As predicted, it is open season on unmanned vehicles. The US has set the precedent that unmanned assets are not worth fighting over and that we’ll sit back and allow them to be seized if a strongly worded protest won’t stop the act of piracy/war. That precedent guarantees open season on unmanned assets. To whit,
The Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy attempted to capture a U.S. Navy unmanned surface vessel that was operating in the Arabian Gulf on Monday and Tuesday, U.S. 5th Fleet said in a statement.
U.S. 5th Fleet spotted IRGCN support ship Shahid Baziar towing the USV around … [1]
A warship is a piece of sovereign US territory and to seize one is to commit an act of war. I would assume that an unmanned warship also constitutes a piece of sovereign US territory although that is a question I leave to legal experts on international law (here’s an excellent examination of sovereign status of ships).
Iran committed an act of war or, at the very least, an act of piracy. I fail to understand why we don’t simply sink the Iranian ship. Doing that every time would put a quick end to such attempts. Our default position of abject appeasement is how you become a second rate nation.
 |
| Iranian Vessel Towing US Unmanned Craft (circled in red) |
Apologists and pacifists may claim that it’s not worth going to war over a small unmanned boat (as if Iran is going to declare war on us over a failed act of piracy on their part) but what happens when the Navy starts deploying medium and large unmanned vessels that carry classified sensors and weapons? Are we going to stand idly by while foreign countries seize them? Precedent would suggest that’s exactly what we’ll do. Heck, we did nothing when Iran seized two manned riverine boats and their crews so why would anyone think we’ll do anything about an unmanned vessel, no matter how large it is?
It is embarrassing to witness the level of timidity we’ve sunk to.
_____________________________________
[1]USNI News website, “VIDEO: Navy Blocks Iranian Attempt to Steal U.S. Surface Drone in Persian Gulf”, Heather Mongilio, 30-Aug-2022,
It's possible the ship was confused and approached Iran's coast, perhaps after jamming or spoofing. Note they blacked out location data in the photo. That would be truly embarrassing to our Admirals.
ReplyDeleteIt's possible that Santa Claus needed the US unmanned vessel to carry extra presents and asked the Iranians to tow it to the North Pole. In fact, that's a more likely story.
Delete"It's possible that Santa Claus ..."
DeleteHaha... CNO can be such a savage!! Too funny, but point.made and taken!!
"It's possible the ship was confused and approached Iran's coast, perhaps after jamming or spoofing."
DeleteWe REALLY need to better assess enemy electronic warfare capabilities. Too many US government and military leaders assume our current and potential enemies will be helpless before our technology, and unable to adopt countermeasures against them- jamming and spoofing being two of MANY potential countermeasures, for which we need to adopt counter-countermeasures.
On 5 December 2011, an American Lockheed Martin RQ-170 Sentinel unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) was captured by Iranian forces near the city of Kashmar in northeastern Iran. The Iranian government announced that the UAV was brought down by its cyberwarfare unit which commandeered the aircraft and safely landed it, after initial reports from Western news sources disputedly claimed that it had been "shot down".[1] The United States government initially denied the claims but later President Obama acknowledged that the downed aircraft was a US drone.[2][3] Iran filed a complaint to the UN over the airspace violation. Obama asked Iran to return the drone. Iran is said to have produced drones based on the captured RQ-170 including a full sized copy, the Simorgh.
Deletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93U.S._RQ-170_incident
I guess I should say that I'm not surprised that the Iranians attempted and succeeded in acquiring a piece of U.S. Navy hardware. The lack of an appropriate (and really a justified) response indicates 1) we've become a paper tiger and 2) we have lost that edge, the chip on the shoulder we use to have in the past.
ReplyDeleteI think we need to develop a 21st century version of gunboat diplomacy.We need to show everyone, not just the Iranians, that actions like these will not be tolerated and afforded the appropriate measure of response.
What they should do is fit them with a remote scuttling charge (with the option of a larger charge during wartime) like they do with QF-16 drones. Of course, in the case of the QF-16s its purpose is to destroy the drone if control is lost to prevent a crash in an inhabited area. Still it should be easily feasible.
ReplyDelete"What they should do is fit them with a remote scuttling charge..."
DeleteThat might encourage hostile nations to simply shoot the drones on sight. Nonetheless, the resulting losses will be more acceptable than simply letting the drones get captured and used for reverse-engineering, or worse, for false flag attacks.
Love the idea of a do not tamper charge. They may scuttle them on sight, yes, but the first one may end up taking out an asset that is much more than the next 10 USV's combined. But better this route than having a war erupt over an USV. Iranians don't seem to place that value of life on a Jihadist in a speed boat, and the Iraq war showed how they value life, they simply don't. Ditto say a North Korea.
DeleteIn 2001, didn't the Chinese down a crewed American EP-3 flying over international waters, hold the crew hostage for weeks, and never return the plane? Seems worse than what the Iranians did here. I don't think we ever retaliated for that incident, which of course emboldened every Tom, Dick and Harry with an axe to grind against the US to pull their own stunts.
ReplyDeleteThe Chinese hired North Korean consultants (aka Team Pubelo) for the EP-3, the Chinese lacked the guts to keep the plane, the NK team laughed at them.
DeleteThe Chinese stripped the aircraft of all sensitive parts and eventually returned the plane in a disassembled state.
Delete"In 2001, didn't the Chinese down a crewed American EP-3 flying over international waters, hold the crew hostage for weeks, and never return the plane?"
ReplyDeleteAccording to Wikipedia (I know, I know), "The disassembled aircraft was released on July 3, 2001, and was returned to the United States by the Russian airline Polet in two Antonov An-124 Ruslans. The repairs took place at Lockheed Martin in Marietta, Georgia, for reassembly and to make it flightworthy again."
This is 4D Chess at its finest.
ReplyDeleteLet the Iranians capture some of our worthless unmanned crap.
They send it to the Chinese, who copy it and make it the basis of the PLAN.
BRILLIANT!!!
#winning
Lutefisk