Italian Navy Deploys Carrier Strike Group for Five-Month Indo-Pacific Mission

 

The Italian Navy's Carrier Strike Group, led by the Cavour (CVH 550) STOVL aircraft carrier and accompanied by the Alpino (F 594) Bergamini-class frigate, embarked on a five-month deployment to the Indo-Pacific region on June 1st. This mission was confirmed by Italian Navy Chief of Staff Admiral Enrico Credendino at the Conference Navale de Paris in January, though the Ministry of Defense has not released detailed information.

During this deployment, the Carrier Strike Group will visit around ten countries and ports, traveling through the Mediterranean Sea, Indian Ocean, Red Sea, and Gulf of Aden to reach the Pacific. The group will operate in the Indo-Pacific for approximately two months before returning to Italy, making stops in Southeast Asia, India, and the Middle East.

Admiral Credendino emphasized that the Cavour Carrier Strike Group is a versatile tool for projecting power globally, maintaining sea control, and ensuring open sea lines of communication. The deployment will achieve initial operating capability (IOC) for the Italian Navy’s fifth-generation aircraft, enhancing interoperability with allies.

The Cavour carries an air group including Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning IIs, Boeing AV-8B Harrier II Plus aircraft, and NH90 helicopters, totaling more than a dozen assets, with expectations of increased numbers during the mission. The Alpino frigate provides anti-submarine warfare capabilities, and the group will expand with NATO, EU, and allied naval assets, including Spanish and French frigates.

The Italian Carrier Strike Group will engage in naval diplomacy, promote Italian industry, and collaborate with NATO and local navies. Highlights include the biennial Pitch Black exercise in Australia, interactions with the US Armed Forces in the Central Pacific, and engagements with the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force. The group will visit the Philippines, Indonesia, Singapore, India, Oman, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia before returning to Italy in early November.

This mission is crucial for evaluating and qualifying the capabilities of the fifth-generation F-35Bs, aiming to reach IOC by the end of 2024, which is significant for both the Italian Navy and NATO.

Germany Expands Eurofighter Fleet with New Order of 20 Jets Amid Defense Boost

 Germany has announced plans to purchase an additional 20 Eurofighter combat aircraft, supplementing an existing order of 38 jets. This decision aims to strengthen the nation's defense capabilities and support the aerospace industry, according to Chancellor Olaf Scholz. The announcement was made on the first day of the Berlin Air Show, highlighting how the influx of defense funds, spurred by Russia's invasion of Ukraine, has revitalized the aerospace sector.

The new Eurofighters, with an estimated cost of €2 billion (approximately $2.2 billion), will ensure continuous production for Airbus, the aircraft manufacturer. Scholz hinted at potential future exports of the Eurofighter, developed in collaboration with the UK, Italy, and Spain, suggesting more orders could follow.

Besides these four core countries, the Eurofighter is also part of the air fleets of Austria, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Kuwait, and Qatar. However, exports to Middle Eastern nations with poor human rights records occasionally cause political tensions in Germany, and by extension, with other European co-producers who are less concerned about such issues. Germany's current stance allows Saudi Arabia to purchase additional Eurofighters through Britain as the intermediary.

Currently, Airbus is producing a batch of 38 Eurofighters in the Quadriga configuration, costing nearly $6 billion, with the final deliveries expected by 2030. Additionally, Germany is collaborating with France and Spain on the Future Combat Air System (FCAS), a next-generation aircraft projected to debut in 2040, though delays seem likely.

To mitigate potential setbacks with the FCAS program, Germany and France are enhancing their existing fleets—Germany with the Eurofighter and France with the Rafale—despite asserting that there is no substitute for the FCAS.

Oman seeks Bid for Euro-fighter

The government of Oman has requested that BAE Systems submit a formal bid for the supply of Typhoon fighter aircraft. The move clarifies the Middle East nation’s continuing commitment to the program following delays in completing negotiations.

A spokeswoman for the U.K.-based defense company said it expected to complete negotiations by the end of the year, with deliveries of the first aircraft taking place 36 months later.

The request for proposals involves a squadron’s worth of Tranche 3 standard aircraft — about 12 airframes — a support package and training for the Omani air force.

