Donald Trump’s decision to blockade the Strait of Hormuz is a risky escalation. But peace talks between the United States and Iran are not over yet.
No blockade to peace
The US navy’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, which went into effect last night, is a risky escalation with the potential to derail the two-week ceasefire in the Iran war. But the blockade is primarily an instrument of economic coercion to gain leverage in a negotiating process that remains alive despite the failure of last weekend’s talks in Islamabad to produce an agreement.
Parts of the Washington foreign policy establishment have for weeks been urging the White House to blockade the strait in response to Iran’s imposition of restrictions on shipping there. If Tehran is going to stop others from using the strait, the argument went, it should not be able to export its own energy through it either.
Trump announced the blockade after 21 hours of talks between American and Iranian negotiators in Islamabad ended on Sunday without a deal. Vice-president JD Vance, who led the US delegation, said Iran had refused to commit to forgoing a nuclear weapon, rejecting what he called Washington’s “final and best offer”.
READ MORE
The Pakistani daily Dawn reports this morning that diplomats are working to bring Washington and Tehran back to the negotiating table before the ceasefire expires next Tuesday. The hope is that if they make some progress during a second meeting, the two sides will agree to extend the ceasefire by at least 45 days.
Although neither side has made public many details of last weekend’s negotiations, media reports suggest Vance offered an end to economic sanctions and integration into the regional and global economy if Iran agreed to US demands on the nuclear issue, the Strait of Hormuz and support for proxies such as Hamas and Hizbullah. Axios reported last night that the US proposed Iran should accept a 20-year moratorium on uranium enrichment and the removal of all highly enriched uranium from the country.
The Iranians countered with a shorter “single-digit” moratorium, according to the report and agreed to a “monitored process of down-blending” instead of the complete removal of highly enriched uranium. Turkish foreign minister Hakan Fidan, who is involved in efforts to bridge the gap, told Anadolu news agency he thought the Iranians would evaluate the US proposal and give their response in the coming days.
“Initial positions are always somewhat maximalist. Later, the parties try to find common ground with the support of mediators. As long as they have the intention to reach, maintain and permanently achieve a ceasefire. What I see is that both sides are sincere about the ceasefire,” he said.
“If the nuclear issue becomes an ‘all-or-nothing’ situation, especially regarding enrichment, I think we may encounter a serious obstacle. We will try to overcome this with the support of some mediators and other countries.”
One obstacle in the way of an agreement is Israel’s continued bombardment of Lebanon, which has already killed more than 2,000 people and which Iran insists should be covered by the current ceasefire. Israeli and Lebanese negotiators meet in Washington today and a positive outcome there could help to improve the atmosphere if there is a second round of talks between the US and Iran later this week.
Please let me know what you think and send your comments, thoughts or suggestions for topics you would like to see covered to denis.globalbriefing@irishtimes.com
