International Observation: Step by Step in Shock! Military Experts Analyze Three Possible Scenarios for the U.S. Military to Capture Hark Island

Xinhua News Agency, Los Angeles/Washington, March 21 - Title: Heart-Pounding! Military Experts Analyze Three Possible Paths for U.S. Forces to Capture Hark Island

Xinhua News Agency reporters Gao Shan and Huang Qiang

The Trump administration in the United States was reported on the 20th to be significantly increasing troop deployments to the Middle East, including sending ground forces. This has intensified discussions about the U.S. military considering the capture of Hark Island, a key hub for Iranian oil exports.

U.S. military experts have analyzed that there are three possible paths for U.S. forces to capture Hark Island, but each path is fraught with danger and carries significant risks. Moreover, even if the U.S. military successfully captures the island, it does not mean the "mission is accomplished," as there will be at least two major headaches for the Trump administration afterward.

Is U.S. Military Strength Sufficient?

Multiple sources have revealed that the U.S. is increasing its military presence in the Middle East, including amphibious assault ships and Marine Corps personnel.

Information from the U.S. on the 20th indicated that three warships, including the USS Boxer amphibious assault ship, and approximately 2,500 Marines have set sail from California, expected to arrive in the Middle East in at least three weeks.

Days ago, the Pentagon had dispatched the USS Tripoli amphibious assault ship carrying the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit from Japan to the Middle East, with an estimated size of up to 5,000 personnel, expected to arrive in the next couple of days.

U.S. military experts believe that the current strengthening of military power may be aimed at "clearing" the Strait of Hormuz or preparing for the capture of Hark Island.

Experts analyze that, including the troops being deployed to the Middle East, U.S. military strength in the region could reach about 50,000 personnel, but this includes multiple branches, with a large number of logistics personnel, and the actual ground forces capable of executing the island capture mission are not many. However, the U.S. military can still continue to assemble more ground forces, allowing available assault forces to exceed 10,000 personnel, which would provide sufficient strength for the U.S. to carry out the operation to capture Hark Island.

Hark Island is located in the northwestern part of the Persian Gulf, approximately 6 kilometers long and 3 kilometers wide, with 90% of Iran's crude oil exported from here.

For decades, Americans have been eyeing Hark Island. According to U.S. media reports, during the 1979 Iran hostage crisis, then-President Carter considered bombing or capturing the island. In 1988, while still in business, Trump also suggested capturing the island while promoting his book "The Art of the Deal."

Three Methods of Island Capture

U.S. military experts point out that there are three methods available for the U.S. military to capture the island: amphibious assault, helicopter insertion, and airborne parachuting, which may also be used in a mixed manner, but regardless of the method, there are significant risks. Hark Island is only about 25 kilometers from the Iranian mainland, and U.S. attacking forces would always be under the coverage of Iranian coastal firepower.

If an amphibious assault is conducted, meaning forcibly landing on the beach, the U.S. amphibious fleet would become a concentrated target for Iranian firepower while passing through the Strait of Hormuz. Former U.S. Army officer Harrison Mann stated that the Iranian military could deploy mines in the strait and surrounding waters of Hark Island, while also using coastal anti-ship missiles, drones, and unmanned boats to launch attacks, making any landing operation vulnerable to Iranian artillery and rocket fire.

While helicopter insertion may avoid anti-ship weapons, all aircraft attempting to land would become targets for Iranian drones, missiles, and artillery, and would also face threats from ground-based short-range air defense systems. Additionally, the V-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft and various helicopters equipped by the U.S. Marine Corps would require multiple trips to deliver sufficient forces, giving Iran ample time to calibrate their strike parameters.

Airborne parachuting is even more dangerous. Mann believes that U.S. air superiority can suppress and destroy remaining Iranian air defense capabilities, but paratroopers landing would be widely dispersed, making it easy to deviate from the designated landing area, potentially leading to drowning or landing alone within Iranian-controlled territory.

Although the Trump administration claims that U.S. forces have destroyed all Iranian military targets on the island, it is currently uncertain how many Iranian troops remain on the island.

More Dangers After Capturing the Island

Military experts analyze that even if the U.S. military captures Hark Island, the subsequent situation will be even more perilous.

First, U.S. soldiers may become "live targets" trapped on the island. Experts analyze that if the U.S. captures the oil facilities on the island and occupies it, they would be highly susceptible to various forms of shelling and may also face close-quarters combat. If the U.S. military withdraws, it could lead to a repeat of the disastrous scenes seen during the withdrawal from Somalia or Afghanistan.

Mann stated that for those troops "unfortunately ordered" to execute the island capture mission, this operation, even if not considered a "suicide mission," could very likely evolve into a "hostage crisis."

Second, the effectiveness of resolving the Strait of Hormuz crisis would be limited. Hark Island is still several hundred kilometers from the Strait of Hormuz, and occupying the island may not necessarily prevent Iran from continuing to use coastal facilities in the strait to attack U.S. ships.

Third, it may force the U.S. military to continue increasing troop deployments, making the situation in the Middle East more complex and intense. Once U.S. forces on the island find themselves in trouble, the U.S. may be compelled to continuously increase troop numbers, significantly raising the likelihood of a larger-scale ground war.

Domestic Political "Crisis"

For the Trump administration, the biggest trouble with capturing Hark Island may not lie in the military aspect, but in the domestic political landscape. There has always been significant controversy within the U.S. regarding this high-risk operation to capture the island.

Some hawkish individuals advocate for the capture of the island, believing it would help choke off Iran's economic throat and reverse the current situation of the conflict, recreating the so-called "glory of the Venezuela operation."

However, opponents argue that this action would escalate the conflict and bring greater uncertainty.

On one hand, if the oil facilities on Hark Island are destroyed during military operations, it would undoubtedly further devastate oil supplies. Additionally, Iran may retaliate by launching attacks on oil and gas facilities in the Gulf region. This would trigger severe fluctuations in the energy market, putting greater pressure on the U.S. economy. It is reported that when the U.S. previously bombed the island, they deliberately avoided oil facilities.

On the other hand, capturing, occupying, and defending the island could force the U.S. military to continuously deploy ground forces, which means the U.S. would gradually step into a "quagmire of war." This is a result that the Trump administration and the American people are very reluctant to see. According to a recent poll by the organization "Data for Progress," 68% of surveyed Americans oppose launching any scale of ground war against Iran.

U.S. Senator Ed Markey, a Democrat, stated that the action to capture Hark Island signifies "the beginning of a new round of crisis," which could bring various "unforeseen consequences."