Iran Nuclear Crisis: Philip Hammond Warns Tehran Not To Block Shipping Lanes After Fresh Sanctions

First Posted: 05/01/2012 09:24 GMT Updated: 05/01/2012 09:42 GMT   PA

Philip Hammond is to warn Iran that any attempt to block the Strait of Hormuz, a vital shipping lane, would be "illegal and unsuccessful" and would be countered militarily if necessary.

The defence secretary is expected to deliver the message in a speech after talks at the Pentagon with his US counterpart Leon Panetta during his first visit to Washington in the role.

He will also defend severe cuts to military spending on both sides of the Atlantic but accuse other Nato countries of failing to pull their weight.

The visit comes amid heightened tensions between Tehran and the US and other allies, fuelled by the implementation of tougher sanctions against the regime.

Iran has threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz over the dispute about its nuclear programme.

"It is in all our interests that the arteries of global trade are kept free, opening and running," Hammond will say in a speech to the Atlantic Council.

"For example, our joint naval presence in the Arabian Gulf, something our regional partners appreciate, is key to keeping the Strait of Hormuz open for international trade.

"The Royal Navy will continue to play a substantial role as part of the Combined Maritime Forces, both at the headquarters in Bahrain, and through our mine counter-measure vessels which help maintain freedom of navigation in the Gulf.

"Disruption to the flow of oil through Strait of Hormuz would threaten regional and global economic growth. Any attempt by Iran to do this would be illegal and unsuccessful."

Echoing recent comments by the head of the UK armed forces, Hammond will also point to the economic crisis as the most serious threat to national and international security.

Countries would have to work together more to reduce the "astronomical" costs of modern warfare, he will say, as deep cuts are implemented on both sides of the Atlantic.

"Without strong economies and stable public finances it is impossible to build and sustain, in the long-term, the military capability required to project power and maintain defence.

"That is why today the debt crisis should be considered the greatest strategic threat to the future security of our nations."

Last month, the head of the British armed forces said the biggest strategic risk facing the UK was economic rather than military.

General Sir David Richards, the Chief of the Defence Staff, said the country's main effort must be the economy, as "no country can defend itself if bankrupt".

Hammond will continue: "The fact is, in this era of austerity... not even the United States can afford the astronomical resource commitment required to deal with every threat from every source.

"In times of economic austerity, fixing these problems will mean finding smarter ways of working together to get greater capability from the resources that exist."

But he will demand a greater contribution from some European allies.

"Libya and Afghanistan have highlighted the significant difficulties we face in ensuring that Nato continues to serve the needs of collective security.

"Too many countries are failing to meet their financial responsibilities to Nato, and so failing to maintain appropriate and proportionate capabilities.

"Too many are opting out of operations or contributing but a fraction of what they should be capable of. This is a European problem, not an American one. And it is a political problem, not a military one."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK POLITICS

Filed by Felicity A Morse  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 35
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
06:54 PM on 01/05/2012
That nation's leader is so eager to destroy that nation and the countdown has begun, the victory will never be their trophy and the leaders knows that but somehow don’t care. The past clearly exhibit the path of small nations against giants, ruin, ruin, ruin and continue ruin afterward. Israel is the only nation sanction to destroy giants in the earth and she abandons that position when she continue to abandon Christ as her king. Because of their fear and refusal to fight the giants and conquer the land, the Israelites wandered in the wilderness for 40 years until all the faithless ones were dead. Only Caleb and Joshua of the original 12 spies lived to see the Promised Land.

The Demolition of Jericho started the 6 year war against the giants!!
6 year equals 6000 year reign of destruction for those nation in defiant of God's will for Israel
06:40 PM on 01/05/2012
Why is it that when I write the word ZIONIST I get censored? are AOL HUFFINGTON Zionists?
photo
karim banned
A fool's mind is at the mercy of his tongue and a
06:32 PM on 01/05/2012
"Too many are opting out of operations or contributing but a fraction of what they should be capable of. This is a European problem, not an American one. And it is a political problem, not a military one."

So if it is not a military problem, then why should they increase their help to NATO to wage wars. How can somebody say such a nonsense.

If a sea blockade of Iran is not an act of war, then Iran's blockade of her own territorial water is not an act of war either.

There are forces in West who want to see Europe's bankruptcy in a year instead of a decade.
War with Iran and higher Oil prices is the fastest way to make bankers richer and make Western populations poorer.

I expect millions of people pouring into the streets of London when the oil prices passes $200 dollar per barrel. West tries to bite the hand that keeps the Oil flowing in Persian Gulf for reasons beyond comprehension for people. But the brains behind West aggression towards Iran, do it for the money. You and I will not see that money. Actually that money will come out of our tax payment and pockets when we use higher priced gasoline at the pumps.
06:06 PM on 01/05/2012
Give the captured drone ro russia china and North korea and mass produce (linux not ms it has bugs lol)
photo
karim banned
A fool's mind is at the mercy of his tongue and a
06:33 PM on 01/05/2012
Bugs in ms is way to make money, haven't you figure it out yet?
06:01 PM on 01/05/2012
Yeah those Iranians better be careful or we'll send our aircraft carries out there ???? Oh bum.
04:27 PM on 01/05/2012
The largest purveyours of State sponsored terrorism on earth are the USA/UK/Israel.

