Lethal Trajectories - Michael Conley [90]
Planning Considerations:
A. King Mustafa is likely to attempt the following within the next thirty days:
Gain agreement quickly to as many of his Five Demands as possible.
Isolate Israel and support Hamas and Hezbollah insurrections around Israel.
Marginalize Iran, neutralize Iraq, and sway OPEC producers to his cause.
Foment destabilization in the Middle East as a prelude to global jihad.
Fragment global opposition, and create rifts between the superpowers.
B. Four distinct challenges and/or operational risks attendant to any allied response:
Oil supply will shrink and require tight rationing and austerity programs.
If defeat is imminent, Mustafa is likely to detonate dirty bombs.
Military conflicts and civil unrest will intensify as nations struggle to survive.
Zero-sum solutions may not be workable given the global nature of the oil crisis and its all-pervasive impact on international commerce. Economic vitality requires robust domestic economies that can buy and sell goods.
Options and Possibilities:
The purview of this Executive Summary is not to suggest a specific plan of action, but rather to provide a continuum of options ranging from full military responses to collaborative, asymmetric solutions. The options are compartmentalized into three generic approaches—each of which can be blended or tweaked to meet desired objectives. A detailed description of each option follows this Executive Summary. The three approaches are as follows:
1 Collaborative and Asymmetric Approach:
The asymmetric approach would create a united front difficult for the Saudis to oppose. It would feature a war of attrition with an endgame strategy of causing regime change in Saudi Arabia through domestic insurrection. It would require a global coalition united against Mustafa and willing to take collective measures—including rationing, resource-sharing, and collaborative strategic planning—to achieve common objectives. It would be critically important to engage China and major nations in this coalition. The downside of this approach is the time, patience, and collaboration required to develop and sustain the coalition.
2 Go-It-Alone Approach:
This approach would enable the United States to act quickly and aggressively to protect its own best interests with respect to securing oil supply. It would be easier to implement with immediate gains, and it represents the ultimate zero-sum game. It would rely almost exclusively on the military and economic power of the United States to achieve desired results for its own purposes. The downside is it would fragment the global community and create an “every nation for itself” mentality that would preclude the possibility of global leverage being used against King Mustafa.
3 Military Solutions:
This approach calls for an aggressive military response that could include the use of nuclear weapons. It would also require a full-scale mobilization of forces. It could be conducted as a standalone operation or in collaboration with others. It could include occupying chokepoints such as the Strait of Hormuz, interdicting OPEC ships, commando raids on Saudi territory, and a host of other military actions. The downside is the possibility that Mustafa will detonate dirty bombs that permanently deprive the world of Saudi oil.
Conclusions:
We may expect a global economic meltdown of catastrophic proportions to occur within the next 5-6 months unless a solution is found for the Saudi oil embargo. Until then,