Potential US Land Operations Against Iran - A New Strategic Dimension in the U.S.-Iran Conflict

_________ Ronin

POTENTIAL US GROUND OPERATIONS IN IRAN - Audio 2026-03-27 at 12

11:45

Speculation has been mounting in the United States about whether American soldiers will be deployed on the ground in Iran as the US-Israeli war entered its fourth week.

Now, why the US would want to opt for a ground invasion in Iran? According to Mark Cancian, a senior adviser at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, the U.S. apparently considers that "bombing alone" cannot ensure protection of commercial ships from Iranian drones and missiles, and boots on ground are needed – hence, the prospective operational preparedness. The operational missions may include seizing or blockading islands/clearing Iran’s coastline to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. The islands and the coastal areas may be captured to use those as Temporary Operational Bases (TOBs), from which further operations inland, or, over watch/secure shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. 

The other missions try to secure the straits by taking some key positions inside Iran, and, in the most consequential scenario, securing Iran’s nuclear material. Accompanying Special Operations Forces (SOF) could be used for targeted missions inside Iran, including striking military infrastructure or capturing key personnel. The SOFs may capture a certain objective, destroy some Iranian radar or some Iranian facility, and capture Iranian Generals. Even small SOF teams and intelligence cells may operate inside Iran beyond public visibility, making it difficult to assess the full scope of their current activity. Another scenario could be to assist a potential prolonged insurgency aimed at toppling the Iranian Regime further assisted by the Kurds inside and across the Iranian border – if the much ambiguous ongoing US-Iran peace initiative fails.

• Capture of Islands Along The Strait of Hormuz: The most likely mission would be to reopen the strait, conceivably by seizing small islands, near the shipping lanes and deploy air-defence assets. In such a scenario, US naval and air strikes would again strike Iranian military assets on the island. Next, a combination of US Marines and elements of 82^nd Airborne Division troops would deploy to secure key facilities, weapon/missile systems, oil terminals and storage infrastructure.

•  Kharg Island: Any U.S. ground operation targeting Kharg Island would face already prepared and militarized Iranian military strongholds. The Kharg Island is a 33 square km oil rich real state in the Persian Gulf, 25 km away from the Iranian Northwest coast. It is Iran’s main oil gateway, where crude is stored and loaded onto tankers destined to global markets. Around 90% of Iran’s crude oil exports pass through this island, making it critically important for the country’s economy. Although Iran itself accounts for only about 3%–4% of global oil supply, Kharg’s geographic position along the strait gives it the ability to threaten a much larger share of global energy flows. It is also a major source of revenue for the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Recently, the US forces struck defensive positions, bases and helicopter facilities in the Island, leaving the oil infrastructures unscathed. The US strategy not to hit Kharg’s oil infrastructures may be due to following reasons like evading an energy shock, keep Kharg’s oil assets intact as a potential bargaining chip, avoid regional and local political backlashes, avoid retaliations against US or GCC energy facilities across the Middle East and ensure future energy management and export prospects. A game theory matrix shows several possible outcomes of a potential Kharg conflict. If the US continues air strikes and Iran keeps the strait closed, both sides lose in a prolonged war. If Iran opens Hormuz Strait due to air strikes, the US decisively wins, while Iran weakens. If the US seizes Kharg, Iran's economy risks breakdowns, even if it later opens the strait.

Credit: The Telegraph

• Qeshm Island: Qeshm Island sits at the entry of the Hormuz Strait. Its capture would lead to Control of the Strait of Hormuz, strike its hidden naval bases housing fast-attack craft and mines, which are crucial for Iran's asymmetric warfare capabilities,  exercise leverage over Iran, potentially forcing Tehran to keep the strait open and impacting the Revolutionary Guard Corps' (IRGC) economic lifeline. The island hosts an array of Iranian Navy Marines (IRIN-Marines) and IRGC Naval Commandos.

Credit: ALMA Research

• Other Islands: Apart from Kharg and Qeshm, other islands like the Larak Island, (potential radar/missile sites), Hormuz Island (strategic for overlooking the strait) and Hengam Island (used for observation posts) may also be targeted.

o   Retrieving Iranian Nuclear Stockpile: Certain nuclear specialists argue that nuclear material can never be destroyed by airstrikes alone, that a presence on the ground would be essential. Iran is known to have allegedly stockpiled more than 400 kg (60% enriched) uranium, which can be enriched to 90% weapons grade level, needed for a nuclear bomb. These are claimed to have been buried under rubble after last year’s US-Israeli air-strikes at the enrichment sites. One of stated US desires is to retrieve that stockpile, mainly through Special Operations Forces (SOF). Planning has reportedly included the potential deployment of forces from the Joint Special Operations Command, an elite unit typically tasked with sensitive counter-proliferation missions. However, no decision is yet made with such an operation. Unlike the Iraq invasion, a mission to physically recover nuclear material in Iran would likely be tightly defined with precise goals and involve far fewer soldiers to reduce risk, analysts said.

Credit: FDD

o   Toppling The Iranian Regime: If a peace plan fails in Iran due to no-agreement of the warring sides, the country may plunge into long term domestic insurgency. In such a scenario, US ground Forces stationed at the Hormuz Islands and the coastal areas with their supportable logistic/intelligence support assets may render support to Iranian insurgent groups. A prolonged phase of such a scenario, with gradually wearing financial state may ultimately lead to Iranian Regime collapse.

Credit: FDD

US Assets Being Arrayed

Apart from the already stationed 50,000 troops in the Gulf Region (in different capacities), more three groups of additional US troops are heading towards the theater.