Last month, Oman ordered a second batch of 12 F-16 Block 50’s from Lockheed Martin in a $600 million deal

The Omanis formally stated their intention to purchase the Eurofighter Typhoon in early 2010, and company executives said at the time that the deal could be ready for signing within months.

In a statement, BAE said it welcomed the release of the request for proposals, adding that the news underpins its long-standing defense and security relationship with the sultanate as a major equipment supplier.

The most recent major equipment sale was signed in 2007 to deliver three corvettes to the Omani navy in a deal valued at 400 million pounds.

The warships remain undelivered for technical reasons.

The first of the Khareef-class vessels should have been handed over in 2010 but have been delayed following the discovery of technical problems during sea trials.

The spokeswoman denied that the signing of the fighter deal between the two sides is dependent on the agreement of a get-well package for three corvettes.

The spokeswoman said the first of the corvettes is now scheduled to be handed over at the end of the second quarter.

The Omanis’ commitment to Typhoon follows recent competition losses for the fighter in Japan and Switzerland.

A decision by India on whether to select the Eurofighter aircraft or its French rival, Dassault Rafale, is imminent.

Earlier this month, BAE announced that talks with the Middle East’s first Typhoon customer, Saudi Arabia, over amendments to a deal to supply 72 fighters, were dragging on and would likely affect its 2011 earnings.

The original deal called for the first 24 aircraft to be delivered from the BAE production line in the U.K., with subsequent assembly in Saudi Arabia.

BAE and the Saudis announced a change of plan last February over where the final 42 aircraft would be built but are still haggling over the details.

Typhoon is a four-nation program involving the Germany, Italy, Spain and the U.K. So far, it has exported the aircraft to Austria and Saudi Arabia

Would the US be defeated in the Persian Gulf in a War with Iran?

mi

Soldiers attend Iranian massive naval maneuvers dubbed Velayat 90 on the Sea of Oman, Iran, Dec. 28, 2011. The naval drills cover an area of 2,000 km stretching from the east of the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Aden.

(Xinhua/Stringer/Ali Mohammadi)

After years of U.S. threats, Iran has started to take very public steps to demonstrate that it is willing and capable of closing the Strait of Hormuz. On December 24, 2011 Iran started its Velayat-90 naval drills in and around the Strait of Hormuz and extending from the Persian Gulf and Gulf of Oman (Oman Sea) to the Gulf of Aden and Arabian Sea in the Indian Ocean. Since these drills took place there has been a growing war of words between Washington and Tehran. Nothing the Obama Administration or the Pentagon had done or said deterred Tehran from continuing the naval drills.

The Geo-Political Nature of the Strait of Hormuz

Besides the fact that it is a vital transit point for global energy resources and a strategic chokepoint, two additional things should be noted in regards to the Strait of Hormuz’s relationship to Iran. The first point is about the geography of the Strait of Hormuz. The second point is about the role of Iran in co-managing the strategic strait on the basis of international law and its sovereign rights.

Source : http://www.marketoracle.co.uk

The maritime traffic that goes through the Strait of Hormuz has always been in contact with Iranian naval forces, which are predominately composed of the Iranian Regular Force Navy and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Navy. In fact, Iranian naval forces monitor and police the Strait of Hormuz along with the Sultanate of Oman via the Omani enclave of Musandam. More importantly, to go through the Strait of Hormuz all maritime traffic, including the U.S. Navy, sails through Iranian territory. No country can enter the Persian Gulf and transit the Strait of Hormuz without sailing through Iranian waters and territory. Almost all entrances into the Persian Gulf are made through Iranian waters and most exits are through Omani waters.

Iran allows foreign ships to use its territorial waters in good faith and on the basis of Part III of the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea’s maritime transit passage provisions that stipulate that vessels are free to sail through the Strait of Hormuz and similar bodies of water on the basis of speedy and continuous navigation between an open port and the high seas. Although Tehran in custom follows the navigation practices of the Law of the Sea, Tehran is not legally bound by them. Like Washington, Tehran signed this international treaty, but never ratified it.

