US - Iran Peace agreement Part 3

[TopPocketFind]

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/conflict-in-the-middle-east/5535141-us-iran-peace-agreement-part-2https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/conflict-in-the-middle-east/5535141-us-iran-peace-agreement-part-2

Leave it to the IRGC @RedTagAlan what could possibly go wrong?

They're doing a grand job of ruling Iran and Gaza and Lebanon are enjoying the benefit of their expertise too.

Exactly The MOU is quite clear
and strategies are in place to deal with the transit
Iran stated quite rightly that Foreign bodies ie the US have no authority over the Strait
They also warned at the beginning that they would act if any ships ignored directives

Read what the MOU says. The MOU that Trump signed,

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.

This bit -

....the Islamic Republic of Iran will make arrangements.....

It also says

The Islamic Republic of Iran will conduct dialogue with the Sultanate of Oman to define the future administration....

Trump signed that. So why does it appear that the US has an alternate route ? Why are the US apparently not following the MOU that they signed. I mean if the MOU says it is up to Iran to move the ships, and they have been, why on earth would anyone want to upset the apple cart, when Iran has made clear what will happen to ships that do not follow their instruction ?

What does that mean?

IRGC "rules Gaza" but if Israel maintains control of borders, airspace, and maritime access, surely it's a much more complicated situation than you appear to believe.

The only thing that could possibly go wrong, which I imagine a lot of people would have known in advance, was that the US lacks a leader that understands basic comprehension and signs stuff which he himself said ‘he only reads the first line of’

The US signed the MOU
they need to get a grip on what it actually says

Just watched the Sky Analysis you mentioned @RedTagAlan and the analyst does indeed suggest that Iran might have misunderstood or misinterpreted the interim peace deal with the US.

He says Iran likely targeted the 3 ships because they chose the path more on the Omani side - whereas other ships were overwhelmingly going through the strait on the Iranian side.

He thinks Iran were trying to re-establish their control in the region. He says, "that's absolutely against the law of the sea and international law as we know it, and that does need to be dealt with".

https://news.sky.com/story/iran-latest-israel-launches-preventative-attack-defence-minister-says-13509565?

The US will understand the international law of the sea, it's the IRGC who appear not to. Or possibly think it doesn't apply to them?

They will have to be made to understand that it does apply to them.

From the Guardian, in the MoU: shipping through Hormuz would resume under Iranian “arrangements”.

The US government has got rid of a lot of expertise and knowledge, they work with outdated intelligence, I am not so sure they understand international law.

Everything has changed under Trump.

CNN has a very good analysis of the current US position in today's political briefing. It is a succinct summary of why and how Trump has got himself into a position where he has little room to move. As expressed in the iPaper quotes upthread, there's the current inadequacy of Witkoff and Kushner, who have approached negotiations as if it were a real estate deal, with them trying for a buyout (via the MOU).
They have failed to understand that for Iranians, it is about national security, economics, pride etc.

I very much doubt that even bombing civilian targets will bring Iran to its knees after seeing the level of support for the regime at the funeral. China's not going to be happy with the US bombing a trade route, and an increasingly frustrated Trump has admitted that he does not know what the future would look like.

The point was also made that this war could be an ongoing, simmering background to US foreign policy for years to come.

You don't have to be an expert to understand that attacking ships in international waters is unlawful under international law.

Iran can't be the one exception to this.

Also in the Guardian:

Then, on 7 July, the US revoked Iran’s oil export waiver as Tehran was trying to consolidate control over shipping through Hormuz – not by permanently closing the strait, but by forcing vessels to transit through its designated northern route rather than the US-backed southern route.

According to the MoU, which Donald signed, they do not have the right to pick a route.

It’s not international waters though. It’s too narrow and too shallow. Half owned by Oman and half owned by Iran.

The international law of the sea requires transponders to be on
The US attacked Iran when a ship attempted transit whilst its transponders were off
If the US understand
Why don’t they then understand.

Please can you identify in the MOU the piece that states the US have either control of the SoH
or / and where they have control in the operation of the SOH for the transit of ships
during the 60day period

I know a bit about UNCLOS. It is normally me who posts about it. And yes, what is going on in this war is against UNCLOS. But there is a key word there. War.

And let's think. Has the US done anything against UNCLOS in this war. Yes, they fired on and disabled ships they said were breaking their blockade. And that is not a whataboutism, because there is a war on just now. That is a "war thing". That is why the US have sunk ALL of the Iranian navy. At least twice. Or is it thrice now ?

If there was no war, like last year when there was a war, all the ships would be sailing as per UNCLOS. Like they did, before Trump started this war.

In fact, it would have been nice if the MOU had said something about Iran and the US ratifying UNCLOS, because neither have. Hopefully that will come later.

These aren’t International waters

Agree
Trump being Trump doesn't want the highly educated advising him

Firstly, the 3 ships were on the Oman side anyway, so there's that.

Secondly, while the shipping lanes in the Strait of Hormuz are located partly in Omani territorial waters, and partly in Iranian territorial waters, they are still governed by international maritime law and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

They will have to be made to understand that it does apply to them

Why? Who will make them and how?

They are however still governed by international maritime law and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

Iran control the movement of ships
Without the go ahead by them every ship must wait in the waiting area
( Assuming they’ve been moved into that area of course and if not they also have to wait to be told to do so. Not by the US )

No
Thats not true ( edited )

No, international maritime law does not take control of a country’s own waterways. Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), coastal states retain full sovereignty over their internal and territorial waters. 1, 2]
The extent of a country's control depends on the specific zone of water: 1, 2]

Territorial Sea: Waters extending up to 12 nautical miles from the coast. A country holds full sovereignty over this area, treating it much like its land territory, though international law requires the country to allow foreign commercial and military ships the right of "innocent passage"

So
keep their transponders on !!!!
and during the 60 days ceasefire
wait for Iran to instruct

Shame that Israel don’t take your advice though

Exactly. As stated in the MoU, for the 60 days. And then Oman and Iran will decide between them how to manage the SoH. Donald signed this. The man is an idiot.

I'm not denying that the US has also done things against UNCLOS in this war.

But this happened in the middle of a 60 day ceasefire, also in the middle of the Ayatollah's funeral - a period where they had warned the US not to do anything inflammatory.

The timing is very odd. Unless the IRGC wanted to sabotage the interim talks or unless they are just so madly aggressive they can't help themselves.

But the US hitting 90 targets in Iran is like a cuddle from your Nan?