Expert insights: Will US deploy ground troops to the Strait of Hormuz?

As tensions surrounding Iran continue to escalate, speculation is mounting over whether the United States could take the unprecedented step of deploying ground forces near the Strait of Hormuz. Recent military movements and media reports have fueled such concerns, but a closer look suggests that while Washington may be signaling resolve, a full-scale ground deployment remains fraught with risks and constraints.

The US military is deploying thousands of marines and several more battleships to the Middle East, even as US President Donald Trump's top officials are reportedly engaged in talks to potentially end the war with Iran.

Some 2,200 Marines from the 31st Expeditionary Unit, traveling aboard the USS Tripoli, are due to arrive in the region on Friday, according to The Wall Street Journal, along with an amphibious landing dock, the USS New Orleans. Around 2,500 more from the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit are on their way from California with the USS Boxer. 

The troop movements are taking place against the backdrop of the first tentative signs of ceasefire talks since the conflict began on February 28. After giving Iran an ultimatum to open the Strait of Hormuz or face the destruction of its power grid, Trump wrote on Truth Social that he had "constructive conversations" with the Iranian leadership regarding a total resolution of hostilities in the Middle East.

In an interview with CGTN, Cui Shoujun, a professor at the School of International Studies, Renmin University of China, said the US move is not intended to launch an immediate full-scale amphibious assault, but rather an escalation of its maximum pressure strategy.

Given the real threat of Iran blocking or interfering with the Strait of Hormuz, this move aims to demonstrate the US capability to "cut off the economic lifeline at any time," Cui said.

The Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway through which roughly one-fifth of the world's oil supply passes, has long been a focal point of geopolitical competition.

Adding to the tension, US forces carried out a large-scale strike on Iran's Kharg Island on March 13, targeting more than 90 military-related sites. The island is critical to Iran's economy, handling around 90% of its crude oil exports, with a daily export capacity of 1.5 million barrels and a storage capacity of 28 million barrels.

One strategy Trump is reportedly considering to reopen the Strait is the capture of Kharg Island. 

Cui said sending signals to seize the island, which is central to Iran's oil industry, is a bottom-line deterrent. It aims to force Iran to be cautious in its strait blockade operations through a high-pressure posture.

Once Kharg Island falls under US control, Iran will take some effective countermeasures, including increasing air strikes, such as missiles, drones and medium- and long-range artillery, against US forces, and also targeting US energy and supply lines, said Zhao Junjie, a researcher at the Institute of European Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, during an interview with CGTN.

Zhao said once the US military controls and destroys the oil refining facilities on Kharg Island, Iran can also launch concentrated attacks on US military bases in the Gulf region, and even attack the freshwater supply systems of neighboring countries, such as the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. "Such targeted attacks would be fatal to these countries."

Military realities

Experts have said the feasibility of deploying US ground forces in the Strait of Hormuz remains highly questionable. Militarily, Iran holds significant advantages in its home waters. The country's long and rugged coastline, combined with its layered coastal defense systems, presents a formidable challenge.

Iran has deployed anti-ship missiles, drones and fast attack craft across the Strait. Even if US forces were able to seize certain islands, maintaining control over them would be extremely difficult in the face of sustained Iranian counterattacks, Cui said, adding this long-term occupation, with its "extremely low returns and high costs," is not worthwhile for the US.

Zhao listed several preconditions for possible ground warfare, including the US Congress's willingness to participate, sufficient military spending and a complete supply of munitions. "Currently, it appears that waging a large-scale, protracted ground war with Iran is highly risky and costly, and it is unlikely to achieve its strategic objectives."

Political constraints at home

Beyond military considerations, domestic political factors also weigh heavily on decision-making in Washington. Public support in the United States for deeper military involvement in Iran is limited, particularly after years of fatigue from prolonged conflicts in the Middle East.

Trump, who has promised to avoid new large-scale wars during his political campaigns, would face significant criticism and opposition from Democrats and members of Congress if he authorized the deployment of ground troops, Zhao said.

The Trump administration's overarching strategic approach centers on "America First" and offshore balancing, and its core voter base is strongly opposed to the US becoming entangled in another "endless war" in the Middle East, Cui said. 

Any escalation of military action against Iran would not only contradict Trump's political pledge to avoid new conflicts, but could also drive up domestic inflation, said Cui, adding that in the current US political climate, launching a new war in the Middle East would be politically toxic.

International pushback

On the global stage, the prospects for US ground intervention are equally constrained. Key allies have shown little appetite for joining a potential military campaign. The European Union has made clear that the current tensions do not constitute "Europe's war," while countries such as Germany and the UK have declined to commit forces. In the Asia-Pacific, traditional US partners including Japan and Australia have also been reluctant to participate.

Efforts to form a so-called "Hormuz coalition" have thus far failed to gain traction. Meanwhile, countries such as Russia have openly criticized US actions as violations of international law, and many nations continue to call for a diplomatic resolution to the crisis.

In this crisis, the interests of the transatlantic alliance and traditional Middle East partners have diverged markedly, Cui noted. The European continent, heavily reliant on stable global supply chains and Middle East energy, is deeply wary of the economic shocks and refugee flows that war could trigger, he said.

If the United States were to launch a unilateral ground operation without substantive NATO support, it would not only risk complete isolation in terms of international law and moral legitimacy, but would also have to bear the full cost of the war alone – further accelerating the depletion of its global hegemonic resources, he added.

As the situation continues to evolve, the Strait of Hormuz remains a critical flashpoint. Whether the United States chooses restraint or escalation will not only shape the trajectory of US–Iran relations but also influence the stability of the wider Middle East and the global economy, experts emphasized.