American-Iranian Tensions in the Persian Gulf

Now the Iranian Majlis (Parliament) is re-evaluating the use of Iranian waters at the Strait of Hormuz. Legislation is being proposed by Iranian parliamentarians to block any foreign warships from being able to use Iranian territorial waters to navigate through the Strait of Hormuz without Iranian permission; the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee is currently studying legislating this as an official Iranian posture on the basis of Iranian strategic interests and national security. [1]

On December 30, 2011, the U.S.S. John C. Stennispassed through the area where Iran was conducting its naval drills. The Commander of the Iranian Regular Forces, Major-General Ataollah Salehi, advised the U.S.S.John C. Stennis and other U.S. Navy vessels not to return to the Persian Gulf while Iran was doing its drills, saying that Iran is not in the habit of repeating a warning twice. [2] Shortly after the stern Iranian warning to Washington, the Pentagon’s press secretary responded by making a statement saying: “No one in this government seeks confrontation [with Iran] over the Strait of Hormuz. It’s important to lower the temperature.” [3]

In an actual scenario of military conflict with Iran it is very likely that U.S. aircraft carriers would actually operate from outside of the Persian Gulf and from the southern Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. Unless the missile systems that Washington is erecting in the petro-sheikhdoms of the southern Persian Gulf are fully capable and active, the deployment of large U.S. warships may be unlikely in the Persian Gulf. The reasons for this are tied to geographic realities and the defensive capabilities of Iran.

Geography is against the Pentagon: U.S. Naval Strength has limits in the Persian Gulf

U.S. naval strength, which predominately includes the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Coast Guard, essentially has primacy over all the other navies and maritime forces in the world. Its deep sea or oceanic capabilities are unparalleled or unmatched by any other naval power. Nevertheless, primacy does not mean invincibility. U.S. naval forces in the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf are very vulnerable to Iran.

Despite its might and shear strength, geography literally works against U.S. naval power in the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf. The relative narrowness of the Persian Gulf makes it like a channel, at least in a strategic and military context. Figuratively speaking, the aircraft carriers and warships of the U.S. are confined to narrow waters or are closed in within the coastal waters of the Persian Gulf.

This is where the Iranian military’s advanced missile capabilities come into play. The Iranian missile and torpedo arsenal would make short work of U.S. naval assets in the waters of the Persian Gulf where U.S. vessels are constricted. This is why the U.S. has been busily erecting a missile shield system in the Persian Gulf amongst the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries in the last few years.

Even the small Iranian patrol boats in the Persian Gulf, which appear pitiable and insignificant against a U.S. aircraft carrier or destroyer, threaten U.S. warships. Looks can be deceiving; these Iranian patrol boats can easily launch a barrage of missiles that could significantly damage and effectively sink large U.S. warships. Iranian small patrol boats are also hardly detectable and hard to target.

Iranian forces could also attack U.S. naval capabilities merely by launching missile attacks from the Iranian mainland on the northern shores of the Persian Gulf. Even in 2008 the Washington Institute for Near East Policy acknowledged the threat from Iran’s mobile coastal missile batteries, anti-ship missiles, and missile-armed small ships. [4] Other Iranian naval assets like aerial drones, hovercraft, mines, diver teams, and mini-submarines could also be used in asymmetrical naval warfare against the U.S. Fifth Fleet.

Even the Pentagon’s own war simulations have shown that a war in the Persian Gulf with Iran would spell disaster for the United States and its military. One key example is the Millennium Challenge 2002 (MC02) war game in the Persian Gulf, which was conducted from July 24, 2002 to August 15, 2002 and took almost two years to prepare. This mammoth drill was amongst the largest and most expensive war games ever held by the Pentagon. Millennium Challenge 2002 was held shortly after the Pentagon had decided that it would continue the momentum of the war in Afghanistan by targeting Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, Lebanon, Syria, and finishing off with the big prize of Iran in a broad military campaign to ensure U.S. primacy in the new millennium.

After Millennium Challenge 2002 was finished, the war game was presented as a simulation of a war against Iraq under the rule of President Saddam Hussein, but this cannot be true. [5] The U.S. had already made assessments for the upcoming Anglo-American invasion of Iraq. Moreover, Iraq had no naval capabilities that would merit such large-scale use of the U.S. Navy.

Millennium Challenge 2002 was conducted to simulate a war with Iran, which was codenamed “Red” and referred to as an unknown Middle Eastern rogue enemy state in the Persian Gulf. Other than Iran, no other country could meet the perimeters and characteristics of “Red” and its military forces, from the patrol boats to the motorcycle units. The war simulation took place because Washington was planning on attacking Iran soon after invading Iraq in 2003.

