THE POWER OF WORDS
This week we have seen how words matter when trying to interpret the meaning of agreements. Mr. Trump claimed that when Iran attacked a tanker with a drone this week: “"Obviously, this is a foolish violation of our Ceasefire Agreement." Iran claimed that it was part of its “administration” of the strait. Here is the text from the MOU:
5. Upon the signing of this MOU, the Islamic Republic of Iran will make arrangements using its best efforts 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. The traffic of commercial vessels will immediately start, and considering the need for removing the technical and military obstacles, and de-mining by the Islamic Republic of Iran, will be instated within 30 days. The Islamic Republic of Iran will conduct dialogue with the Sultanate of Oman, to define the future administration and maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz, in discussions with other Persian Gulf Littoral States, in line with applicable international law and the sovereign rights of coastal states of the Strait of Hormuz.
If you read the text, you can see the problem. The U.S. reads the text as requiring Iran to reopen the passage within 30 days.
Iran reads the text as authorizing them to “make arrangements” for safe passage. Making those arrangements, from their reading, allows them to define where, how, and when boats can pass. Their interpretation allows them to restrict passage to routes that they can monitor and make safe, and the boat in question was passing through the Strait along the Omani coast, outside of their administrative zone and without their ability to guarantee safe passage. Since this occurred within the 30-day window established by the MOU, they appear to have some validity to this administrative claim.
I would point out two other issues raised inside this clause of the MOU.
First, the phrase, “with no charge for 60 days only, from the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Oman.” The text, as written, seems to provide that Iran is restricted to “no charge” for only 60 days. Had the text moved the comma from after “only” to before “only” the text would have read, “with no charge for 60 days, only from the Persian Gulf to Sea of Oman”.
As written the text seems to imply that at the end of 60 days Iran is free to impose fees.
Second, the text “The Islamic Republic of Iran will conduct dialogue with the Sultanate of Oman, to define the future administration and maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz.” The issue here, as you can read, is that the MOU seems to give Iran the authority to administer the Strait of Hormuz as long as it is done in conjunction with Oman.
“Administration and Maritime Services”. Maritime Services are internationally defined as a wide array of activities, logistics, and technical operations required to manage vessels and facilitate global trade. They ensure safe, efficient, and compliant movement of goods and people at sea.
The MOU provides that Iran, along with Oman, will control these Maritime Services, which could likely require fees to support those actions. This certainly sounds like giving Iran, with Oman, administrative control of the Strait of Hormuz moving forward.
Unfortunately, the negotiated framework for future actions has been agreed to by the U.S. and codified in this MOU. Sometimes, as Hamlet says “For ‘tis the sport to have the engineer, hoisted with his own petard.” (FYI, a “petard” is a small bomb, and the quote refers to a bomber blown up by his own bomb.)