While Iran and Oman have had a productive three weeks of deliberations over the management of the Strait of Hormuz, according to Tehran, the question as to whether commercial shipping will proceed awaits a decision in Washington to first return to the 14-point Memorandum of Understanding signed by the U.S. and Iran on June 17.
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said last night that Iran and Oman are agreed on the details of the management. In general, Iran is to control ships entering, and Oman, conjointly with Iran, would control ships exiting the Strait. Yet Baghaei warned about possible obstructions from Washington, saying that the agreement is in its “final stages... if certain third parties do not obstruct the process” and cautioned that “any such agreement between Iran and Oman would not, by itself, guarantee security in the strategic waterway.”
Iranian deputy foreign minister Kazem Gharibabadi told state media first that the Iran-Oman deal is “on the verge of being finalized,” as they agreed now on nearly all issues, including the location of entry and exit routes for maritime traffic and a “new model” for managing traffic through the Strait, including closing down the existing temporary routes, including one near Iran’s Larak Island and another southern route near Oman.
The main issue, though, for regular shipping to proceed is for the U.S. to fulfill its part of the MoU. There can be no “foreign interference” in the waterway nor any naval blockade, but other elements (no sanctions on Iran’s oil, an end to warfare and even threats of violence, etc.). Gharibabadi did state that they had received messages from Washington signaling that Washington was “fully prepared to return to their commitments” of the MoU. However, while that was necessary, it was not sufficient.
The problem is that after the U.S.’s “breach of promises and commitments” under the MoU, Tehran simply has no basis for trusting Washington. So, Tehran cannot simply return to the June 17 situation. He said that Iran has not yet made a decision on entering a “second phase” of the MoU. For example, The Financial Times cited “two people briefed on the talks” who said that ships would not be charged fees during the temporary arrangement. This is something Tehran had agreed in the MoU to a 60-day period of no fees. However, Gharibabadi made clear that that offer does not hold unless Tehran decides they can go forward with the MoU. Hence, the U.S. returning to the letter of the MoU is necessary, but it appears that Tehran is looking for any sign that Washington has figured out that ‘might makes right’ is unacceptable.
President Trump today said what he normally says when he wants to signal a possible deal, that he’d “rather make a deal with Iran” because he doesn’t “want to kill people.” But he seemed to, once again, shoot himself in the foot adding, “I’ll launch the biggest attack since World War II,” if “I’m not pleased.”
