Strait of Hormuz hangs in the balance as US-Iran ceasefire unravels

The US-Iran MoU, open to (mis)interpretation and power plays, hangs by a thread. Iran has closed the Strait of Hormuz until further notice, and the US has reportedly hit 140 Iranian targets as retaliation on Sunday, with Iran responding with missile attacks on US allies Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and the UAE. While still within lines of a predictable pattern - strike, stop, talk, renew - the two sides have caused significant tears in the high-stakes diplomacy.

Donald Trump announced that the fragile ceasefire was 'over'. But he also said that 'full-scale war' was unlikely in the aftermath of the latest flare-up. Last week, Iran attacked three tankers in the Strait of Hormuz for trying to get out by hugging the Omani coast. The US hit more than 170 targets in Iran in response. Who knew 170 legitimate targets were still left?

Also read: US launches fresh strikes on Iranian weapons and boats near Hormuz


Tehran answered back with drones and missiles, attacking sites in Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrain. The cycle of attacks and counterattacks continued over the weekend with Bahrain and Kuwait launching missiles at Iran. In a further twist, reports of a supposed assassination plot against Trump raised the spectre of a nuclear attack with a Truth Social post bristling with anger.

Several analysts have pinned responsibility for the latest cycle of attacks on the US for not abiding by the terms of the MoU. Escorting ships through alternate routes goes against the agreed language. In addition, the first article of the MoU, which calls for an immediate end to the war in Lebanon, remains unfulfilled.

The threat level in Hormuz, meanwhile, has been raised to 'severe' by an international body that studies maritime risks. US officials expect Iran to publicly declare that all channels in the strait are open. But no such announcement has come from Tehran. The state of 'no war, no peace' continues, and the world waits.

Iranian attacks on three tankers that led to the current conflagration apparently came from a rogue unit of the IRGC determined to undermine the MoU, according to US officials who said Iranian negotiators had told them so. Did they? The tendency to see Iran's politics only as a contest between 'hard-liners' and 'moderates' and nothing further obscures the obvious - Tehran is not about to surrender its leverage. As Aaron David Miller, a former negotiator for both Republican and Democratic administrations, said, 'To believe Iran's desire to control the strait results from rogue elements is to believe in fairy tales.'

While Washington goes through a bout of wishful thinking, public statements from Iran's leaders tell a different tale. They talk of revenge and defiance. It seems Iran is determined not to allow traffic that doesn't follow its rules, perpetuating the Hormuz 'dilemma'.

At issue is para 5 of the MoU, which says Iran will arrange 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 was seen by many as implicit confirmation that Iran did, indeed, have de facto control of the strait. Iran's interpretation: Tehran decides which ships get through and the route they take. If the US wants Iran to stop interfering with traffic, it must stop redirecting traffic to bypass Iran, especially because it can't protect those ships.

Also read: Oil flow through Hormuz rises after ceasefire, but fresh strikes spark fears, IEA says



So, what is Trump's end game? And is it achievable? Tehran's actions and statements point clearly to the fact that Hormuz is now seen as an Iranian core national interest. It's become a red line. Tehran can see that the US president is unwilling to commit military resources - ground troops - needed to wrest control of the strait. Which means Tehran will continue to hold sway over the crucial waterway.

Military pressure of the kind Trump has mounted is unlikely to change Iran's calculus on Hormuz. Tactical strikes will not alter ground reality. Nor will fiery words that are increasingly ineffective and bounce off into the void. Restoration of status quo ante seems well-nigh impossible. Is it time to accept that the rules of the game have changed, and the pre-February 28 world is gone?

Shortcomings of the MoU, negotiated hastily, are all too clear, and it's not surprising that Iran is exploiting them. More energy and effort should have gone into the negotiations and less on message manipulation. But what's done can't be undone. Trump agreed to the language because he understood more bombing wouldn't necessarily bring more success, only a global recession.

Prepare for the new Hormuz normal: Iranian transit fees, selective delays, harassment of individual tankers, drone threats and naval mines, as strategic reserves continue to get exhausted all around.