US naval power at stretching point: US and Iran deal points to security challenge for Australia

Keeping the Persian Gulf open for business will require a sustained US naval presence that projects an offensive capability.

Australia should be watching the Gulf very closely. Not only because Australia has key trading partners in the Middle East, but because the crisis demonstrates how US maritime power can become stretched.

We’ve just seen the biggest build-up of US naval power in the Persian Gulf since the 2003 Iraq War. This has included deployment of three aircraft carriers with the USS Abraham Lincoln, USS Gerald R. Ford and USS George H.W. Bush operating together in the Middle East for the first time ever.

The world’s strongest navy was drawn into an asymmetric conflict by Iran, a regional power that used drone-attacks, mine ships and small attack boats to opportunistically freeze a global sea route.

The conflict in Hormuz show the reality of how maritime power actually works in the real world. In many ways, the US-Iran war has more lessons for our region than the Russian-Ukraine War.

A conflict between China and the United States might not see soldiers come eye-to-eye. Instead, it will be dominated by warships, aircraft, and mobile launchers firing long range missiles at each other.

VIEW ALL

Unique Dynamics

Elevated fuel, shipping and fertiliser costs are the price being paid for the USA’s inability to keep the Persian Gulf open and secure.

The economic dimension of the war would be mirrored in any future conflict with China.

Australia; with its reliance on narrow sea trade routes through South East Asia, now needs to reconsider its investment in future maritime capability.

A major navy does not have to be defeated in battle for its influence to lose value. Just being disrupted by a smaller opponent, and failing to protect trade routes and security, can expose concerning vulnerabilities.

Australian Impacts

Australia’s strategic environment, encompassing the Indian, Pacific and Southern Oceans, has relied on the United States Navy as a world policeman who keeps major sea lanes open, protects global trade and projects power wherever it was needed.

The picture is changing for the US, facing new pressures from the expansion of China’s navy in the western Pacific, and the threat of asymmetric warfare with cheap drones and robotic attack craft from smaller payers like Iran.

This matters a great deal for Australia. As an island continent, we have the world’s largest maritime jurisdiction, deep dependence on seaborne trade, and strategic exposure across oceans.

Australia’s debate about AUKUS is important but argues we need to think beyond the choice to purchase new submarines.

The bigger question is what kind of maritime power Australia needs in a world where sea control is contested, and denial of access to trade routes is cheaper, and the United States may not always be able to come to our rescue quickly.

The growing sophistication of China’s military exercises around Taiwan show how naval power can influence diplomatic, trade and political outcomes. Beijing’s pressure on Taiwan sends a message to the US and allies.

At sea, deterrence is visible. Exercises, patrols and naval encounters are watched very closely by regional neighbours, such as South Pacific nations, where Australian naval power was traditionally dominant.

Final Thoughts

The sea has always been central to Australian security. What’s changing is that the contest is no longer theoretical.

The Gulf, Taiwan and the western Pacific are showing us that control of the sea is becoming something states have to demonstrate, not simply assume.

***Adam Lockyer is an Associate Professor of defence and security at Macquarie University.***

He is the author of ‘Conventional Maritime Deterrence: The Operational Foundations of Influence at Sea’, a new book examining how navies use exercises, patrols and encounters at sea to shape the calculations of rivals, allies and regional powers.