The scenario in the 2002 war game started with the U.S., codenamed “Blue,” giving Iran a one-day ultimatum to surrender in the year 2007. The war game’s date of 2007 would chronologically correspond to U.S. plans to attack Iran after the Israeli attack on Lebanon in 2006, which was suppose to expand into a broader war against Syria too. The war against Lebanon, however, did not go as planned and the U.S. and Israel realized that if Hezbollah could challenge them in Lebanon then an expanded war with Syria and Iran would be a disaster.

In Millennium Challenge 2002’s war scenario, Iran would react to U.S. aggression by launching a massive barrage of missiles that would overwhelm the U.S. and destroy sixteen U.S. naval vessels – an aircraft carrier, ten cruisers, and five amphibious ships. It is estimated that if this happened in reality, more than 20,000 U.S. servicemen would have been dead after the attack within a single day. [6] Next, Iran would send its small patrol boats – the ones that look insignificant in comparison to theU.S.S. John C. Stennis and other large U.S. warships – to overwhelm the remainder of the Pentagon’s naval forces in the Persian Gulf, which would result in the damaging and sinking of most of the U.S. Fifth Fleet and the defeat of the United States. After the U.S. defeat, the war games were started over again, but “Red” had to operate under handicapping restraints so that U.S. forces would be allowed to emerge victorious from the drill. [7] This would hide the reality of the fact that the U.S. would be overwhelmed as an outcome of a conventional war with Iran in the Persian Gulf.

Hence, the formidable naval power of Washington is handicapped by geography coupled with Iranian military capabilities when it comes to fighting Tehran in the Persian Gulf or even in much of the Gulf of Oman. Without open waters, like in the Indian Ocean or the Pacific Ocean, the U.S. will have to fight under significantly reduced response times and, more importantly, will not be able to fight from a stand-off (militarily safe) distance. Thus, entire tool boxes of U.S. naval defensive systems, which were designed for combat in open waters using stand-off ranges, are rendered unpractical in the Persian Gulf.

Making the Strait of Hormuz Redundant to Weaken Iran?

The entire world knows the importance of the Strait of Hormuz and Washington and its allies are very well aware that the Iranians can militarily close it for a significant period of time. This is why the U.S. has been working with the GCC countries – Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, and the U.A.E. – to re-route their oil through pipelines bypassing the Strait of Hormuz and channelling GCC oil directly to the Indian Ocean, Red Sea, or Mediterranean Sea. Washington has also been pushing Iraq to seek alternative routes in talks with Turkey, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia.

Both Israel and Turkey have also been very interested in this strategic project. Ankara has had discussions with Qatar about setting up an oil terminal that would reach Turkey via Iraq. The Turkish government has attempted to get Iraq to link its southern oil fields, like Iraq’s northern oil fields, to the transit routes running through Turkey. This is all tied to Turkey’s visions of being an energy corridor and important lynchpin of transit.

The aims of re-routing oil away from the Persian Gulf would remove an important element of strategic leverage Iran has against Washington and its allies. It would effectively reduce the importance of the Strait of Hormuz. It could very well be a prerequisite to war preparations and a war led by the United States against Tehran and its allies.

It is within this framework that the Abu Dhabi Crude Oil Pipeline or the Hashan-Fujairah Oil Pipeline is being fostered by the United Arab Emirates to bypass the maritime route in the Persian Gulf going through the Strait of Hormuz. The project design was put together in 2006, the contract was issued in 2007, and construction was started in 2008. [8] This pipeline goes straight from Abdu Dhabi to the port of Fujairah on the shore of the Arabian Sea. In other words it will give oil exports from the U.A.E. direct access to the Indian Ocean. It has openly been presented as a means to ensure energy security by bypassing Hormuz and attempting to avoid the Iranian military. Along with the construction of this pipeline, the erection of a strategic oil reservoir at Fujairah was also envisaged to also maintain the flow of oil to the international market should the Persian Gulf be closed off. [9]

Aside from the Petroline (East-West Saudi Pipeline), Saudi Arabia has also been looking at alternative transit routes and examining the ports of it southern neighbours in the Arabian Peninsula, Oman and Yemen. The Yemenite port of Mukalla on the shores of the Gulf of Aden has been of particular interest to Riyadh. In 2007, Israeli sources reported with some fanfare that a pipeline project was in the works that would connect the Saudi oil fields with Fujairah in the U.A.E., Muscat in Oman, and finally to Mukalla in Yemen. The reopening of the Iraq-Saudi Arabia Pipeline (IPSA), which was ironically built by Saddam Hussein to avoid the Strait of Hormuz and Iran, has also been a subject of discussion for the Saudis with the Iraqi government in Baghdad.

