Iran: The Latest – How the Iran War Was Years in the Planning

Date: March 5, 2026
Host: Roland Oliphant (The Telegraph)
Guests: Tom Sharp (former Royal Navy commander), Nicholas Hopton (former British ambassador to Iran)

Episode Overview

This episode explores the deep strategic and historical roots of the ongoing US and Israeli war with Iran. Veteran correspondents and expert guests, including a naval commander and a former diplomat, provide analysis of the military and political developments, the significance of events such as the sinking of an Iranian ship, the maritime threat in the Persian Gulf, and the broader Western objectives. Listeners are given insider context on years of planning, the complexity of warfare in the Gulf, and the diplomatic considerations that have shaped the West's response to the conflict.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Ongoing War: Context, Expansion, and Disinformation

[01:05, Roland Oliphant]

• The current escalation is the outcome of years of planning and game-playing on all sides.
• Major US and Israeli military operations in Iran have begun, including the reported death of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
• The US Congress failed to limit President Trump’s authority, leaving him free to expand operations.
• Notable recent events include:
  • US submarine sinking an Iranian warship near Sri Lanka.
  • Reports—possibly misinformation—of Kurdish militia (potentially backed by the CIA) entering the conflict.
• Oliphant stresses the volume of misinformation, stating:

  “This is a warning shrouded in misinformation… it is our job here at the Telegraph to reach through that fog of war, to try to establish the facts and to sweep aside, as best we can, attempts by all sides in the conflict to spin, manipulate and mislead.” [02:30]

2. The Strategic Evolution of Iran’s Naval Doctrine

Guest: Tom Sharp, former Royal Navy commander
[04:39–08:15]

• Post-1980s US attacks (Operation Praying Mantis), Iran restructured its navy away from conventional big ships to focus on the IRGC Navy, specializing in fast attack craft, small boats, and covert tactics.
• Western navies have trained for decades to counter this “swarming” threat of 2,000+ fast attack boats, including explosive-piloted jet skis and mini-subs.
• Sharp explains:

  “The actual strategic maritime threat is the IRGC Navy … fast attack craft of which they have … over 2,000. … They were very proficient. Every time you went through Hormuz, you’d be rushed by 10 of these things, right?” [05:21]

• These tactics, and the presence of hundreds of potentially autonomous or crewed small vessels, were seen as the real threat, not the legacy surface fleet.

The Strait of Hormuz and Current Maritime Threat

• Despite threats of closure, so far Iran has not “dialed up” its maritime response; the reason—tactical patience or loss of capacity—remains unclear.
• Key “exam question”:

  “Are they not using [these capabilities] because they’re choosing not to or because they can’t?” [08:26]

3. Anatomy of a Notorious Attack: Sinking of the Iris Deira

[11:23–17:16]

• The US Navy’s sinking of the Iranian frigate Iris Deira (off Sri Lanka by submarine) shocked guests and hosts alike—due to distance from main combat zones, and the cold utility displayed.
• Detailed discussion of military law, the tension between rules of armed conflict and real-world command decisions:

  “As the captain of a warship, you’ve got one job and it’s to make sure that if something like that happens, it’s to them, not to you. Utterly focused. … At least it’s not you. That’s the point of being a warfare commander.” [12:24]

• No survivors were picked up by the submarine; debate over legitimacy and responsibilities of war at sea.

  “Are we expecting the Virginia class submarine to surface and take the… I mean, it’s unrealistic at that point. … You have to assume that the Coast Guard agencies of the country that you’re near… will come and get them.” [16:08]

• The action is framed as both practical defense and a strategic message, possibly toward China:

  “A lot of this is about sending a message to China and testing American capabilities against similar kit, especially in the naval theater.” [17:16]

4. Britain’s Waning Naval Role & Political Hesitation

[19:53–23:45]

• The UK’s military options are stretched thin: sending HMS Dragon, and calls for deploying an aircraft carrier, put further strain on already limited resources.
• Sharp is critical of the “political indecision and almost fear of making choices,” highlighting deep structural weakness due to 30 years of military decline.
• British forces continue to “deliver at the pointy end,” but the lack of clear political leadership or coherent strategy may undermine effectiveness.

5. Advance Planning for War: “This Has Been Years in the Making”

[24:32–26:27]

• Both Sharp and Oliphant drive home the reality that much of what is happening now was extensively planned years ago, with regular war games, coordination, and built-in assumptions about the eventuality of conflict with Iran:

  “What we’re seeing unfolding now is part of something that has been planned and thought about and game-planned for years.” [24:32] Sharp: “100%. … Bits of it have changed beyond recognition. The number of drones, for example… But … the plan for the big showdown, the big war … has been planned for a long time.” [24:47]

• While tactical details evolved—especially drone warfare—the basic outlines and expectations have been in Western, especially US/British, military doctrine for well over a decade.

Ultimate Objectives and the Risk of “Half Solutions”

• Sharp speculates that control of oil resources and maintenance of the petrodollar system are the unspoken ends of US policy.

