Brett McGurk is a CNN global affairs analyst who served in senior national security positions under Presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump, and Joe Biden.

The initial weeks of the ongoing crisis involving Iran have showcased the military supremacy of the United States and Israel, countered by Iran's asymmetric responses. The unfolding situation will be pivotal in determining the future dynamics of this conflict.

Understanding military conflict involves recognizing three forms of escalation:

• Vertical escalation: Direct military engagement targeting military assets. In this arena, the U.S. and Israel maintain dominance while Iran strives to attack U.S. and Israeli military installations, albeit with diminishing returns.
• Horizontal escalation: Efforts to broaden the conflict by launching attacks against neighboring Gulf states, Jordan, Turkey, and Azerbaijan. Iran's strategy aims to compel these nations to push the U.S. toward de-escalation. Thus far, Iran's attempts have been unsuccessful, as targeted nations have united against its aggression.
• Asymmetrical escalation: This type of escalation seeks to redefine the rules of engagement through tactics such as terrorism, cyber warfare, or economic disruption. Here, Iran holds significant leverage by threatening to destabilize global energy transit through the Strait of Hormuz. The prolonged closure of this critical waterway is designed to increase pressure on Washington, with Iran hoping that President Trump will curtail military operations before they escalate further.

The most effective response to asymmetrical escalation lies in forming a coalition of allied nations. However, as President Trump is currently discovering, this is a challenging endeavor.

Coalition-Building 101

Throughout my career, I have aided in establishing coalitions to address security threats. Between 2014 and 2018, as an envoy for Presidents Obama and Trump, I helped assemble a coalition of nearly 80 countries to combat ISIS. This coalition not only conducted military operations but also implemented global sanctions and regulations to deter terrorist movement across borders.

In 2023 and 2024, I played a role in forming a naval coalition focused on the Bab el Mandeb Strait, which was threatened by Iranian proxy attacks. This coalition expanded to nearly 20 nations, led by the U.S. military, with support from allies like the UK and Denmark in countering missile threats.

This successful coalition serves as a potential model for addressing the security issues surrounding the Strait of Hormuz, especially if Iranian proxies resume aggressive actions in the Red Sea.

Legal Basis

Establishing a military coalition involves navigating a complex landscape of legal and political frameworks unique to each nation. Many countries have strict legal standards that must be satisfied before they can deploy military forces abroad, particularly in situations involving the use of force. The U.S. must work diligently with its allies to fulfill these legal prerequisites.

The United Nations often plays a crucial role in this process. For example, when Iraq invoked Article 51 of the UN Charter in response to ISIS, it enabled NATO allies to assist. Similarly, a UN Security Council resolution in early 2024 condemned Houthi attacks and affirmed international rights to free navigation, providing a legal basis for military participation.

Recently, the Trump administration made strides in this area, with a record 135 countries co-sponsoring a UN resolution condemning Iranian aggression in the Gulf. This resolution also invoked the right to collective self-defense, potentially meeting the necessary legal threshold for military action in the Strait of Hormuz.

Political Basis

Domestic political considerations complicate the coalition-building process. Even when legal thresholds are met, leaders must secure a baseline of public support to deploy military forces abroad.

This is where the Trump administration faces potential obstacles.

The UK and Denmark, two key nations with naval capabilities and experience in countering maritime threats, may be hesitant to contribute due to recent diplomatic tensions with the U.S. These factors complicate efforts to engage them in military commitments.

The challenge posed by Iran in the Strait of Hormuz is not merely a regional issue; it demands an international response. Iran's tactics threaten global economic stability, necessitating a united front among nations.

Regrettably, the U.S. has approached this conflict with minimal consultation among allies, seeking support only after two weeks of military engagement. While there are ongoing diplomatic efforts to rectify this, an earlier collaborative approach would have been preferable.

Military Basis

Upon ensuring legal and political backing, the significant task of defining military requirements, roles, and rules of engagement begins. This is not only intricate but can also cause divisions within coalitions from the outset.

In the Red Sea coalition, for instance, France opted to create its own parallel coalition instead of operating under U.S. command. A coalition for the Strait of Hormuz would likely operate under U.S. leadership, which could deter some nations from participating. Additionally, differing rules of engagement could complicate cooperation, such as whether a UK destroyer could engage missile launchers in Iran or only defend against incoming threats.

Moreover, Trump's suggestion for China to join the coalition adds another layer of complexity, as U.S. forces would be unlikely to operate alongside Chinese military assets.

Conclusion

Building a coalition to address the crisis in the Strait of Hormuz is undeniably complex and resource-intensive. However, even the initiation of coalition-building can alter the dynamics of the ongoing conflict. Iran may reassess its asymmetric tactics knowing that it faces a united military front from multiple nations rather than just the U.S. military.

In the interim, the U.S. military is working to weaken Iran's capabilities in missiles, drones, and naval assets to set the stage for a successful coalition. Though a naval coalition may not materialize immediately, the groundwork for effective coalition-building should begin in the coming weeks to prevent Iran from maintaining its asymmetric advantage.

Source: CNN News