BEIJING, March 31 (Xinhua) -- U.S. President Donald Trump has in recent days consecutively issued new threats against Iran, vowing to either seize or obliterate Kharg Island, Iran's oil export hub.
This is far from the first time Trump has set his sights on the island. As early as 1988, he claimed that capturing the island would be a way to exert pressure on Iran.
Why is Trump so fixated on a small coral island? What are the chances that Washington will attempt to seize it? If such a move occurs, how might it shape the course of the war?
WHY KHARG ISLAND?
Located in the Persian Gulf, Kharg Island is about 25 km off the coast of Iran and less than 700 km northwest of the Strait of Hormuz.
The island has served as Iran's main oil export terminal since the 1960s, when its facilities were built with the involvement of U.S. oil companies. Tehran has since expanded and upgraded its infrastructure over the decades. Today, crude shipped from Kharg forms the backbone of the Iranian government's revenue.
Although it covers only about 20 square km, it handles about 1.5 million barrels of crude oil every day, with 90 percent of Iran's oil passing through a terminal on the island, making it an "economic lifeline" for the country.
"Iran has spent decades building pipelines from major inland producing areas to the (Kharg) island, turning it into the main collection, storage and loading point for crude before it moves to international buyers," according to Kpler, a data analytics firm.
On March 13, U.S. forces "executed a large-scale precision strike" on Kharg Island, destroying naval mine storage facilities, missile storage bunkers, and multiple other military sites.
The strike deliberately spared oil facilities on the island, indicating that Washington may be treating them as its own assets rather than military targets.
For Trump, it may also serve as a strategic bargaining tool in any attempt to pressure Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
ANOTHER OIL PRICE SPIKE?
Since the onset of the Middle East conflict, Brent Crude has remained mostly above 100 U.S. dollars per barrel, marking a more than 50 percent increase from pre-conflict levels.
If the United States were to seize the island fully, it could cripple Iran's ability to export oil, The New York Times reported.
Such a move would also carry the risk of driving energy prices higher, particularly if Iran retaliates by targeting other infrastructure in the Middle East or attacking oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz, it added.
Any operation to seize Kharg Island would be "economic warfare," said Seth Krummrich, a vice-president at security firm Global Guardian.
Iran has officially rejected the U.S. 15-point proposal and responded with its own five-point plan, which includes continued control over the Strait of Hormuz.
Tom Kloza, chief energy advisor for Gulf Oil, a major American global oil company, said that the United States seizing the island makes no sense if the Strait remains blocked.
"It's a silly exercise because all of the oil loaded at Kharg Island pretty much moves through the Strait of Hormuz," Kloza said.
The island's destruction or loss would not only deprive the government of a crucial revenue stream, but also further reduce global oil supply at a time when prices are already rising sharply, U.S. PBS News reported.
A VAIN MOVE
While Trump claimed talks with Iran are happening and are going "very well," several media reports have revealed that the Pentagon has planned for weeks, or even months, potential ground operations to seize the island.
However, getting ships close to Kharg Island would be a difficult task, as it would involve navigating the perilous Strait of Hormuz, which is often referred to as a "shooting gallery," the Financial Times reported, quoting Mark Cancian, a retired Marine colonel and Pentagon official.
Iran's Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said that his country's forces were "waiting for American soldiers," noting Iran would "rain fire" on any U.S. troops attempting to enter Iranian territory.
Deploying U.S. troops from a staging area on land may be another option, said Jonathan Hackett, a Marine Corps veteran, but it would require basing, access and overflight rights from the nearby Gulf states, which would put those countries further in Iran's crosshairs.
"Introducing ground troops is clearly a riskier operation to our own forces," said Karen Gibson, former director of intelligence for U.S. Central Command, emphasizing that the action could trigger continued pressure.
Even with the cover of U.S. ships and aircraft, there would remain a narrow window of time to intercept every drone or missile fired from the mainland at the island, said Michael Eisenstadt, a former U.S. military analyst.
"The coast tends to be mountainous, so the drones can come in through mountain passes where it's hard for our radar to pick up," Eisenstadt said.
Analysts also suggest that Iran could resort to a destructive strategy, potentially destroying its own oil infrastructure rather than allowing it to fall into the hands of its enemy.
That means, even if an operation to capture the island were executed without a hitch, it might have little impact on the United States' overall position in the ongoing conflict with Iran, said Nick Reynolds, a research fellow of the Royal United Services Institute in London. ■