If Syria and Lebanon were converted into Washington’s clients, then the defunct Trans-Arabian Pipeline (Tapline) could also be reactivated, along with other alternative routes going from the Arabian Peninsula to the coast of the Mediterranean Sea via the Levant. Chronologically, this would also fit into Washington’s efforts to overrun Lebanon and Syria in an attempt to isolate Iran before any possible showdown with Tehran.

The Iranian Velayat-90 naval drills, which extended in close proximity to the entrance of the Red Sea in the Gulf of Aden off the territorial waters of Yemen, also took place in the Gulf of Oman facing the coast of Oman and the eastern shores of the United Arab Emirates. Amongst other things, Velayat-90 should be understood as a signal that Tehran is ready to operate outside of the Persian Gulf and can even strike or block the pipelines trying to bypass the Strait of Hormuz.

The first Trans-Arabia pipeline designed to keep tankers out of Iran’s range.

Geography again is on Iran’s side in this case too. Bypassing the Strait of Hormuz still does not change the fact that most of the oil fields belonging to GCC countries are located in the Persian Gulf or near its shores, which means they are all situated within close proximity to Iran and therefore close Iranian striking distance. Like in the case of the Hashan-Fujairah Pipeline, the Iranians could easily disable the flow of oil from the point of origin. Tehran could launch missile and aerial attacks or deploy its ground, sea, air, and amphibious forces into these areas as well. It does not necessarily need to block the Strait of Hormuz; after all preventing the flow of energy is the main purpose of the Iranian threats.

The American-Iranian Cold War

Washington has been on the offensive against Iran using any means at its disposal. The tensions over the Strait of Hormuz and in the Persian Gulf are just one front in a dangerous multi-front regional cold war between Tehran and Washington in the broader Middle East. Since 2001, the Pentagon has also been restructuring its military to wage unconventional wars with enemies like Iran. [10] Nonetheless, geography has always worked against the Pentagon and the U.S. has not found a solution for its naval dilemma in the Persian Gulf. Instead of a conventional war, Washington has had to resort to waging a covert, economic, and diplomatic war against Iran.

Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya

U.S. Navy Frees Iranian Sailors from Pirates

The fishing dhow Al Molai looks like hundreds of similar craft plying the waters of the Arabian Sea.

A BOARDING TEAM from the destroyer Kidd approaches the dhow Al Molai to free a group of Iranian sailors held hostage by pirates (U.S. Navy)

For about six weeks, the fishing boat moved around attracting little attention, its average appearance masking evil intentions.

The picture of innocence began to change Jan. 5.In reality, the vessel and its crew of Iranian sailors was being held hostage by pirates. The Al Molai became a mother ship for smaller boats apparently carrying Somalis bent on attacking merchant ships.

The end of the Al Molai's pirate career began when the Bahamas-registered cargo ship Sunrise issued a distress call around 8:30 a.m. A group of suspected pirates in a small, 15-foot open skiff was, according to the master of the Sunrise, attacking his ship.

The nearby U.S. aircraft carrier John C. Stennis heard the radio call and dispatched the escorting cruiser Mobile Bay to move in. When an MH-60S helicopter from Helicopter Anti-submarine Squadron 8, Detachment 1 operating from the cruiser approached, the six people aboard the skiff tossed a number of objects in the water.

"We suspected the objects to be RPGs [rocket-propelled grenade launchers] and rifles," Rear Adm. Craig Faller, commander of the John C. Stennis carrier strike group, told reporters during a conference call from his flagship on Jan. 6.

