If the unpredictable US president does actually promulgate an order that sees US forces in the region protect only US ships, it could have the potential to cause greater damage to Iran than the cyber-attack that he ordered.
Read the article by Lindsay Hughes, Senior Research Analyst, Indian Ocean Research Programme on Future Directions International.