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

Thanks @TopPocketFind Any discussion on charging fees for transiting the Strait of Hormuz would suggest by extension, that the genie is well and truly out of the bottle on fees. I had read on distinctions being made from man made constructions/canals but also the point that straits also require some measure of maintenance/administration. It could be argued that we have all had it too easy in the past, but as governments have to deal with the reality of finding funds to manage their countries, it would make sense to monetise their natural assets, if possible.

If Iran officially state it was a mistake

so far all we know is what the US are telling us
So more likely putting the blame on Iran and Nothing more

Yes that's what we're waiting to see - if Iran officially state it was a mistake.

According to the US, Tehran privately acknowledged to Trump's advisers that the recent shooting at ships was a mistake, and that an "errant" sect of hardliners was trying to undermine negotiations, senior US officials told CBS News, the BBC's US partner.

One official told the TV network: "They [the Iranians] came back to the table and said, 'We screwed up. We made a mistake. Let's keep talking.'"

In a briefing for reporters on Friday, the US officials said a message to Tehran's leadership had been conveyed through regional mediators demanding Iran release a statement declaring the Strait of Hormuz open and pledging to stop shooting at commercial ships, according to multiple media reports.

"They're either going to give us that statement or we're not having a good outcome for them," said one official, quoted by Reuters news agency.

Iran haven't confirmed or denied this.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crelyq79x71o

So the question is, will we see a statement by the end of today from Iran or will we be seeing what the US mean by not having a good outcome for them.

I'm guessing the latter because I don't expect Iran to issue a statement. I do believe they "made a mistake" - or a miscalculation that the US wouldn't respond by pausing the ceasefire over it - but that's just personal opinion of course.

There is also an act going through congress, to charge non built US ships for sailing to US ports. Been in the works for a while. That will be challenged under UNCLOS.

And yes, canals do not some under UNCLOS, nor does the Bosporus. Turkey did not sign UNCLOS, and that waterway has its own treaty. So Turkey charges.

The US has launched another round of attacks on an Iran.

Hegseth: “Iran made a poor choice. Now they pay.”

Allegation that Iran struck a container vessel earlier,

Iran fired warning shots at vessels using "unapproved route", declared SoH closed, so US are bombing Iran. Iran claims one shot hit a ship. It is not known what route, but Sky says suspects the Southern route. The Trump 'southern highway" as it is being called, because he has championed it, Sky says.

If that is the case, I have no idea why ships would go that route.

It looks to me like the US are saying OPEN IT, and Iran are saying GIVE US THE MONEY. I don't think Trump has any intention of delivering on the MOU. He just wanted it open for his Birthday.

No, Trump had no intention of sticking to the MOU. He and the Israelis wanted to rearm and the US was hoping to refill the SPRs (Vance said this a week or so ago). I wonder what the US SPRs look like now.

To make matters even worse for the world, the US and Europe Ukraine are attacking Russian oil depots and refineries and Russia has apparently banned diesel exports.

It seems simple to me, that the ships should be using the Iranian lanes. Maybe there is a reason? Destination or cargo they don't think Iran will let through perhaps ?

But really, given the confusion that is around this paragraph 5, all it would take is for Trump to say to use the Iranian lanes ? And in the meantime get on with getting the rest of the MOU paragraph 13 things in place. Israel and the funds.

As posters know, my take on paragraph 5 is that Iran does the SoH. So to get on with talks and even get to the nuke stuff, I would say USE THE IRAN LANES. Baffles me why nobody is saying that. Apart from the Iranians of course.

It's clear that Iran wants to retain control of the SOH. It's also clear that the US do not want this and want to control it themselves, which contravenes the MOU that they signed. The US has been putting a lot of pressure on Oman and is trying to form their own Southern corridor where ships can pass. It's no surprise that the Iranians are reacting aggressively to this. The US are not good faith actors and had no intention of sticking to the MOU. Unfortunately, the MOU appears to be dead or dying and I think this war will drag on, with awful consequences.

Oman has proposed splitting Strait of Hormuz shipping into two lanes: A southern route through Omani waters with normal free passage, and a northern route through Iranian waters that would require Iran's prior approval but no transit fees.

The proposal is still being negotiated, and Iranian and Omani officials discussed it in Muscat.

Source: CNN

Maybe Trump is in no hurry to get the rest of the MoU done? It can be extended after the 60 days after all. It seems to me that his stance has hardened after all the emphasis from Iran on assassinating him.

The nuke stuff is under control at the moment and the price of oil isn't that high.

The US don't agree with your take that "Iran does the SoH" and seem to be asserting the principle that (with Oman's agreement), ships should be allowed to use the southern route through Omani waters with normal free passage.

According to the Independent, Oman said it and Iran agreed to keep talking about the Strait of Hormuz "at the technical and political levels."

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iran-us-war-live-trump-strikes-israel-strait-of-hormuz-b3012370.html

There was me thinking that the MOU was discussed and agreed. What was discussed and agreed we might never know. Iran seems to be clear on what was agreed. Of course, Iran could be lying, but Trump is not saying anything about that.

Maybe we will know when Jared writes his book.

Sky news agrees with @RedTagAlan that according to the MOU, Iran controls the Strait. And their experts must have examined it in detail.

My feeling on the Iran war is that it will be recorded in the history of 47, as Trump's FAFO moment. He knew better than everyone else what the possible consequences could be. He got rid of experienced/expert advisers and thought he could control Bibi. A quick in and out win like in Venezuela. Nope! Now we have unnecessary instability in the region and the rest of the world pays for his hubris.