  “Regime change is fundamental…They’ve killed the regime [leadership]. They haven’t changed it. … I fear we may be walking towards a half solution here… and we’ve missed a once in a generation opportunity to really change it.” [26:27]

• Israeli objectives are more maximalist (“the face of the Middle East is going to be unrecognizable after this” [27:14]), but details remain murky even among officials.

6. Diplomatic Perspective: Inside Iran and the Global Fallout

Guest: Nicholas Hopton, former UK ambassador to Iran
[30:33–33:25]

• Hopton recalls a bygone era of diplomatic engagement and some optimism following the 2015 nuclear deal, which was reversed by President Trump’s withdrawal and “maximum pressure” policy, hardening Iran’s international stance.
• Describes the severe restrictions and tense but controlled atmosphere for Western diplomats, emphasizing Iran’s complex ethnic and political landscape.

Prospects for Internal Conflict & Kurdish Militias

[34:56–38:47]

• Hopton analyzes reports (likely strategic leaks, [36:37]) of Kurdish separatists being supported by the US/Israel to trigger internal unrest against Tehran.
• He is skeptical these would lead to genuine regime collapse:

  “It would be unlikely…to succeed in turning into a national movement. One, because it is specific to that ethnicity… also it wouldn’t necessarily be resourced and capable… unless it had backing from the US and Israel.” [37:12]

• Warns that further unrest could fragment Iran into civil strife rather than achieve regime change.

British Political Response

[38:47–43:42]

• Hopton and Oliphant discuss the UK’s ambiguous political messaging, internal Cabinet divisions, and the struggle to calibrate response between supporting allies and avoiding escalation.

  “The communication coming out of the British government…was a bit rabbit in headlights and confused.” [41:39]

• National interest now centers on defending allies and assets in the region and adapting to fast-moving circumstances.

7. Endgame: Regime Survival, Regional Risk, and Strategic Uncertainty

[43:42–53:04]

• Oliphant and Hopton agree Iran's regime knows its objective—survival—and is willing and able to absorb devastating blows, while hoping to outlast Western appetites for conflict.
• Hopton is cautious about optimistic scenarios, noting potential outcomes:
  • A US declaration of victory with the regime still “in place,” avoiding full regime change.
  • The possibility (but, he believes, unlikeliness) of US/Israel successfully engineering a popular uprising or a coup in Tehran.
  • The greater probability:

    “…Gradual chaos within the country, more bloodshed and more regional destabilization, not to mention the destabilization of the global economy because the Iranians have effectively closed the passage of hydrocarbons through the Straits of Hormuz. … Countries like China… will be also watching and taking an interest.” [53:04]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the sinking of the Iris Deira:
  “That it then received the first indication they would have known of the submarine threat would have been the back of the ship breaking. … you need these guardrails in place…and the good guys are the ones who should uphold them. … But as a warfare officer, hit them before they, before they can hit you. And that’s the friction.”
  — Tom Sharp [12:24, 13:54]

• On Western plans for war:
  “You’re seeing stuff happening now that you were part of. You would have been part of if you were still in. You recognize this plan 100%?”
  — Roland Oliphant [24:40]
  “Bits of it have changed beyond recognition. … But the plan for the big showdown, the big war with Iran has been planned for a long time.”
  — Tom Sharp [24:47]

• Diplomatic skepticism:
  “At this point, it’s very hard to see how [a positive outcome] happens. And it’s much easier, I’m afraid, to see a descent into gradual chaos within the country, more bloodshed and more regional destabilization…”
  — Nicholas Hopton [53:04]

Timestamps of Key Segments

• [01:05] – Roland Oliphant: Context of misinformation and evolving war
• [04:39] – Tom Sharp: Iran’s naval adaptation since the 1980s
• [11:23] – Sinking of Iris Deira: Legality and military calculus
• [16:08] – Rules of engagement at sea and response to survivors
• [17:16] – Sinking as strategic message/test for China
• [19:53] – UK naval deployments, military decline, and political indecision
• [24:32] – Confirmation of years-long planning for war with Iran
• [26:27] – Endgame speculation: regime change vs. “half solution”
• [30:33] – Nicholas Hopton: Experience in Iran, return of hardline regime
• [34:56] – Kurdish separatists, likelihood and limitations of uprising
• [38:47] – British government’s hesitant, ambiguous response
• [43:42] – Iran’s regime survival instinct and regional strategy
• [53:04] – Hopton: Skepticism of positive outcome, warning of chaos and instability

Conclusion

This episode offers a comprehensive, clear-eyed examination of the long-term strategic, military, and diplomatic factors underpinning the current US-Israeli war with Iran. Guests stress that the events unfolding in 2026 are not sudden eruptions, but rather the result of decades of planning, strategic recalibration, and mutual anticipation between Iran and Western powers. While military victories are discussed, the ultimate outcomes—regime change, regional transformation, or deepening chaos—remain highly uncertain, clouded both by military realities and political hesitancy, and compounded by the ever-present fog of war and propaganda.