FT named risks of Trump's plan to blockade the Strait of Hormuz
Kyiv • UNN
The US is imposing a full embargo on ship passage through the strait to pressure Tehran. This decision threatens the stability of energy markets and rising prices.
The naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, announced by the US, risks further destabilizing global energy markets and provoking a new surge in oil prices, the Financial Times reports, writes UNN.
Details
The naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, which could potentially lead to the seizure of any vessels paying duties to Tehran, was Trump's latest attempt to change the dynamics of the US-Israeli war against Iran, which he started in late February but from which he has struggled to exit, underestimating the Islamic Republic's ability to choke off energy trade through the critical waterway, the publication writes.
At first glance, the naval embargo aims to reduce Iran's ability to finance its defense by limiting the revenue it receives from oil exports. But such an operation risks further destabilizing global energy markets and provoking a new surge in oil prices. It also jeopardizes the fragile two-week ceasefire agreed by the US and Iran last Tuesday
"A complete closure of the strait would lead to an even greater increase in oil prices than before and increase pressure on the US from the international community," said Jennifer Kavanagh, director of military analysis at the Washington think tank Defense Priorities.
"It certainly shows how frustrated and out of options the president feels," she added.
Trump's order for an embargo on the strait reflects his hope that he can apply to Iran the model of his intervention in Venezuela, when the US seized then-President Nicolás Maduro during a military operation after a naval blockade of the Latin American country, the publication notes.
"We are imposing a complete blockade. We will not allow Iran to make money from selling oil to people they like, not to people they don't like, or anyone else," Trump told Fox News on Sunday. "You saw what we did with Venezuela. This will be something very similar to that, but on a higher level."
Trump's aides say that the imposition of a naval embargo, scheduled to begin at 10:00 ET (15:00 Kyiv time) on Monday, was a consequence of Iran's intransigence in negotiations between the two countries after the ceasefire and was intended to put additional pressure on Tehran.
Specifically, free passage through the Strait of Hormuz was one of a number of "red line" demands that Iran did not agree to in Vance-led talks in Pakistan on Saturday, a US official said. Others include the dismantling of Tehran's uranium enrichment facilities, which the US bombed last June, the removal of its enriched uranium stockpiles, and the issue of Iran's funding of regional proxy groups.
After developing the blockade with Trump and his team, Vance hopes Iran will be more willing to agree to a deal that meets US demands, a US official said.
But the Islamic regime has repeatedly shown that it is not ready to capitulate to pressure. It believes it has the upper hand in the conflict, and the strait is its main leverage.
Some analysts supported the proposed blockade. But others were skeptical, such as Vali Nasr, a former US official and professor at Johns Hopkins University. He said that Trump's threat to block the strait would not worry the Islamic Republic in the short term, given that Tehran expects the closure of the strait to put more pressure on the global economy than on Iran.
"The Iranians are fine with it, it continues their grip on the global economy," he said. "And the Iranians can close the Bab el-Mandeb Strait [a narrow strait off the coast of Yemen], and then the US will have to deal with that."
Analysts have repeatedly warned against comparisons with the Maduro regime in Venezuela, pointing out that the Islamic Republic has spent almost half a century building an entrenched bureaucracy and decades preparing for the type of asymmetric warfare it is waging, led by the ideologically motivated Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Trump's naval blockade is a sharp departure from Washington's strategy, which allows Iran to continue exporting oil, amid its desire to calm energy markets, the publication writes.
The strait is important for Iran's exports and imports. But it has alternatives for importing food and other goods, as it borders 15 countries, including land routes to Iraq and Turkey to the west, Central Asian states and Russia to the north, and Afghanistan and Pakistan to the east.
Kavanagh said that a US naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz would also create some operational challenges and dilemmas that did not exist during actions against energy supplies to and from Venezuela.
"Suppose it's a Persian Gulf state or a French ship passing through the strait, and they've paid the duty," she said. "What will the US do? Seize an allied tanker? And then suppose it's a Chinese ship that's paid the duty. Are we going to seize a Chinese tanker? And what will the Chinese do?"