By From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Donald Trump has reportedly told aides that he would be willing to end the war in Iran without securing the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.
In his first address to the nation since the start of the war, Trump claimed that the U.S. had decimated Iran and would strike the Islamic Republic “extremely hard” for the next two to three weeks. He claimed that almost all of the American military’s objectives in Iran had been met.
The U.S. President claimed that “tonight, I’m pleased to say that these core strategic objectives are nearing completion … In these past four weeks, our armed forces have delivered swift, decisive, overwhelming victories on the battlefield – victories like few people have ever seen before”.
The Strait has become a central anxiety for Washington’s allies since Tehran forced its effective closure with strikes on commercial shipping.
In peacetime, the waterway facilitates the transit of around a fifth of the world’s oil and gas. Its closure has forced oil prices up to a nearly four-year high, hurting consumers and businesses worldwide.
The U.S. and Israel have only intensified their strikes on Iran in a bid to bring the regime to the negotiating table. But after a month without achieving the stated aim, patience in the U.S. is wearing thin. However, Trump said Wednesday: “We are on the cusp of ending Iran’s sinister threat to America and the world. We have all the cards. They have none.”
Trump reassured the markets and voters Tuesday that U.S. forces will “be leaving very soon”, giving a timeframe of two to three weeks. He said that Iran “doesn’t have to make a deal” for the US to bow out.
“The countries of the world that … receive oil through the Hormuz Strait must take care of that passage,” Trump said. “Just take it, protect it, use it for yourselves.”
He also thanked “our allies in the Middle East – Israel, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, Kuwait and Bahrain,” saying: “They’ve been great, and we will not let them get hurt or fail in any way, shape or form.”
He also added: “We’re now totally independent of the Middle East, and yet we are there to help … We don’t have to be there. We don’t need their oil. We don’t need anything they have … We’re there to help our allies.”
Trump said the U.S.-Israeli military campaign in Iran, labelled Operation Epic Fury, “delivered swift, decisive, overwhelming victories on the battlefield, victories like few people have ever seen before”.
With the U.S. now considering a “no deal” exit strategy, focus turns to what would be the outcome of it leaving with the Strait of Hormuz issue unresolved. Here are three ways it could play out:
U.S. media reported Tuesday that America is increasingly doubtful that it will be able to promise to reopen the Strait as part of a deal with Iran to end the war.
Officials told the Wall Street Journal that Trump has told his aides he is willing to end the war without reopening Hormuz, and unnamed sources close to the discussions told CNN that top officials worry they will not be able to reopen the waterway within a previously set timeline of four to six weeks.
There is no precedent for a prolonged closure of the Strait, and Iran would struggle to justify and uphold one. But experts say the world can expect to pay more for energy if the war ends without a clear fix.
Dan Brouillette, a former U.S. energy secretary during Trump’s first term, told Fox Business that leaving without a deal would be “highly problematic”.
“If that were to happen, Iran gets exactly what it wants. It gets a ceasefire, it gets to keep this chokehold, and it looks more like a timeout than a deal. You’re simply going to push this issue into a future administration and into future economies.”
He said there would be no way around $4 per gallon gasoline and $100/barrel oil, and added that other vital products like urea for farming and helium for data centres also pass through the Strait.
Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, told CNN that leaving without a deal “would basically be surrendering the strait to Iran and guaranteeing higher energy prices because Iran would be free to attack vessels and charge tolls”.
The Strait of Hormuz lies in Iran’s territorial waters, but is viewed as an international waterway and is normally open to all ships. Iran has imposed a selective blockade on the channel, making deals with some friendly nations to secure safe passage since the war erupted – a move it now hopes to enshrine in law.
Lloyd’s List has reported that since the conflict erupted, a small number of ships have been able to transit through pre-approved routes under an IRGC ‘toll booth’ system.
Iranian lawmaker, Alaeddin Boroujerdi, claims that Iran was charging $2m for safe passage. A source told Bloomberg that Iran was considering formalising the fee as part of any peace deal with the U.S.
Such a move would probably be illegal under maritime law and draw round criticism. Either way, a reduced supply of oil and gas would likely see Asian powers swallow up what remains, leaving Europe priced out, even if it relies less directly on Gulf energy.
Matthew Oresman, geopolitical expert and partner at international law firm Pillsbury, told The Independent that if Trump does back out without ensuring free passage for all nations, European, Asian and Middle Eastern countries “would be left to negotiate transit agreements directly with Iran, securing safe passage by effectively paying ransom”.
He said “the long-term impact of leaving the Strait insecure is a recipe for long-term disruption, including higher energy and commodity prices and an ever-present casus belli for future conflict.”
Governments from Europe and Asia are already looking at ways to avoid scenarios one and two.
Sir Keir Starmer said Wednesday that the UK has brought together 35 nations aligned on a single push for “maritime security across the Gulf” and that the Foreign Secretary will host a meeting with them this week aimed at reopening the Strait.
The Prime Minister said the coalition would “assess all viable diplomatic and political measures we can take to restore freedom of navigation, guarantee the safety of trapped ships and seafarers and to resume the movement of vital commodities”.
Oresman said: “The alternative, of course, would be for these countries to risk their own people and assets to destroy Iran’s military capabilities targeting the Strait of Hormuz.”
But there is no suggestion that any of the coalition members would seek out military confrontation with Iran if the U.S. withdraws its navy, and recent polling shows the British public remains opposed to the idea of joining offensive strikes.
The Ministry of Defence has already sent military planners to U.S. Central Command to review options for ensuring transit through the Strait. But tangible progress towards securing a deal without U.S. help remains unclear.
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
