By Saamia Jahangir
The Strait of Hormuz acts as a major strategic leverage for the stakeholders involved along with acting as the busiest oil transit route. Global power dynamics of the 21st century welcome with open arms, the ones who are strategically and economically equipped.
America, being the sole “Hegemon” of the Uni-polar world, keeps its dominating influence through all the regions of the world. Same is the case in the Middle East where the three major stakeholders of the critical gateway of the World’s oil industry, Strait of Hormuz, Iran, United Arab Emirates and Oman act as either allies or adversaries of America.
The recent developments have put Oman and UAE with America on one side of the equation and Iran on the other side. However, Iran enjoys a critical political leverage in the region by exercising significant geographical control in the Strait of Hormuz. Under the rules of International Law, the shipping lanes of the Strait are located within the territorial waters of Iran and Oman. Iran controls the more strategically critical path of the Strait, making it a major stakeholder. The Strait of Hormuz is important because it is a geographic chokepoint and a main artery for the transport of oil from the Middle East. Former Iranian Prime Minister called this chokepoint as:
The jugular of the global economy
Iran faces immense pressure in the form of economic sanctions in the wake of its nuclear program. Its business and trade ties are often cut down with the rest of the world. However, it continues to stand firm against the global super power. One of the reasons for Iran’s steadfastness is the political influence it can administer over Strait of Hormuz due to its geo-strategic location. Since the very beginning, tensions have surfaced over the region time after time. Numerous conflicts continue to endanger the global economy and peace till date.
This has also led Iranian administration to release threats to close the transit path of the strait. However, analysts suggest that the closure of the Hormuz is chatter far from reality. This is due to the fact that nor Iranian economy cannot survive without the smooth passage of oil transit route neither will the international community allow it. However, Iran will continue to give small blows in the region to maintain its influence and power in the region. The world will continue to face the threat of a military adventure in case bilaterally beneficial provisions are not developed.
Chokepoints:
Chokepoints are a vital transit routes for the international maritime trade and business. It is necessary that the smooth flow of ships continue to take place as international trade is highly dependent upon these chokepoints. Even a momentary closure of any world’s eight key maritime chokepoints can disrupt the global economy, effecting millions of people throughout the globe. Global food supply and energy market are highly reliant on them.
U.S. Energy Information Administration defines chokepoints as:
A narrow channel along widely used global sea routes that is critical to energy security
Throughout the global, around 200 canal or straits are present, however, only few are termed as chokepoints, which derive their strategic significance from the fact that their closure can stop the sea traffic carrying millions of tons of oil per day. Hence, tensions can rise emerging from the global power dynamics revolving around the chokepoints.
International Law has been providing protection to these internationally significant chokepoints for a long time. These are the points through which all the nations have an equal access for passage. Law of Sea Conventions further ensured flexibility for the nations in 1982 by providing aviation routes over these straits.
One of the most important chokepoint globally, through which most of the international oil consumption gets transported, is the Strait of Hormuz, also known as the Strait of Ormuz.
Geography of Strait of Hormuz:
The well balanced geography of Strait of Hormuz has bestowed the stakeholders with immense political and economic leverage. Right between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman, the hook-shaped waterway between Iran and Oman known as Strait of Hormuz lays acting as the flashlight of global geo-strategic politics. It acts as the sole transit route from Persian Gulf to the open ocean. On the north coast of the chokepoint, Iran holds the position of an important stakeholder. United Arab Emirates, along with Oman, have a control over the south coast of the strait. In terms of unit of measurement of territorial waters, the Strait of Hormuz is approximately of 90 nautical miles (167 km).