Most people don't know this but the USA alone has killed over 4 million innocent human beings since 1960 in places like Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Central America etc etc etc etc.
04:18 PM on 01/05/2012
The US Government is re-playing the Pearl Harbor deception, in which they kept bringing economic pressures to bear on Japan until Japan had no choice but to attack, then pretended Japan's reaction to US provocations was a total surprise and wholly unjustified. This allowed Roosevelt to trick the American people into WW2.

Today we are seeing the same thing with the US bringing economic pressures to bear on Iran, hoping Iran will strike back, thereby allowing the US to play the innocent victim of an Iranian "surprise" attack and trick Americans into a massive escalation of WW3.
04:02 PM on 01/05/2012
Iran is the most peace loving country and just like China Iran do not send it army in dirty war so pick Iran and blame Iran for WMD? Iraq was blame for it and even 9/11 attack backing Bin Ladan but no direct evidence so when Europe feel like they blame anyone for anything even having WMD?

Yes India, Pakistan and many other country in the world have WMD and they all back by UK, US and Europe so why Iran even they have one, why world feel threat? I personnaly feel threat and fearful of US because they have used it on Japan?
03:26 PM on 01/05/2012
It is not the place of Philip Hammond to warn Iran (or anyone). The UK has no land or sea territory in/adjacent the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has both. Hammond would be aware that what is actually “illegal” is to threaten militarily attack. He is acting in an illegal manner to warn Iran.

Hammond is mistaken to refer to “threats”. He is fully aware that Iran has not threatened the UK, or any nation. Iran has not been involved in a war since it was attacked by Iraq. Iran is a country at peace. The people of the region view the UK/US as a much more immediate threat than Iran, for obvious reasons. The UK has invaded two countries in the region in the last 10 years, causing around 1 million deaths. This followed a 13 year aerial bombardment of Iraq, and sanctions that killed 500,000 children. The UK supports tyrannical regimes in several regional countries. The UK supports the nuclear powers of the regions (Israel, Pakistan and India). The UK has armed forces occupying countries in the region. Iran has armed forces in Iran only.

Is it reasonable to write to Philip Hammond and demand that he cease his illegal threats against Iran? I believe so.
06:24 PM on 01/05/2012
Send letters to your local MP we do not want a war or can afford one!!!!!
KenInd
We too shall get through this.....
01:42 PM on 01/05/2012
Hammond warns Iran?

What does he have to back it up?

Buy the QEII back from Dubai, paint it dazzle grey and send it there?

The UK has no aircraft carrier.

Perhaps it can rent space on one of France's.

Sad. The UK no longer rules the waves. It waives the rules.

Bleat on, Mr Hammond. Bleat on.
02:28 PM on 01/05/2012
More to the point...does Iran have the means to block the Strait of Hormuz? I doubt it. The UK might not have an aircraft carrier but the US has plenty, so big that they are like small cities. The UK hasn't ruled the waves since the year after WW2 ended.......whereas America does.
04:16 PM on 01/05/2012
Im afraid Iran does have the capability to block the Straits. Unfortunately we lack the military clout to do anything about it after decades of defence cuts. Hammond embarrasse himself and us with his toothless threats. We couls always send a gunboat, but after cuts there wont be a gun lol.
03:22 PM on 01/05/2012
All Iran does is sink 4-5 ships in the main shiping channel, then ship mine the other areas. Job done. Then any ships come near they have a good supply of french exocet missles.
04:05 PM on 01/05/2012
Iran might be very lucky to sink one but never four or five. Just sinking one will also bring all hell down on them. The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow waterway but not that narrow, I should know, I've sailed ships through there many times.
08:12 PM on 01/05/2012
Bindstu, does not matter how wide it is there is a channel that the oil tankers need to go along like a road. I think the ship to ship and exocet missles have a good range. Here is a good article http://www.rense.com/general80/hormuz.htm the narrowest point the straits are 21 nautical miles wide. Each country has a 12 nautical coastal exclusion zone for protection. So at the narrowest point there is 10.5 nautical miles which each side claims as terratorial waters.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:30 PM on 01/05/2012
Pretty please, can we have our drone back.
06:34 PM on 01/05/2012
I really dont think they want it back......if you know what I mean.....
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:47 PM on 01/05/2012
US gave Nuclear palnts to Iran
1974-1979: Iran Seeks Nuclear Power That the Shah established the Iran Atomic Energy Organization in 1974 and that year announced plans for an ambitious nuclear program that would eventually include over 20 nuclear power reactors. This program was actively supported by the major Western powers, and the United States, France, and Germany sought lucrative power reactor sales to Iran.
Iran also expressed interest in acquiring a domestic reprocessing, or plutonium separation plant to handle power reactor spent fuel, an action opposed by the United States. Declassified National Security Council documents from 1975 and 1976 show that Iran's interest in reprocessing was a major sticking point in U.S.-Iranian negotiations of a peaceful nuclear cooperation agreement necessary for the United States to sell several nuclear power reactors to Iran. The United States was wary of Iran's interest in an Iranian reprocessing plant and of the ability of the IAEA to satisfactorily safeguard such a plant. Instead, the United States encouraged Iran to participate in a multinational plant or return the plutonium to the United States.
Just under the surface, however, Iran's nuclear program also included nuclear weapon intentions. Iranian officials backed off that remark, and the Shah claimed repeatedly afterward that Iran would not seek nuclear weapons. In February 1975, however, he said Iran had "no intention of acquiring nuclear weapons but if small states began building them, Iran might have to reconsider its policy."
02:29 PM on 01/05/2012
Yes but that was well before the lunatics took control of the mad house in Iran.
04:38 PM on 01/05/2012
After India and Pakistan as they became independent from British rule, US backed Pakistan all the way and without US policy in region, there was no further war between this two nation because Pakistan did not have mean to fight and spend borrowed money free of charge in name of aids? Yes US like divide and rule policy that is for sure? Oh sorry i do not mean to say whole of US but few politicians who have nothing to do except to live on poor people money earn by corrupt mean so when you have nothing to do, you create trouble between two neighbours? The Lucifer and God are neighbour too so now many evil rulers have made God and Lucifer enemies number one so they are going to fight so they both uses nature to turn world go marry go around. It is hard to tell who is God and who is Lucifer because they discard their true indentity?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Norma Ward
12:30 PM on 01/05/2012
Western sanctions against Iran have worked very well - for China. As shown in this article, western countries have been forced to step back from infrastructure investment in Iran's oil and gas industry and have been replaced by China:

