In the 1987, following the Iranian threats to block the oil traffic in the Persian Gulf, the international community (American-led) decided to send a fleet to protect the oil tankers from possible attacks by the small boats Pasdaran (the guardians of the Islamic revolution).
The then Goria Government (the Defense Minister was Zanone while Andreotti was on foreign affairs) sent naval units of the Navy to protect Italian energy interests - with the specific task of escorting oil tankers out of the Strait of Hormuz -, the expedition was composed of frigates Sirocco, perseus e Grecale, from the three minesweepers Vieste, Milazzo e Sapri, and the support units Vesuvio e Stromboli.
The news that reaches us these days from the Persian Gulf closely resembles the situation that occurred then.
The two oil tankers - which were carrying oil for Japan - in flames in the Strait of Hormuz is but the last episode of what to all intents and purposes seems to have become a sort of oil tanker war, which started in the region.
Last May 12, in fact, two Saudi oil tankers, one Norwegian and one from the Emirates, were damaged by a series of explosions, when they were still at anchor. It is not inconceivable that the explosions were caused by underwater magnetic mines, weighing some tens of kg.
Sinking an oil tanker with a high displacement is very difficult, the tanks that are transported are watertight, and when they travel discharges are very high on the water level. The damage was, to what leaked, not excessively serious, the explosions opened holes in the structure of the ships, but there were no casualties or release of fuel at sea.
As in the very recent attacks, even in those of last month the United States (in addition to other countries of the international community) strongly suspect the direct involvement of Tehran.
We believe they may have been conducted by naval raiders (i Pasdaran have long developed a component for special operations) in Tehran, employing underwater vehicles, such as SDVs (Swimmer Delivery Vehicle) Al-Sabehat 15 or the e-Ghavasi.
Tankers struck in May were anchored many miles from the coast, so the raiders were able to take advantage of the lack of a port protection service. The monitoring of the naval traffic mainly concerns the contrast to the conventional underwater threat, as in the case of class submarines Kilo (a conventional attack would be ruled out as the torpedoes would have produced much greater damage), but this is not possible with small boats which are able to evade satellite surveillance as well.
In the attacks of the 12 in May, the approach to the ships stopped at anchor in the open sea, with the favor of darkness, did not present particular problems. The raiders placed explosive charges, stripped at different times (the explosions took place from 4.00 to 7.00).
After the blasts took place in the French aircraft area (patrol boats Atlantic) and the P-3C Orion took off from the aircraft carrier Lincoln which, together with its battle group, has been stationed for about a month in the Gulf, which would have identified an SDV that was heading towards the Iranian coasts.
In the same hours in which the four tankers were hit, there was an attack (claimed by the Yemeni rebels Huthi, supported by Tehran) also against a crude oil pumping station of a pipeline located in Saudi Arabia, and causing the interruption of the crude flow for 24 hours.
The attack on the pipeline could have been carried out using armed drones, although it would seem difficult for Shiite rebels in Yemen to have acquired the necessary technologies to set up such an operation. To the disadvantage of the drone hypothesis is the fact that Saudi airspace is very controlled, also thanks to the contribution of foreign countries, such as France and the United States.
With the economic sanctions imposed by the international community, Iran feels cornered, as it needs huge funds to finance the Armed Forces and wars abroad (as in Syria and Yemen). Do you try to get out of it using unconventional forms of struggle?
Photo: CNN / web / US Navy