The width of the strait varies along the length, ranging from 52 nautical miles (96 km) to 21 nautical miles (39 km). Its narrowness has given it a significant place in global dynamics of politics. It connects the Gulf countries like Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar and United Arab Emirates to the Arabian Sea and beyond on sea routes. The islands of Qeshm, Hormuz and Hengam are located in this domain which can be used by the connecting countries for defense and economic purposes. The narrow path of the Hormuz compels the ships to confine to their strict shipping lanes, carrying the largest crude carriers on Earth. Collision of ships is avoided by adopting the technique of Traffic Separation Scheme. Under this scheme, separate lanes are used by the inbound and out bound ships. Each lane is two miles wide and is separated by a median of two mile width.
Geo-strategic Significance of Hormuz:
Through the sea routes, Strait of Hormuz is the only viable solution to transport people and goods to the rest of the world in the most effective way. Millions of barrels of oil pass through the strait throughout the day towards the main markets of Asia, Europe, South America and beyond. In 2018 alone, a milestone of 211 million barrels of oil and other petrol liquids passing through this chokepoint per day was achieved. In each barrel, 159 liters of oil is present which surpasses the figure of 3 billion liters in total. This equals 21% of daily petrol consumption of the world. Moreover, this strait was able to transmit 1/3 of world’s sea transmitted oil. Being the biggest exporter of liquefied natural gas (LNG), Qatar was able to export 1/4 of the world’s total through this strategically significant maritime path.
Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) exports most of the oil through this trade route. The biggest importer of oil through the Strait of Hormuz is Asia. In 2018, 76% of crude oil passing through this strait was transported towards the Asian markets. There are 5 major rising economies which welcome this oil, that are, China, India, South Korea, Japan and Singapore. The figures of oil passage through this route are the highest than any other chokepoint. Strait of Malacca is considered the second busiest route with a carrying capacity of 15.7 million barrels per day.
In the realm of fiscal logistics, Strait of Hormuz has achieved a vital position as any stoppage in the passage, even temporarily, will result in sky high shipping costs throughout the world. The supply chain can be delayed and become ineffective for days. As a result, the energy prices around the globe would get out of control. As a result of any disruption, the countries who rely on receiving the oil and the ones whose economy is dependent on selling this oil will face damaging effects.
Hence, Strait of Hormuz has no other practical alternatives. Only Saudi Arabia and UAE can bypass the route by shipping outside of the Persian Gulf but even this is not effective enough. In contrast to the 21 million oil transfer through the Hormuz, Saudi Arabia can only transmit 5 million barrels per day through it East-West pipeline to its port on The Red Sea. Similarly, UAE utilizes its Abu Dhabi pipeline to transport oil directly to the Gulf of Oman, pumping 1.5 million barrels of oil per day. Other pipelines in the region are also present; however, they are comparatively small crossing into national boundaries. Hence, they are useless considering the political disagreements among the states in the region.
Major Stakeholders:
International Law allows control of 12 nautical miles from the coastline of each country. At its narrowest point, the strait and its shipping lanes lie majorly in the control of Iran and Oman. Ships along with the military vessels are permitted by the international conventions to pass through a state’s territorial waters. For proper navigation, the provisions provided by United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) are undertaken. Ships are allowed to pass the strait through the territorial waters of Iran and Oman based on the rules of transit passage.
Transit passage, a rule of Law of the Sea, permits the vessels and aircrafts for transiting from one side of the economic zones to the other. Entire strait is under the obligation to fulfill these provisions. Even warships, auxiliaries and military aircrafts are granted a continuous, uninterrupted passage. Most of the countries, including America ratifies to the provisions of the conventions.
However, Iran amended the status of the Strait legally and politically in 1959. The area beyond the coastal river was expanded to 12 nautical miles and an announcement was made that Iran will only allow the transit by innocent passage rule. According to this concept of the law of the sea, a vessel or an aircraft will only be able to pass through the strait under certain limitations. Following the footsteps of Iran, in 1972, Oman also extended its territorial sea by 12 nautical miles leading to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz by their combined territorial waters.