http://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2011/12/iran-oil-giant.html

China's multi-billion dollar investment in Iran will definitely complicate the delicate balancing act for the United States should they choose to take military action against the Iranian regime.
02:31 PM on 01/05/2012
If they attempt to block the Strait of Hormuz, military action will most certainly follow.
04:40 PM on 01/05/2012
This is what Illuminatis of the world wants because they get super rich from bagger and those who were super rich they becomes Gods?
04:17 PM on 01/05/2012
There are many more nations who have invested in Iran not only China? How about Russia and India and Pakistan? They have invested trillions in gas line running through Aghanistan to Pakistan and into India? Over Billion people depend on their return all over the world? Yes more poverty and joblosses every where so the bankcrupcy would be beyond limit if mad people do not see light of the day and continue to live under gound just like devil himself? Would Iran use WMD if they had it? No not at all because while Europe was stone age, Iran had city and people with rules to live so why anyone would think Iran would do such thing and if Iran do it, would they going to survive? world would pipe out Iran from map and Iran knows it too well so what is the game played by US and it allies?
11:49 AM on 01/05/2012
Is Mr Hammond proposing to send a couple of squadrons of Harriers on an aircraft carrier? If so, I have news for him!
katertaif
My wife thinks I have one fault. Everything I do!
01:03 PM on 01/05/2012
Someone should tell him, he doesn't appear to know. I'm sure Iran will hold off until 2020 or therabouts, if we ask nicely. Cameron promised we would be back in business by then. Somehow I think that by then our entire strategy will have changed towards Islamic countries
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NJP1
11:29 AM on 01/05/2012
Iran doesn’t need to ‘close’ the strait of Hormuz, just sinking one tanker will send world industry into meltdown; the shipping insurance companies will see to that. when that happens, world oil prices will probably quadruple overnight, oil markets will panic and users will start buying and hoarding.
Already oil prices are rising on the threat of military action there.
Unlike the 70s oil embargoes, there just isn’t the capacity in the global oilfields to make up the shortfall; in any event, within weeks western users will be literally begging potential suppliers for oil at any price. The remaining major oilfields, (Russia, Africa and South America) will immediately tighten the stranglehold on a weakened western industry, oblivious to their own simultaneous destruction as the global economy falls apart.
That will shut down world transport systems, and 99% of your food moves by truck. Any attempt at military retaliation will engulf the entire region. The military hardware of Iran will be unleashed in every direction and they wont care who it drops on. That will shut the oilfields of Saudi, Kuwait, Iraq and Iran and the ‘stable’ dictators of the region will collapse as their regimes implode after the oil revenues stop. (Saudi money has value only so long as the oil keeps flowing, most of the oil exporters use revenue to buy food.)
Iran is a basket case and has nothing to lose, the west has everything to lose.
http://www.yourmedievalfuture.com/
04:21 PM on 01/05/2012
This is like there are over 1000 people in one village and one farm producing food for all this 1000 people. This 1000 people says let's attack the farm and ruin it production? Yes they did it and now question is who would give food to this 1000 people because there are no one not even God because he says i would not involve in mad people business so please good people of the world, think?