As the U.S.–Iran war enters a new phase, the range of options now being discussed stretches from hitting Iran’s economic and oil lifeline at Kharg Island to the far more dangerous prospect of a ground invasion, or a narrower operation focused on Iran’s nuclear material.
The urgency comes as recent U.S. strikes have degraded parts of Iran’s military infrastructure without collapsing the regime, raising pressure on the Trump administration to decide what comes next.
Each option carries significant risks: disrupting Kharg Island could shock global oil markets, a ground invasion could draw the U.S. into a prolonged regional war, and operations targeting nuclear material could trigger escalation while still failing to eliminate the threat.
What happens next could determine not only the trajectory of the conflict with Iran, but also the stability of global energy supply and the future of Tehran’s nuclear program.
Recent U.S. strikes already hit military targets on Kharg Island, a small island in the Persian Gulf that serves as Iran’s main oil export terminal that has emerged as a central pressure point in the conflict, while sparing its oil infrastructure, underscoring just how consequential the next move could be.
Seizing or neutralizing Kharg Island
Kharg Island is the centerpiece of Iran’s oil export system. The island handles about 90% of Iran’s oil exports, and Iran recently has been exporting roughly 1.1 million to 1.5 million barrels of oil per day, mostly to China.
Recent U.S. strikes on Kharg targeted military installations while leaving key oil facilities intact — a sign that Washington is trying to preserve a major pressure point without immediately detonating global oil markets.
Abdullah Aljunaid, a Bahraini analyst, told Fox News Digital that after Iran’s military capabilities were weakened, the U.S. focus could shift to economic pressure on Iran.
"The Iranian military capacity and offensive abilities have been totally degraded, so we need to probably do something else," Aljunaid said.
Aljunaid pointed to key strategic sites, including Bushehr — a coastal city in southern Iran on the Persian Gulf that hosts the country’s only operational nuclear power plant and a key port — and Kharg Island, Iran’s main oil export hub.
"We need to take certain strategic assets — geography — like Bushehr and Kharg, out of the equation," he said. "Those two, especially Kharg, represent the jewel of the crown, and without that, Iran’s economic ability to finance itself is going to be dead."
He added that control over key maritime choke points could further shift the balance.
"If the U.S. decided to take Bushehr at the mouth of the Strait of Hormuz, then I believe we can really see a different equation, forcing the Iranians to come to the negotiating table on our terms — the U.S. terms, and probably the rest of the world."
Retired Gen. Jack Keane has argued that the U.S. could take Iran’s main oil export hub if it chose to do so, but so far has chosen "not to take that now," he said on Fox News’ "Sunday Morning Futures."
Keane said such a move would effectively put the Iranian regime in "checkmate," given how heavily its economy depends on the island.
"Now we (would) own all of their major assets," Keane said. "It's 50% of their budget, 60% of the revenue, 80, 90% of the distribution points for their oil."
That view reflects the logic behind a Kharg scenario: disable the regime’s cash flow without launching a full-scale war across Iran’s interior. At the same time, the fact that Kharg’s oil infrastructure was reportedly spared suggests Washington thinks taking the island fully offline could send energy pricessharply higher and shake global markets.
Kharg’s facilities include major storage capacity and any serious disruption there could remove up to roughly 2 million barrels a day from global supply.
There also is a nonkinetic version of this scenario.
In an analysis shared with Fox News Digital, Rick Clay, who served as a senior deputy advisor in Iraq from 2003 to 2009, argued that maritime insurance can function as a strategic choke point.
His argument is that a tanker without recognized coverage cannot easily dock, finance cargo or operate in compliant markets, meaning the United States could pressure Iran’s export system financially even without physically seizing the island.
No comments:
Post a Comment