The time period of 1970’s regarding the route passage went smoothly as no interruption was experienced by the warships from either Iran or Oman. However, 1980’s witnessed a shift in events when law practice was renewed. Oman took an initiation in 1981 and confirmed the permission of only innocent passage along with a necessity of prior permission for the passage of foreign warships to travel across territory of Oman. Similarly in 1982, Iran issued the following statement:
“Only states parties to the Law of the Sea Convention shall be entitled to benefit from the contractual rights created therein including the right of transit passage through straits used for international navigation”
However, a decade late in 1993, Iran enacted an inclusive law whose provisions were in contrast to UNCLOS. Most important provision was the need for permission for the warships, submarines and nuclear powered ships prior to observing innocent passage through territorial passage of Iran. Iran claims sovereignty over some islands in the region too.
In this scenario, The United States of America has refused to accept any of the provisions issues by either Iran or Oman. The forerunners of international political dynamics like America and Saudi Arabia are unwilling to overlook the political, strategic and economic gains linked with the geography of the strait. Consequently, politics of the region affects the stability of Strait of Hormuz as a shipping route. USA continues to challenge both nations till date giving rise to several conflicts in the region as Iran has no intention of backing off from its territorial seas.
Iran has been in a pressure drill to terminate its nuclear program as West believes that it is trying to create nuclear weapons. Conversely, Iran insists that it is only working to strengthen its nuclear power and excel in medical research. To defy the pressure, Iran has gained strength over the strait. A Tehran newspaper quotes the words of a Revolutionary Guard commander who says:
Government leaders would not allow a drop of oil to pass through the strait if our enemies block the export of our oil
Iran has threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz several times in the wake of the rising tensions. Upon conflicts, the oil minister and other government officials have warned that an attack on Iran would create havoc in global oil supply. Iran continues to battle against a coalition of states till date.
Tanker War:
The foremost battle involving Strait of Hormuz took place during Iraq-Iran War in 1984. This war has been compared with the severity of World War 1 considering the modes of tactics employed. The Tanker War phase was a dominant phase of this war. Iraq wanted to choke Iran’s strategic standing so it attacked the oil terminal and oil tankers at the Kharg Island of Iran. Both the state’s tried to sink each other’s energy exports. Iran placed sea mines in the path of ships and Iraq fired missiles at them. The main motive behind Saddam Hussein’s act was to involve America and its allies by closing the most import chokepoint in the world. This highlights the global significance of the Hormuz as no nation allowed to risk the million barrel oil transit even when millions of lives were being taken in the Iraq-Iran War.
US-Iran Conflict:
The major players in the Strait of Hormuz decade long tensions are America and Iran. Their ongoing conflicts have the potential to escalate and to choke the global economy to from the very beginning; both nations have found them in the whirlpool of anxiety and uncertainty. Starting in 1988 from Operation Praying Mantis, U.S. Navy inflicted a single day battle in and around the strait. It was a retaliatory attack by the U.S. forces in response to Iran’s strike. It was followed by yet another misadventure, Downing of Iran Air 655, in July, 1988 killing all 290 passengers and crew members onboard. After several years, in 2008, U.S.-Iran Naval Dispute caught the world’s anxious attention.
Several stand-offs took place between the Iranian speedboats and U.S. warships in the Strait of Hormuz. This continued to highlight the strategic significance this chokepoint held and continues to hold till date on a worldwide scale. Accusations from both sides fanned the flames. However, the major dispute was yet to come in 2011-2012. After the threat of Iranian Vice President regarding the closure of Strait of Hormuz following U.S. economic sanctions, the dispute arose in the late 2011. Later, Iran conducted several naval drills and missile tests.
Iran was warned openly by the U.S. and its allies to refrain from any misadventure. Along with this, a fleet of warships was hurled to deter Iranian attempt to block the strait. The dispute surfaced when European Union imposed sanctions on Iran forbidding it to export oil to Europe from Iran. It was supposed to demotivate Iran from its urge to pursue nuclear program. However, oil export is extremely important for the economy of Iran as it contributes to 80% of its public revenue.
