“President Trump's memorandum of understanding with Iran was supposed to open the Strait of Hormuz and relieve the pressure on the global economy. Instead, it set off a test of wills that has exploded into violence twice in the past two weeks.
The root of the dispute is Paragraph 5, which says Iran will make arrangements to restore shipping through the strategic waterway and then work with Oman to determine how to administer it in the future. But it also includes an Iranian pledge to ensure safe passage and remove military obstacles such as mines.
Trump administration officials saw that clause as unlocking the strait, the main accomplishment of the president's deal.
Iranian hard-liners, however, have used it to push a maximalist interpretation that gives the Islamic Republic exclusive control over the waterway as a key source of leverage.
The U.S. and its Arab Gulf allies don't want Iranian hegemony over Hormuz, the lifeline for much of the world's oil and gas supply. The language of the deal has left the two sides fighting over that point rather than making progress on a final agreement on Tehran's nuclear program.
"This gap in interpretation is wide, baked into the deal, and not exactly surprising," said Michael Horowitz, an Israeli geopolitical analyst. "Washington has tried to convince Tehran that compliance would be more profitable, but this framing misses the point. Iran's behavior isn't driven by financial motives but by security concerns and bargaining leverage. It's a power dynamic."
Three weeks after Trump signed the preliminary deal to wind down the war at Versailles, traffic through the Strait of Hormuz is still stunted.
A U.S. official familiar with negotiations said Paragraph 5 has been problematic and that the U.S. and Iran are on "different planets" when it comes to interpreting the deal.
Notably, the paragraph says nothing about the U.S. making arrangements for the safe passage of vessels, which Iran has seized on to attack ships that use a U.S.-coordinated route, the official said.
"President Trump made his feelings very clear [on Wednesday] in no uncertain terms. Iran's attacks on these innocent vessels are acts of terrorism," another U.S. official said. "The United States is still committed to finding a resolution, and technical talks continue. Iran can never possess a nuclear weapon."
Iran's lead negotiator in the talks with the U.S., parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, quoted the clause in arguing on social media that Iran controls the strait. "The Strait of Hormuz will only open with 'Iranian arrangements,' not American threats," he said.
Jordan said it intercepted missiles fired by Iran on Thursday, after Iran attacked Kuwait and Bahrain overnight in retaliation for U.S. strikes up and down its coast.
Iran choked off traffic through the strait by firing drones and missiles at ships at the beginning of the war. It has argued that the waterway is under its control. Tehran has also repeatedly asserted that it will work out arrangements for future management of the strait with its weaker neighbor across the waterway, Oman.
The language of Paragraph 5 nods at those claims. The idea of carving out talks on the future administration of Hormuz was pressed by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the Iranian paramilitary group that protects the regime and controls the strait, mediators said.
The parties agreed, seeing the language as necessary to close the deal but figuring they could assert their interpretations afterward, the mediators said. Once the deal was signed, the IRGC pushed Iran's civilian government toward a maximalist interpretation that Iran should be in charge, they said.
The IRGC has also pushed the government to insist on future service fees on ships crossing the strait, they said.
The process is managed by the Persian Gulf Strait Authority, which Iran set up to collect tolls from ships transiting the strait. Shippers need a PGSA-approved insurance policy to cross.
"Iran saw the deal as a recognition it was in control. Now countries in the region are paying the price," said Amjad Taha, an Emirati political strategist.
"It's a disaster, and we are back to square one."
The U.S. and its regional allies have balked at Iranian control. The oil-rich Arab monarchies of the Persian Gulf depend on the strait as the exit route for much of their output and want a return to its prewar status of free navigation.
They embraced an initiative of the United Nations' International Maritime Organization to formalize a safe corridor through the waterway hugging Omani waters, the mediators said.
The U.S. Navy has secretly helped ships transit that southern route, officials said. The navigation effort has largely happened at night, with ships turning off their automatic identification systems while a U.S. destroyer stays in radio contact with the bridge and the shipowner's operations center.
The southern channel helped exports of crude from the Persian Gulf rebound to 9.5 million barrels a day by early this week, more than half their prewar levels, according to ship-tracking company Kpler.
The success of the Omani route sparked anger among hard-liners in Tehran who are critical of engagement with the West.
The difficulty coming to terms on opening the strait points to rough negotiations ahead if talks eventually turn to more contentious issues such as Iran's nuclear program.
"The flaw of the MOU was not so much that it avoided the nuclear issue, but that it apparently papered over major differences between the U.S. and Iran on the key issues the agreement was intended to solve -- the ceasefire, the status of the Strait, and sanctions relief," said Eric Brewer, a former senior Iran analyst in the U.S. intelligence community. "Either the U.S. didn't know about those differences or chose to ignore them."
---
Here is the text, with Journal analysis:
Paragraph 5. Upon the signing of this MOU, the Islamic Republic of Iran will make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels, with no charge for 60 days only, from the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Oman, and vice versa.
WSJ analysis: The text makes Iran responsible for opening the strait, which Tehran is leveraging to try to exclude competing efforts to shepherd ship traffic. It also only prevents Iran from charging fees for 60 days.
The traffic of commercial vessels will immediately start, and considering the need for removing the technical and military obstacles, and demining by the Islamic Republic of Iran, will be instated within 30 days.
WSJ analysis: Continued attacks are at odds with the removal of military obstacles. We are also three weeks into that 30-day period with traffic still disrupted.
The Islamic Republic of Iran will conduct dialogue with the Sultanate of Oman, to define the future administration and maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz, in discussion with other Persian Gulf Littoral States, in line with applicable international law and the sovereign rights of coastal states of the Strait of Hormuz.
WSJ analysis: Iran gets a nod for its plan to set terms for the strait with Oman, which controls its southern coast -- but with the caveat it has to account for the rights of neighboring countries and international law, which could limit its ability to charge for passage.” [1]
1. Clause in U.S.-Iran Pact Is At Center Of Fight --- Memorandum hands Tehran leading role in opening strait, but sparks major dispute. Norman, Laurence; Faucon, Benoit; Feng, Rebecca; Holliday, Shelby. Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 10 July 2026: A1.
Komentarų nėra:
Rašyti komentarą