What a GOLDEN legacy indeed!

Interesting article on ideas for transiting the Strait, from CNN.

2 HR 9 MIN AGO

Source: Oman proposes deal for Strait of Hormuz shipping routes
By CNN staff

Vessels at the Strait of Hormuz, as seen from Musandam, Oman, June 18.
Stringer/Reuters
Oman has drafted a proposal to manage traffic in the Strait of Hormuz through two separately controlled routes, a source with knowledge of the talks told CNN.
Under the agreement, which is yet to be finalized, both corridors would remain open. The Southern Corridor, through Omani territorial waters, would allow free navigation under pre-war conditions.

Vessels transiting the Northern Corridor, through Iranian territorial waters, would require prior approval from Iran, although no tolls would be imposed under the deal.
https://edition.cnn.com/2026/07/12/world/live-news/iran-war-trump?post-id=cmrhacqhq000j3b6rkd7qvd5z

"We have taken control of the Strait of Hormuz with power, and we will preserve it with power as well".
(Ebrahim Rezaei)

The Independent: Confusion over a vague clause

The fifth clause of the MOU states that 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.”

It adds: “The traffic of commercial vessels will immediately start, and considering the need for removing the technical and military obstacles, and de-mining by the Islamic Republic of Iran, will be instated within 30 days.”

The confusion comes over the next section, which states that Iran “will conduct dialogue with the Sultanate of Oman, to define the future administration and maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz, in discussions with other Persian Gulf Littoral States, in line with applicable international law and the sovereign rights of coastal states of the Strait of Hormuz.”

Iran says that this means that the governance of the strait remains under their control and that passage without their approval constitutes a violation. The US says that attacks on vessels are a violation of Tehran’s promise to allow commercial vessels unfettered access.

But Dr Quilliam, energy policy, geopolitics and foreign affairs specialist says that while “the Iranians claim that the MOU includes discussion of Oman-US-Iran agreement, it’s not there. Iran also raised the issue of services, but again that’s not in the MOU. Iran is defending what it sees as a critical interest and is trying to use the MOU to justify that.”

Kpler, a global data and analytics company that provides real-time tracking, intelligence, and forecasting for physical commodities, freight, and shipping markets, told The Independent: “Regarding the MOU, it does seem that even though there is political will to find an agreement, it is becoming increasingly difficult, and at oil prices that are not prohibitively high, the impetus to find a deal is lower (from the US side at least). It does seem like a violation from both sides, and this is likely to rumble on.”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/strait-hormuz-iran-us-ceasefire-peace-deal-b3012657.html

Leaders like Trump and this guy do love their macho statements.

Iran want the sanctions lifted though and access to the billions of dollars for investment in Iran so there's that.

That is fair enough. There were 2 shipping lanes pre war. Both 2 nautical miles wide. One in, one out. With 2 NM gap. All as per article 22 of UNCLOS. I have clipped it below.

The lanes were 2 miles wide for safe separation. And I recall there is a depth restriction in one lane. It only affects the very biggest tankers at full load, but I remember it meant the lane directions needed to be switched sometimes. ?

Given that the strait is 20 miles or so, I think fitting 4 lanes in, with a safety gap, might be pushing it. I just hope the ships all have their AIS switched on. And that the shore radar is all working ok.

But hey, it worked with the two lanes for decades without incident, so sure, lets change it so Trump can ignore the MOU that HE signed.

Article 22
Sea lanes and traffic separation schemes in the territorial sea

1. The coastal State may, where necessary having regard to the safety of navigation, require foreign ships exercising the right of innocent passage through its territorial sea to use such sea lanes and traffic separation schemes as it may designate or prescribe for the regulation of the passage of ships.

2. In particular, tankers, nuclear-powered ships and ships carrying nuclear or other inherently dangerous or noxious substances or materials may be required to confine their passage to such sea lanes.

3. In the designation of sea lanes and the prescription of traffic separation schemes under this article, the coastal State shall take into account: (a) the recommendations of the competent international organization; (b) any channels customarily used for international navigation; (c) the special characteristics of particular ships and channels; and (d) the density of traffic.

4. The coastal State shall clearly indicate such sea lanes and traffic separation schemes on charts to which due publicity shall be given

I suppose it is up to Oman what they decide to do with the Southern corridor, through Omani territorial waters?

From Times of Israel June 23rd:

Oman says it has coordinated with the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to provide a temporary maritime corridor for vessels seeking to transit the Strait of Hormuz, state news agency reports.

The vessels wanting to use the temporary corridor would need to coordinate with the IMO, based on coordinates announced by the organization and Omani authorities, it adds.

The measure is aimed at ensuring freedom of navigation through the strategic waterway in line with international law and the law of the sea, which uphold freedom of navigation without imposing transit fees.

www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/oman-announces-temporary-maritime-corridor-for-hormuz-traffic/

It's been reported that the latest trigger for Iran's attack on a Cyprus vessel was that it was being escorted/facilitated to transit by the US, with transponder off. Imo, it is extremely stupid foolhardy for any shipping company to believe that US protection guarantee will keep you safe right now.

But hey, it worked with the two lanes for decades without incident

That is the crux of it.

Esp given that the MOU is clear about no charges in the 60 days. I do not see what any captain hopes to gain by not following the published instructions.