Iran is jealously competing with Oman as decision-maker over strait of Hormuz | Strait of Hormuz
The Strait of Hormuz is Iran’s primary bargaining tool in negotiations with America and is therefore always likely to be the biggest point of contention. Every meter of the 39-kilometer-wide waterway is a test of willpower and patience.
For Iran, the continuation of the conflict does not pose a problem as long as it does not lose control.
According to the memorandum of understanding signed with Washington on June 18, substantive talks on Iran’s nuclear program do not have to begin until the blockade in the Bosphorus is lifted; Iran needs only to use its “best efforts” to achieve this. Moreover, the longer the blockade continues, the closer Trump’s US midterm elections get. Iran’s government may yet find itself in a reckoning with its inflation-ravaged voters, but no date has yet been set for that.
Iran adopts a maximalist interpretation of the memorandum and declares that it can lift the blockade on its own. Türkiye, which jealously guards this privilege, resists any other country or institution from intervening in the opening of the strait.
Therefore, Iran rejected the UN’s proposal to develop a southern route near the coast of Oman together with the International Maritime Organization. The idea was that since the central route through the strait was closed due to mines, two new shipping lines could be opened, one in Omani waters supervised by the US Joint Maritime Information Center and the other further north, closer to Iran. IMO thought Iran accepted this proposal.
But either different segments of the Iranian regime adopted different positions, or the IMO misunderstood Iran’s flexibility. Either way, Iran’s attack on a Singapore ship passing the southern route on Thursday caused the IMO to abandon the plan.
For Iran, losing the Strait card would mean returning to negotiations on pre-war conditions and losing an important strategic tool. Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi said at a press conference in Baghdad: “Any attempt to adopt new or different regulations from those currently followed by the Islamic Republic will only lead to further complications, delays in reopening the Strait of Hormuz and increased tensions.”
But the dispute over the southern route, which will likely be discussed at talks in Doha, has the potential to overshadow the search for a long-term solution to the management of the strait. This solution has been worked out in considerable legal detail by Oman over the past two months. The plan was prepared with the aim of meeting the requirements of international law and at the same time securing the ultimate support of Iran.
However, Oman, a neutral country in terms of temperament and practice, is in a sensitive position for diplomats. He knows that if he ignores Iran’s objections, Tehran will be less likely to accept Oman’s plan for the future of the strait. But if Oman does not take the initiative to assist the humanitarian operation to free thousands of stranded sailors, the less likely it will be that its proposals for the strait will be accepted by the region or the UN, and the more likely it will be that the US will return to all-out war.
Iranian deputy foreign minister Kazem Garibabadi’s joint talks with Omani foreign minister Abdulaziz Al-Hinai in Muscat means an implicit acceptance that Tehran does not have the authority to make decisions alone in the future management of the strait.
What Oman was trying to do was to create a management system that would enable coastal states to generate revenue from commercial shipping passing through the strait; but revenue was to come, whenever possible, from voluntary contributions or payments for certain navigational services by commercial groups, ships, or governments.
Omani foreign minister Badr al-Busaidi explained: “We are not in favor of imposing fees for passage through the Strait of Hormuz, which is prohibited internationally – although service fees are legal and negotiations on them with the Iranian side are currently ongoing.” This is a distinction with a difference and has been developed with some of the best commercial legal advice in the UK.
Article 26 of the law of the sea expressly prohibits payment for mere passage, but Article 43 allows user states and strait states to cooperatively finance the provision of maritime services, including port of call or service used.
This point will be made by the Sultan of Oman in his meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron on Monday. In theory, Macron and UK prime minister Keir Starmer have a naval task force ready to sail the police to reach an agreement on freedom of navigation. The Sultan may have possibly argued that if the West adopted Oman’s plan, there would be no need for such a force.
