British warships face a ‘significant’ risk of being sunk if they are sent to the Straits of Hormuz, but they should be dispatched anyway, a former professional head of the Armed Forces said today.
General Sir Nick Carter said it was in the UK’s national interest to agree to Donald Trump‘s request for naval help to combat Iranian forces throttling shipping in and out of the Gulf.
But he said that any Royal Navy vessels sent to either clear mines or escort tankers would be ‘vulnerable’ to attacks by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
It came as Sir Keir Starmer appeared set to refuse Trump’s demand for Royal Navy warships to secure the key oil and gas route being blockaded by Tehran’s forces, amid questions over whether any are available.
The UK could potentially send mine-hunting drones to the region rather than a warship, having withdrawn its last mine counter-measures vessel (MCMV) just before the fighting started.
Sir Nick, a former chief of the defence staff, said that the IRGC had its own naval force of small boats, drones and missiles and ‘have become experts at controlling that particular strait’.
He suggested it could take months to clear mines if they have been laid in large numbers, all the while under threat from shore-based attacks.
And he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme escort ships would also face tough opposition, saying: ‘You are very vulnerable when you do it.
General Sir Nick Carter said it was in the UK’s national interest to agree to Donald Trump’s request for naval help to combat Iranian forces throttling shipping in and out of the Gulf
But he said that any Royal Navy vessels sent to either clear mines or escort tankers would be ‘vulnerable’ to attacks by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps
‘On the assumption there are no mines in the water the threat is principally about shore-based drones and shore-based missiles.
‘Modern air defence systems are capable of dealing with that, as we have seen over the course of the last two or three weeks of this war.
‘But we should be in no doubt that if they put together all of the IRGC capabilities … it would quite exciting going through the straits of Hormuz.’
Asked if ‘quite exciting meant ships could be lost, he added: ‘It would be challenging, no doubt about it, the risks as I have described them are significant.’
However he added that it should be balanced against the interest the UK and the global economy has in keeping the Straits open.
He backed ‘a well-coordinated operation led by the Americans with many nations involved in it, thoughtfully planned and implemented’ because no one, not even the US Navy, has the capability to do it alone.
Trump today said Nato faces a ‘very bad’ future should its member states fail to help, adding: ‘We’ll see if they help us. Because I’ve long said that we’ll be there for them but they won’t be there for us.’
It came as Sir Keir Starmer appeared set to refuse Trump’s demand for Royal Navy warships to secure the key oil and gas route being blockaded by Tehran’s forces
In an interview with the Financial Times, he reiterated his call for allied assistance in the Strait of Hormuz, telling the paper: ‘It’s only appropriate that people who are the beneficiaries of the strait will help to make sure that nothing bad happens there.’
He has previously called for the UK, China, France, Japan and South Korea to send ships to secure the route.
An ally of Sir Keir played down the US president’s warning about Nato’s future, saying there was always a lot of rhetoric from the White House.
Work and Pensions Secretary Pat McFadden told Sky News: ‘It’s a very transactional presidency and our job is to navigate this, to always remember that the friendship between the United States and the United Kingdom runs very deep.
‘It’s a good relationship. It’s enduring and I think it will outlast all the personalities involved.’
Sir Nick, however, was more blunt.
‘Nato was created as an – underlined four times – defensive alliance and all of its articles are essentially orientated towards defence,’ he told the BBC.
‘It was not an alliance designed for one of the allies to go on a war of choice and then oblige everyone else to follow.
‘It was not designed for that at all and I am not sure that is the sort of Nato that any of us wants to belong to.’