Kharg Island sits just inside the Persian Gulf and holds the bulk of Iran's oil export infrastructure. Military analysts and social media strategists have called for the United States to seize it. Two retired admirals who spent years commanding naval forces in the region say the Marines could take it - but the real problem starts after the landing.
Vice Admiral John "Fuzzy" Miller and Admiral Jamie Foggo addressed the Kharg Island question on War on the Rocks, as "Hvylya" reports.
Miller said Marines are well suited for the raid-style mission an island seizure would require. They could go in, establish control, and provide command over surrounding airspace and sea lanes. But Kharg is different from other island targets because of its oil infrastructure. "How you seize that island, how you take that island without destroying any of that is a little bit tricky," Miller said. Neither side has an incentive to destroy it - Iran needs the revenue, and the United States wants the oil flowing after the conflict ends.
Foggo drew a parallel to the Libya campaign, where NATO considered striking Gaddafi's oil infrastructure as a center of gravity but abandoned the idea. "You break it, you buy it," he said. Much of that oil flowed to Italy and would be needed for reconstruction. The same logic applies to Kharg.
Getting Marines to the island does not require ships to transit the strait, Miller noted. Forces could be flown in from outside the Gulf, primarily on V-22 Ospreys. But approximately 8,000 Iranian civilians live on the island, most employed in the energy sector. And holding the island under sustained Iranian bombardment from drones, missiles, and fast boats would be a fundamentally different challenge from taking it in the first place.
Foggo cited a basic lesson of ground warfare echoed across Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan: clearing territory is far easier than holding it. Any force on Kharg would face continuous pressure from an adversary fighting to retake its most valuable economic asset.
Also read: "Hvylya" previously explored why the Middle East's underlying problems run deeper than any single regime.