President Donald Trump has suggested that another country could carry out a ground operation against Iran if the US decided to seize Kharg Island , raising questions over which of Washington's allies, if any, could realistically undertake such a mission.
Speaking to Fox News this week, Trump declined to rule out a ground campaign against Iran, saying: "Sometimes you need a ground campaign, but we have other people that will do the ground campaign for us."
He made the remarks while discussing Kharg Island, Iran's main oil export terminal in the Persian Gulf, after CNN reported that the White House was considering military options, including seizing the strategically vital island.
Trump did not elaborate on whom he meant by "other people", leaving analysts and observers to speculate whether Washington could be looking to a regional ally to undertake one of the conflict's most ambitious military operations.
Why Kharg matters
Located around 25 kilometres off Iran's southern coast, Kharg Island handles the vast majority of the country's crude oil exports and has long been regarded as one of Tehran's most strategically important assets.
Although the US has already struck Iranian military positions around the Strait of Hormuz, occupying Kharg would represent a far more significant escalation than air strikes alone.
Capturing the island would require not only an amphibious landing but also sustained naval and air superiority, the suppression of Iranian missile batteries and coastal defences, and the logistical capacity to reinforce and supply troops within range of Iran's mainland.
Even if an initial assault succeeded, holding the island would likely prove considerably more difficult, with any occupying force exposed to Iranian missile, drone and naval attacks launched from nearby coastal bases.
Israel, the most likely candidate
While Trump did not identify the country he had in mind, Israel appears to be the most plausible possibility.
Unlike the Gulf Arab states, Israel is already fighting alongside the US against Iran and has repeatedly demonstrated both the political willingness and military capability to conduct long-range operations against Iranian targets.
The Israeli military has also expanded its amphibious capabilities in recent years, acquiring new landing craft designed to transport troops and equipment during expeditionary operations.
However, even Israel would face formidable obstacles.
Seizing and holding Kharg Island would require sustained naval, air, intelligence and logistical support on a scale that only the United States could realistically provide.
While Israeli special forces could potentially participate in such an operation, maintaining an occupation so close to Iran's coastline would almost certainly depend on extensive US military backing.
Why not the Gulf states?
If Trump was referring to a Gulf Arab partner, the list of plausible candidates narrows considerably.
The United Arab Emirates possesses one of the region's most capable expeditionary militaries and has experience operating beyond its borders, including during the Yemen war. Militarily, it would likely represent the strongest Gulf candidate.
Politically, however, participation appears far less likely.
The UAE has spent recent years rebuilding ties with Tehran and has repeatedly sought to avoid becoming directly involved in a regional war with Iran.
Saudi Arabia also fields a large and well-equipped military but has similarly prioritised reducing tensions with Iran following years of confrontation, while remaining acutely aware of its own vulnerability to Iranian missile and drone attacks on critical energy infrastructure.
Elsewhere in the Gulf, Qatar and Oman have positioned themselves as mediators between Washington and Tehran, making participation in an offensive operation against Iranian territory highly improbable. Bahrain hosts the US Fifth Fleet but lacks the independent military capability to mount such an operation, while Kuwait has traditionally avoided direct involvement in regional conflicts.
More questions than answers
Trump's remarks leave open the possibility that he was speaking rhetorically rather than referring to a specific military plan.
But if he did have a particular ally in mind, Israel appears the clearest fit.
Even then, any attempt to seize Kharg Island would almost certainly rely so heavily on American naval, air and logistical support that distinguishing it from a US-led ground campaign would be difficult in practice.