> Iran doesn’t have the resources to deny access to the entire Indian Ocean.

I have what may be a scale issue in my imagination, so bear with me if this is silly.

There are reports of international drug transport via seaborne drones in the 0.5-5 tonne range, and of these crossing the Pacific, and the cost of the vehicles is estimated to be around 2-4 million USD each. If drug dealers can do that, surely Iran (and basically everyone with a GDP at least the size of something like Andorra's) should be able to make credible threats to disrupt approximately as much non-military shipping as they want to worldwide?

▲

JumpCrisscross 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> if drug dealers can do that, surely Iran (and basically everyone with a GDP at least the size of something like Andorra's) should be able to make credible threats to disrupt approximately as much non-military shipping as they want to worldwide?

Sure. Do you think that means worldwide shipping would shut down?

And the point isn't to take the risk to zero. But to a level where military escorts can feel safe.

	▲	ben_w 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> Do you think that means worldwide shipping would shut down? I think there's a danger of that, at least if countermeasures are not easily available for normal shipping. Even 1-on-1 rather than 1-v-everyone, there's too many players (not all of them nations) with too many conflicting goals and interests. If Cuba tried to do it, could they credibly threaten to sink all sea-based trade involving the USA? If not Cuba, who would be the smallest nation that could? And the same applies to Taiwan and China, in both directions, either of which would be fairly dramatic on the world stage, even though China also has land options. Or North Korea putting up an effective anti-shipping blockade against Japan. > But to a level where military escorts can feel safe. Are there enough military ships to do the escorting?