The first is the Japan based Tripoli Amphibious Ready Group, centered on the America-class assault ship USS Tripoli and the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU).  The group transited the Strait of Malacca and was at Diego Garcia in the British Indian Ocean Territory by March 23. It is expected to enter the CENTCOM area by late March or early April.

The second is the Boxer Amphibious Ready Group, built around the Wasp-class assault ship USS Boxer and the 11th MEU, based in Southern California in the US. The group departed San Diego between March 19 and March 20. This group is expected to reach the combat zone around mid-April at the earliest.

The third is a contingent of about 2,000 soldiers from the legendary 82nd Airborne Division’s (Screaming Eagles) Immediate Response Force, based at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.

The array of force being deployed is consistent with discrete, time-limited operations, not a sustained ground campaign. Both are rapid-response, modular forces designed for raids, seizures of key terrain, and short-duration missions with limited follow-on presence. The assembled force is devoid of heavy armoured units, logistics depth, and command structures required for a prolonged land war. In practical terms, this is a force that can act quickly and selectively, but not one that could sustain operations deep inside Iran or over an extended period.

Likely Consequences

According to many experts, the reasonably estimated certain level of unpopularity of the Iranian regime is unpopular is likely to inspire serious resistance. However, the last four weeks of US-Israeli air-strikes has not apparently met desired level outcome of a regime change or revolt. It rather appears that the strikes have ostensibly united people of different beliefs – through an apparent patriotic fervor. This may be rather reminiscent of the “Rally Around The Flag” effect — the well-documented propensity of the Iranians to unite behind their government in wartime — distinctly demonstrated in Iran after Saddam Hussein’s Iran invasion in 1980 – which ultimately consolidated the very regime the Saddam hoped to topple. Considering Iran’s geography, demographics, military capability, and geopolitical connections, the prospect of a conventional American ground invasion of Iran may be highly counter-productive and may draw US into a highly undesired and prolonged quagmire.

Likely Fall-Outs of Various Hormuz Strait Island Capture Efforts

Mark Twain once said “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes”. During World War II, in the battle for Peleliu, an intended quick strike for an airfield turned into a 10 week battle resulting in the death/injuries of around 10,000 US Marines. That Pacific theater operation was highly criticized because of poor intelligence about actual enemy capabilities and true minimal strategic gains. Iran is known to be sending additional forces and air defenses, as well as laying traps, at Kharg for weeks to deter a potential US operation to seize the island. Like Peleliu, a Kharg Island operation may result in U.S.’s minimal strategic gains with high casualty risks. Any attempt to seize the islands might entail a dramatic escalation of the ongoing conflict by placing US troops directly on Iranian territory. Even Israeli officials like Israel’s ambassador to India, stated that neither Washington nor Jerusalem intends to invade or occupy Iranian territory, rather pressurize the Iranian leadership.

Credit: RANE

The ongoing US campaign is designed around airpower and stand-off strikes. Any US operation to seize the islands would entail a hazardous marine amphibious landing, crossing open water under the threat of Iranian anti-ship missile barrages, naval mines, fast-attack crafts, and drones.  It is worth mentioning that, Iran has spent decades refining these asymmetric tactics, explicitly for the confines of the Persian Gulf. More so, the Hormuz islands are  small, exposed, and well within Iranian land-based missile and artillery coverage. Their occupation would require a permanent physical involvement, necessitating continuous resupply, defensive arrangements, and constant naval protection far away from Mainland US, amid a constant stream of threats. Iran has faced crisis earlier with the Kharg Island. During the Iran–Iraq War, Iraqi air strikes repeatedly targeted Kharg. Iran responded by shifting exports to alternative Larak and Sirri terminals near Hormuz Strait. Iran learned from that experience and built redundancy into its system.

Seizing the islands is less likely to completely diminish Iran’s oil trade. It might rather turn it into a static and highly susceptible battle-space. US seizure of the islands could seriously affect Iran's economy, but it may embroil the US in a long-term occupational quagmire. In reality, it would engage the U.S. in defending small, exposed outposts against a determined hardened adversary operating in its own backyard. More so, a cornered Iran may unleash a regional "scorched earth" policy against Gulf regional energy infrastructure, which might take even years to reinstate. The U.S. may need to resist the temptation to turn an economic leverage into a military quagmire. The most likely resolution remains negotiated concessions: Iran opening Hormuz Strait in exchange for partial sanctions relief or the formalization of Yuan-based trade.

Likely Fall-Outs of Retrieving Iranian Nuclear Stockpiles

Nevertheless, locating, identifications, securing and transporting of such radio-active material from the interior of a hostile country like Iran may prove to be a dreadful nightmare. To add, Iran is four times larger than Iraq and features difficult mountainous terrain.

Likely Fall-Outs of Iranian Regime removal Operations

Such operational efforts would bog down US Forces for prolonged periods. These would designate the US Forces as an occupation army, and help rally all walks of Iranians against the US Forces.

As the last words, an American escalation into a conventional ground invasion would tremendously the already overwhelming regional crisis. Deploying ground troops in Iran would provide an ample opportunity for US great-power rivals, Russia and China, to drain Uncle Sam of blood and treasure. It would be even a much-desired outcome for the duo, to enhance and consolidate their strategic grips in Europe and Indo-Pacific Region (IPR), respectively. So far, the pair have yet to expand their assistance to Tehran beyond diplomatic and intelligence support. But US boots on Iranian soil would provide Moscow and Beijing with a tempting pressure point US that is already strategically overextended. Iran, then, could then become a bloody site of great-power rivalry.

May Twain’s melancholy rhymes not reverberate across the Persian Gulf, to everyone’s dismay.