According to Faller, the suspected pirates surrendered to the helicopter. The cruiser moved in and sent over a boarding team, but no direct evidence was found to hold the Somalis. Despite being found about 175 miles at sea, southeast of Muscat, Oman, the skiff's sailors feigned innocence.

"They told us they were operating in the area for fun," Faller said. "We didn't think so."

Released, the suspected pirates set off on a course for an unknown destination. The helicopter followed at a distance. Soon, the small boat approached an Iranian-flagged dhow. The destroyer Kidd, patrolling in the region against pirates since mid-November, was vectored in, and its embarked MH-60R helicopter from Helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron 71, Detachment 3, took over from the Mobile Bay's helo.

Asked by reporters on the conference call if it was clear it a pirate situation was at hand, Cmdr. Jennifer Ellinger, the destroyer's commanding officer, was confident.

"Yes, definitely," she said.

The helicopters "observed there were Middle Eastern as well as Somalis on board the craft," Ellinger said. "But when we talked bridge-to-bridge they indicated they were Iranian and there were no foreigners aboard, which we knew not to be true," she said.

The dhow's master spoke to the Americans over the radio in Urdu, a language widely spoken in Pakistan. The pirates were unable to follow along, but an Urdu-speaker aboard the Kidd had no trouble translating.

"When we talked to the master, it was clear he was under duress," Ellinger said. "He said they were physically abused, they were scared. They invited us to come over. We reassured them that we would be on the way."

According to Ellinger, the master told the pirates the Americans were coming on board and they knew they were there.

"He convinced them to surrender," she said.

The destroyer drew up to the dhow with guns manned and ready. "Basically it was a forceful approach," Ellinger said. "We asked them all to come topside and surrender their weapons."

The pirates put down their weapons but then tried to hide. When the American boarding team arrived, the master helpfully pointed out all the hiding places, and 15 suspected pirates were taken into custody without any shots being fired.

The 13 freed Iranian fishermen were ecstatic.

"We brought food and meals," Ellinger said. "They had no refrigerator, it was broken. They were relying on fishing to get food, although the pirates had some fruit and provisions."

The Iranian sailors "were extremely grateful," Ellinger said. "Their morale continued to increase as we removed the Somali pirates."

The pirates were transferred on Jan. 6 to the Stennis, where they were still being held on Jan. 7.

"The pirates are under our custody and evidence is being gathered," Faller said. "This will be referred to the interagency in the U.S. to determine what will occur."

The pirates would be treated appropriately, Faller told reporters. "As bad as they are, they deserve humane treatment like any person."

Provisioned with food and wearing Kidd ball caps, the Iranians sailed off to return to their home port.

UNAWARE OF CONTROVERSY

Faller said neither the Iranian fishermen nor the pirates seemed to have any awareness of the recent tensions between Iran and the U.S. over transits of the Strait of Hormuz, the passageway between the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea.

Shortly after the Stennis left the Gulf earlier this week, Iran's Army chief threatened the U.S. Navy and declared that the carrier would not be allowed back in. The threat was issued at the conclusion of a major 10-day Iranian naval exercise, and as new economic sanctions were slapped on Iran by the U.S. and other Western nations.

Despite the heated rhetoric from Tehran, the U.S. has sought to downplay the situation. Asked if the U.S. was exploiting the rescue of the Iranian sailors for publicity reasons, Faller was adamant.

"No sir. We didn't have a vision we'd be on a conference call tonight talking about it," he said during the conference call.

"The Navy is just doing its job out here. Conducting combat operations over Afghanistan and maintaining freedom of the sea."

No response to the rescue has been received from Iran, Faller said, although he acknowledged his forces have recently encountered Iranians.

"We have had interactions at sea with Iranian aircraft and surface ships," he said. "Those interactions have all been professional."

He did not provide further details.

Asked if the Stennis might go back through Hormuz, Faller gave the standard response.

"The Strait of Hormuz is an international strait, and by international law is subject to freedom of navigation," he said. "If it means moving back through the strait that's what we'll do. Right now it's business as usual as we focus on operations over Afghanistan."

"The U.S. Navy has been here for over 60 years," Faller added, "and we'll be here as long as we're needed. On call and ready."

Iran to Hold New War Games in Strait of Hormuz

TEHRAN - Iran is to hold fresh military exercises in and around the strategic Strait of Hormuz within weeks, the naval commander of its powerful Revolutionary Guards was quoted as saying Jan. 6.

