Send our warships to Hormuz — even if they don’t come back, UK general | UK | News
The Royal Navy could lose ships in the Strait of Hormuz and still need to send them, one of Britain’s most senior military figures said today.
The Express understands that General Sir Nick Carter, who serves as the country’s top military officer, floated the idea of joining Donald Trump’s bid to break Iran’s stranglehold on Gulf shipping, even as he explained the extent of the threat facing any ship assigned to the mission.
He warned reporters that the IRGC had spent years honing its ability to dominate the waterway through an arsenal of fast boats, drone swarms and shore-launched missiles; making it one of the most dangerous water areas in the world in which any navy can operate.
He explained that our escort ships will also face tough opposition: “When you do this, you become very vulnerable.
“Assuming there are no mines in the water, the threat is mainly related to shore-based unmanned aerial vehicles and shore-based missiles.
“Modern air defense systems are capable of dealing with this, as we saw in the last two or three weeks of the war.
“But we have no doubt that if they bring together all the capabilities of the IRGC, passing through the Strait of Hormuz will be quite exciting.”
Asked if “quite exciting” meant ships could be lost, he added: “It would be challenging, there’s no doubt about that, the risks I’ve described are serious.”
A job that could take months
Sir Nick estimated that where large numbers of mines had been laid along the strait, the clearing operation alone could take several months, during which time the crew would be exposed to attack from the Iranian coastline.
He told BBC Radio 4’s Today program that no country had the firepower to deal with the problem alone, and instead called for “a well-coordinated, thoughtfully planned and executed operation led by the Americans, involving many countries.”
Sir Keir Starmer is understood to be reluctant to hand over Royal Navy warships, with Whitehall sources casting doubt on what assets are actually available.
The problem is compounded by the fact that Britain’s last mine countermeasures ship was decommissioned shortly before hostilities began, leaving remote mine-hunting drones the most reliable option if ministers decide to take action.
Trump intensifies
According to the Daily Mail, after allies hesitated, Trump increased the pressure today and warned that the future of NATO would look “very bad” if member states continued to back down.
“We will see if they will help us. Because I have said for a long time that we will be on their side, but they will not be on our side,” he said.
In an interview with the Financial Times, he made clear that he expected the beneficiaries of the strait to shoulder some of the burden of securing the strait, saying: “It is appropriate for the people who benefit from the strait to help ensure that nothing bad happens there.”
Britain, China, France, Japan and South Korea were previously identified by Trump as countries that should contribute ships.
‘He will outlast any personality’
Ministers moved to mitigate Trump’s threat to NATO. Speaking to Sky News, Work and Pensions Minister Pat McFadden said the relationship between Washington and London was deeper than any disagreement.
“This is a very transactional presidency and our job is to lead that process, always remembering that the friendship between the United States and the United Kingdom runs very deep,” he said.
“It’s a good relationship. It’s permanent and I think it will outlast all the personalities involved.”
Sir Nick had a sharper perspective on the obligations and limits of the alliance.
“NATO was created as a defense alliance, which has been underlined many times, and all its articles are essentially defensive,” he told the BBC.
“This was not an alliance designed for one of the allies to go to war of its own choosing and then force everyone else to comply.
“That’s not what it was designed for in any way, and I’m not sure it’s the kind of NATO any of us would want to be a member of.”
