HOW MUCH WILL A US MILTARY STRIKE ON IRAN COST? - Filenews 28/2 - by Ilan Berman
Are we heading for a new war with Iran? This scenario seems more and more likely. Over the past month, Washington has amassed massive military power in the Persian Gulf as part of a pressure campaign aimed at forcing the Tehran regime to make substantial changes to its nuclear program and its political stance in the Middle East.
The U.S. air force deployed in the Middle East can only be compared (perhaps even greater) to the force amassed for the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. It includes two aircraft carriers, one of them the USS Abraham Lincoln, which usually operates in the Arabian Sea region. In recent days, it has been reinforced with the arrival of the USS Gerald Ford, which participated in the operation to overthrow Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in January.
U.S. military action is costly. Not much attention is usually paid to the costs associated with U.S. regional military deployment and the cost of a war operation against the Islamic Republic, once it takes place. However, these numbers are taken into account by the government in Washington before deciding on its final moves.
It is reasonable even if we do not have the exact numbers. Even a partial count makes the reason clear. According to the Center for New American Security, operating an aircraft carrier that will act as a strike group costs about $6.5 million a day. Thus, the total cost of the current U.S. military presence in the Persian Gulf rises to about $13 million per day. Added to this amount are the daily expenses for the extra ships that accompany the aircraft carriers and equipment of Trump's "armada" in the Middle East. In short, just to keep U.S. forces "in position" in the southern part of the Gulf, the U.S. spent about $200 million in February. If the negotiations between Washington and Tehran drag on, the cost to the US military presence in the Middle East will reach or exceed half a billion dollars by mid or late March.
If the US "hits" Iran, the cost will skyrocket. Last year's "Midnight Hammer," as the 37-hour U.S. military operation against Iran's nuclear facilities was called, is estimated to have cost the U.S. government about $2.25 billion. A new strike to further weaken Iran's nuclear and missile capabilities will have a similar cost, while a more expanded attack (targeting military and government infrastructure) will mean even greater costs.
Any U.S. military action against Iran is expected to provoke a coordinated response on the part of Tehran – either directly against U.S. forces or against regional allies such as Israel. Protecting against these missile and drone attacks requires additional equipment development, as well as other expenses.
In last year's attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, the biggest cost to Washington was the deployment of advanced air defense systems such as THAAD. A new conflict with Iran would require the implementation of the same defensive measures.
What does all this mean from a political point of view? On the one hand, that the price that Tehran will pay will be greater and greater over time. On the other hand, the more Washington presses, the more politically expensive - at home - a limited deal will be for the Trump administration.
Tehran prefers a minimalist agreement, similar to the 2015 JCPOA, which simply delayed the development of Iran's nuclear program – the White House is unlikely to accept such an agreement.
Trump made it clear in his State of the Union address this week. "I prefer to solve this problem through diplomacy," he clarified. "But one thing is certain: I will never allow the world's largest sponsor of terrorism to acquire nuclear weapons."
The ayatollahs need to listen to what the American president says. "Applied" mathematics is irrefutable.