The maneuvers are to be held in the Iranian calendar month that runs from Jan. 21 to Feb. 19, the Fars news agency quoted Ali Fadavi as saying.

They will underline Iran's assertion that it has "full control over the Strait of Hormuz area and controls all movements in it," Fadavi added.

The announcement - which narrowed down a timeframe for the exercises the Guards had previously only given as "soon" - risked aggravating tensions with the West over the strait.

The waterway is the world's "most important chokepoint" for oil tankers, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administrations. Some 20 percent of the world's oil flows through the narrow channel at the entrance to the Gulf.

Iran's regular navy completed 10 days of war games to the east of the strait, in the Gulf of Oman, early this week with tests of three anti-ship missiles.

Iran's military and political leaders have warned they could close the strait if increased Western sanctions halt Iranian oil exports.

The navy has also warned it will react if the United States tries to redeploy one of its aircraft carriers to the waterway.

The Revolutionary Guards, who use high-speed skiffs mounted with missile launchers and other lightweight vessels, periodically hold maneuvers in and around the Strait of Hormuz.

The last ones took place in July 2011 and included the firing of several anti-ship missiles, including two Khalij Fars missiles with a range of 190 miles.

Fadavi did not give details of the new maneuvers.

"The 7th in the series of Great Prophet Maneuvers will be conducted in the area of the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz. They will have significant differences from the previous ones," Fars quoted him as saying.

U.S. Warns Iran Against Blocking Off Strait of Hormuz

TEHRAN, Iran - The United States on Dec. 28 warned Iran that any move to block shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, the world's most important oil transit channel, will not be tolerated.

IRANIAN SOLDIERS STAND guard on a military speed boat Dec. 28 during naval exercises in the Strait of Hormuz. (Ali Mohammadi / Agence France-Presse)

The chief of Iran's navy, Adm. Habibollah Sayari, said in an interview with Iran's Press TV that "shutting the strait for Iran's armed forces is really easy - or as we say [in Iran] easier than drinking a glass of water."

"But today, we don't need [to shut] the strait because we have the Sea of Oman under control, and can control the transit," he said.

Washington responded with a strong warning against any attempt to disrupt shipping at the entrance to the Gulf, through which more than a third of the world's tanker-borne oil passes.

"Interference with the transit ... of vessels through the Strait of Hormuz will not be tolerated," Pentagon press secretary George Little said.

The strait is a strategic choke point linking the Gulf's petroleum-exporting states of Bahrain, Iran, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to the Indian Ocean.

The United States maintains a naval presence in the Gulf in large part to ensure that passage for oil remains free.

Sayari was speaking a day after Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi threatened to close the strait if the West imposed more sanctions on Iran, and as its navy held war games in international waters to the east of the channel.

World prices briefly climbed after Rahimi warned Dec. 27 that "not a drop of oil will pass through the Strait of Hormuz" if the West broadened sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program.

"The enemies will only drop their plots when we put them back in their place," the official news agency IRNA quoted Rahimi as saying.

Sayari asserted that the Strait of Hormuz "is completely under the control of the Islamic Republic of Iran."

He said Iran's navy was constituted with the aim of being able to close the strait if necessary.

"The Iranians conduct exercises on a fairly routine basis in this area. That's something that we know about," Little said in Washington. "That being said, any effort to raise the temperature on tensions surrounding the Strait of Hormuz is unhelpful," he said, adding that there was no sign of Iran taking provocative steps near the channel.

"I'm unaware of any aggressive hostile action directed toward U.S. vessels in the Persian Gulf or the Strait of Hormuz," or against other ships, Little said.

As Iran staged its military maneuvers, the American aircraft carrier John C. Stennis, and the guided-missile cruiser Mobile Bay moved through the Strait of Hormuz.

Little said this was "a pre-planned, routine transit" on the way to the Arabian Sea to provide air power for the war in Afghanistan.

France on Dec. 28 called on Tehran to respect international law and allow unhindered passage of all vessels through the strait.

Sayari, meanwhile, said the Islamic republic's naval maneuvers were designed to show Gulf neighbors the power of its military over the zone.

