According to the Financial Times (1), the straight is "open" but Iran is extorting fees for passing ships.
> "Iran will demand that shipping companies pay tolls in cryptocurrency for oil tankers passing through the Strait of Hormuz, as it seeks to retain control over passage through the key waterway during the two-week ceasefire."
If they really will start doing so for all shipping, that would be odd since the straight itself is in Oman's territorial waters. Even so, the UNCLOS convention (2) requires free transit:
> Article 44
> Duties of States bordering straits
>
> States bordering straits shall not hamper transit passage and shall give appropriate publicity to any danger to navigation or overflight within or over the strait of which they have knowledge. There shall be no suspension of transit passage.
It would be unprecedented and unlawful, but I guess previous actions of Israel, the US and Iran have shown our world is beyond adhering to laws and agreements now.
Iran hasn't ratified it and is not a party to that agreement. You can't really fault a country for not complying with an extraterritorial law made by and for other countries.
If you are really of that opinion, does that include not accepting warcrimes committed by the US or Iran? Or Israel (and many other nations, including all arab countries, at least half of Africa, and more)
You see, they have not ratified or withdrawn from the Rome treaty, which is the only UN treaty that talks about war crimes.
What I'm saying, if countries just get to opt out of treaties, where that affects a great deal of other countries (like here, in Iran's case), and that just lets them off the hook, then you can just close up the UN and start WW3 right now. Because that just became unavoidable.
(historically people use "war crimes" for Geneva convention violations too, but those can only be presented to the UNSC, and with China and Iran blocking everything, nothing will ever be accepted there. So if those are warcrimes, that's a purely theoretical thing only)
Absolutely. If your country didn't sign up to the law of war crimes, you don't have to follow it. That's how sovereignty works. It doesn't mean they're not bad for doing bad things but it does mean you can't defer to the law to judge them as the parent did.
War crimes is a funny example to choose. It just happens that post WWII, the west has been impermeable with its expensive high-tech militaries so it could comfortably set a high moral standard for itself and then judge poorer countries by that same standard. For example, Palestinians commit war crimes all the time because they don't have the conventional military capability of fighting to the west's moral standards. I suppose in your view, they should just admit they're losers and take whatever happens to them, but people love to fight for the part of the Earth they feel they have exclusive rights to and no amount of labelling something a crime is going to get in the way of that.
There is no responding to this. If war crimes are just fine and peachy, as long as it's your favorite party committing them ... well I hope you're not too attached to your children. I am to mine.
Their point wasn't about accepting it or not, it was about Iran not being bound by the terms of a treaty they've never ratified. And of course that applies to any state and any treaty.
War crime is something of a different case also because it's a term which exists separately in the popular lexicon and isn't used solely to mean "not in keeping with the terms of the UNSC."
Your comment also seems to be an example of whataboutery. It might be worth considering what prompted that.
Not at all. Freedom of navigation, the specific principle Iran violates, is one of the core parts of the post-WW2 "security architecture". Which is a difficult way of saying, it's the big reason we don't have WW3. And now you say, we'll just let Iran "opt out" and firing at other people's ships is just fine now ...
This means getting goods from other countries without paying tax to half the countries in between is no longer possible. It means no more business for any gulf country without paying Iran. It means no more business between EU and Asia without paying Spain and Morocco. It means ... Half the world's wars have been fought over that and the "way out" has been: as long as you use the seas, you get to do that, for free.
You see the problem, I hope?
Yes I get it, we all hate Trump, and this is "showing Trump" (not really, of all countries, the US is one of the least affected by this. This is especially horrible for Europe, especially specific European countries, most of Asia, most of South America and Russia)
Back to wars it is, I guess. This will rapidly deteriorate to the point where a great many countries are effectively unable to trade internationally.
Yes. You're technically right, of course, in theory only by the government whose flag they bear. And that flag is not the US flag. All I can say, it is not a matter of serious disagreement that Venezuela's government was running a drug cartel. That is perhaps not why Trump cares, but it is true. So either that was going to happen or it was just going to continue ...
Maybe we can get israel to pay some of our billion dollars a day military costs. Adelson gave stump 750 million for campaign. There must be a lot of wallets in the us that will open for israel. Maybe a synagogue tax?
Trump and the US effectively control the commerce because they are the only source of insurance. Even with payments and promises from Iran, no ship is sailing without insurance coverage. There is no one insuring the ships other than the US program Trump created.
It's super hard to tell what's actually happening. Because I've seen other reports that Iran state media halted traffic earlier today, as reported by Washington Post[1]:
> With Trump and Iran each claiming victory, but still far apart on key issues, traffic in the Strait of Hormuz remained at a standstill Wednesday.
It's been very hard to watch how many people who, a few years ago, believed everything the media said about say the pandemic, now claim you can't trust them at all. Time makes "conspiracy theorists" out of all of us -- it can be hard to see just how much the media lies and distorts, until they start talking about something you care about.
If you NOW believe that the media is corrupt and full of lies, but also believe that 6 years ago they were 100% truthful, you're being intellectually stunted. If you believed all the media lies during Covid, but NOW you see that the media is lying about the Middle East, you should have the intellectual honesty to at least earnestly consider if you were duped back then. Because that's much more likely than the entire media going from truthful to deceitful in that same period.
Oh don't be so obtuse. We're not going to get into a big long debate about the particulars -- it's been done a million times, you can search the details if you actually care. But you're only asking in an attempt to deflect the topic away from the reality staring you right in your face, if you had the courage to admit it.
> "Iran will demand that shipping companies pay tolls in cryptocurrency for oil tankers passing through the Strait of Hormuz, as it seeks to retain control over passage through the key waterway during the two-week ceasefire."
If they really will start doing so for all shipping, that would be odd since the straight itself is in Oman's territorial waters. Even so, the UNCLOS convention (2) requires free transit:
> Article 44 > Duties of States bordering straits > > States bordering straits shall not hamper transit passage and shall give appropriate publicity to any danger to navigation or overflight within or over the strait of which they have knowledge. There shall be no suspension of transit passage.
It would be unprecedented and unlawful, but I guess previous actions of Israel, the US and Iran have shown our world is beyond adhering to laws and agreements now.
(1) https://www.ft.com/content/02aefac4-ea62-48db-9326-c0da373b1... (2) United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea: https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unc...