The recent attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz have raised concerns about the ongoing peace negotiations between the United States and Iran. The Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway linking Gulf oil producers to the open ocean, has become a focal point of these talks due to its strategic importance and the potential for Iran to impose fees or restrictions on shipping. The attacks, which occurred as funeral processions were held for the late Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, demonstrate Iran's willingness to use its control over the strait as a bargaining chip in the peace process.
The UK Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) reported that a tanker was struck by a projectile, causing a fire, while moving southbound about 8 nautical miles off the coast of Limah in Oman. Iranian television claimed that the LNG tanker ignored warnings, but Tehran did not directly claim responsibility. The ship, Al Rekayyat, was carrying liquefied natural gas and sent out distress signals when it was hit. Another source suggested that the ship might be at risk of exploding due to a fire in its engine room.
A second ship, a Saudi-flagged crude oil tanker, was also damaged in the Strait of Hormuz when the IRGC fired missiles. Hossein Royvaran, a Tehran-based analyst, suggested that the Qatari tanker might have been targeted because it strayed into an area where Iranian teams were performing mine-clearing operations. The IRGC has released a map showing a safe route through the strait for shipping traffic it has approved, but it has not confirmed the presence of mines in the strait.
The attacks come as sensitive peace negotiations continue between the United States and Iran to bring a lasting end to their war, which began on February 28. One of the key sticking points in the talks is the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran effectively closed to shipping after US-Israeli strikes began. The war has been paused under the MoU signed last month, which provided 60 days for negotiations for a permanent deal. However, a round of indirect talks in Qatar concluded last week with no sign of headway towards a lasting peace.
One issue is whether Iran will charge fees to ships using the strait in the future, something the US strongly rejects. Mohsen Milani, a professor of politics at the University of South Florida, suggests that Iran is weaponising Hormuz geographically to bolster its bargaining power. Trump has repeatedly threatened to resume bombing if Iran does not make a deal, while Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi claims that the recent funeral processions have demonstrated Iranians' unity and that negotiations on a final deal will not commence if threats continue.
The attacks on shipping in the strait could have significant implications for the peace process. They demonstrate Iran's willingness to use its control over the strait as a bargaining chip and highlight the contentious nature of the agreement between the US and Iran. The vague wording relating to provisions for the strait is a key issue, and the potential for Iran to impose fees or restrictions on shipping could further complicate the negotiations. The attacks also underscore the importance of the Strait of Hormuz as a strategic waterway and the need for a lasting peace agreement between the two countries.