Iranian ships and aircraft dropped mines in the sea Dec. 27 as part of the drill, and on Dec. 28 drones flew out over the Indian Ocean, according to an Iranian Navy spokesman, Adm. Mahmoud Mousavi.

Iran has said several times it is ready to target the strait if it is attacked or economically strangled by Western sanctions over its nuclear program.

An Iranian lawmaker's comments last week that the exercises would block the Strait of Hormuz briefly sent oil prices soaring before that was denied by the government.

Tehran in September rejected a Washington call for a military hotline between the capitals to defuse any "miscalculations" that could occur between their navies in Gulf waters.

U.S. State Department deputy spokesman Mark Toner dismissed Rahimi's threat as another attempt "to distract attention from the real issue, which is their continued non-compliance with their international nuclear obligations."

The United States and other Western countries accuse Iran of using its uranium enrichment program to build nuclear weapons. Tehran denies the charge.

Extra U.S. and European sanctions aimed at Iran's oil and financial sectors are being considered. A European Union spokesman said on Dec. 28 the bloc was pressing ahead with those plans regardless of Tehran's threat.

DoD Lax in Monitoring Weapon Sales to Gulf: Audit

WASHINGTON - U.S. authorities have failed to adequately monitor weapons sales to Persian Gulf countries criticized for dismal rights records or recent security crackdowns on protesters, a government audit said Nov. 18.
The Government Accountability Office pointed to "gaps" in how the State Department and the Pentagon monitor military equipment, including sensitive technology, after it is sold.

Rising tensions in the Middle East and North Africa between long-standing regimes and protesters seeking their removal triggered concern from government auditors, especially ahead of a looming $53 million arms deal with Bahrain.
Although the State Department has vetted hundreds of individuals and units set to receive U.S.-funded training in the Gulf to make sure the equipment will not be used for rights abuses, it has not done so for $188 million in assets due to reach Oman and Bahrain, the GAO said.
"Such vetting is especially critical given Bahrain's use of its security forces to quell public demonstrations since Spring 2011," it said, noting the lapses mean that sensitive technology such as night-vision devices are left "prone to diversion."
Earlier this year, Bahrain's Sunni monarchy crushed pro-democracy protests, spearheaded by the majority Shiites, with the help of troops from other Arab states in the Gulf, led by Saudi Arabia.
Twenty-four people died during the monthlong crackdown, according to official figures from Manama. Four protesters have since died in custody. The opposition said 40 people were killed.
Auditors also criticized the Defense Department for failing to document its efforts to verify the security and accountability procedures in countries receiving sensitive military equipment, while Pentagon staff in five of six Gulf countries did not document monitoring activities for less sensitive items.
"We need to ensure that the equipment is not being diverted to third parties, and that those groups and units who are the intended recipients are not implicated in human rights violations," said House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla.
Gulf Cooperation Council countries - Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates - are among the U.S. military's biggest clients, with some $22 billion in arms sales from 2005 to 2009.

Iraq in Talks To Buy U.S. Fighter Jets: Report

WASHINGTON - Iraq has renewed talks to buy up to 36 U.S. F-16 fighter jets in a deal worth billions that Washington hopes will help contain neighboring Iran, the Wall Street Journal reported July 11.

Iraq had frozen a $4.2 billion deal to buy 18 fighter jets earlier year because of instability related to the Arab Spring but is now considering an even larger purchase, the Journal said, citing U.S. and Iraqi officials.

The newspaper said the renewed interest was linked to higher-than-expected Iraqi oil revenues and concerns on both sides ahead of the withdrawal of the remaining 46,000 U.S. troops from the country by the end of the year.

Any potential deal would be worth billions of dollars and take years to implement, as it would require the manufacture of the planes and the training of Iraqi pilots.

The Journal said Iraq has also requested ground-based air defense systems, including ground-to-air missiles and large guns.

It said Oman was also looking to purchase 18 F-16s at an estimated cost of $3.5 billion.

U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said earlier July 11 during a surprise visit to Baghdad that U.S. forces were continuing to pursue Iran-backed insurgents, saying they had killed a "heck of a lot" of U.S. troops.

Washington has been pressing Iraq to make a decision on whether it wants US troops to remain in the country beyond the end of the year, when all U.S. forces are to be withdrawn under a 2008 security pact.