Trump administration’s exit from the Iran deal and “maximum pressure” campaign have soar the tensions between Tehran and Washington in the recent years. US administration deployed the US troops in the region, which was being called by Iran as “a very dangerous game”. Moreover, the oil tanker attacks in July, 2019 raised the speculations regarding the involvement of Iran. This whole situation has continued to raise tensions in the region and a progression towards a miscalculated and designed military conflict is feared.
For years, Iran has been feeling the pressure of the economic sanctions imposed by Iran. Iranian government considers the stern behavior of Washington as an economic warfare as Trump administration shows no flexibility in its pressure campaign. According to a diplomat of Middle East:
“The aim of the maximum pressure strategy is to get it all”
This includes U.S. aspiration for Iran to halt its missile development, abandon its nuclear program and cease its proxy activities. The Iranian administration is convinces that after the episode of Libya and US withdrawal from Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, disarmament is unacceptable for the people and government of Iran but a necessity for survival. Pressure continues to rise but there are enormous differences between the both states and no doubt the Trump administration has failed yet again to provide a comprehensive mutually accepted relationship with Tehran.
Most recently in 2019, the tensions rose after the attack on oil tankers named Front Altair and Kokuka Courageous. Later, the U.S. administration blamed Iran for the attacks, which was denied by Tehran. Nevertheless, in case of a war with the U.S., triggered by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, Iran will be immensely injured economically and politically.
Iran-UAE Tussle:
The tussle between Iran and United Arab Emirates is yet another struggle for strategic and political gains in the most important chokepoint of the world. In the 1990s, disagreements between Iran and the United Arab Emirates over control of several small islands surrounded by the Strait of Hormuz resulted in additional treats to close the strait. By 1992 however, Iran took control of the islands but tensions remained in the region all the way through the 1990s.
Located in the strategic zone near the mouth of the Strait of Hormuz, both Iran and United Arab Emirates have a tussle to get hold of the islands within the region known as the Abu Musa, Greater Tunb and the Lesser Tunb. The control of these islands would permit the dominant state to monitor the passage of the ships through the Gulf. This will provide a huge strategic gain which compels both states to stay adamant towards their claims.
Since, 1971, Iran has not shown any flexibility regarding its stance. With its glamorous past of strong hold over the entire region, rich natural resources, strong and autonomous military forces, gifted geographical depth and enormous population, Iran’s motives for the new horizon stays uncompromising. It considers its rule over the islands as “absolute” and “certain” in all respects. However, it offers to conduct bilateral talks but that too for the “clearing of misunderstanding”.
Iran puts forth its arguable stance that if those islands truly belonged to United Arab Emirates, then the Arab state’s support should have been evident for Iraq, Libya, South Yemen and Algeria when, with the help of Soviet Union, these countries confidently took their plea to the doorsteps of United Nations Security Council in the 1970’s. This claim of the Iranian officials is refuted by the Emirati officials claiming that supporting a socialist camp in the wake of 1971-1972 was impossible for the state considering the rising tribulations between the both camps.
Since the beginning of 2006, Abu Dhabi has brought a change in its strategy by referring to the international community for its years of unheard woes. It seeks to gain maximum benefit from the distorted image of Tehran around the globe. This tactical change of strategy is adopted by Abu Dhabi to maximize its strategic and political gains. Moreover, mediation through third party is also sorted by the UAE officials. In this regard, those countries are approached who have a healthy relation with Iran so that the political decisions of Iran can be modified and show some flexibility over its decades long stern stance.
However, the situation is unable to melt down as Iran has no intentions to re-evaluate its strategy and political approach. The methods of internationalization and securitization are going in vain as there exists a highly political uncertainty in the region. With huge economic sanctions over Iran, the country considers the upholding of its stance as a matter of life and death for itself. The political leverage it gets by controlling major portion of the Strait of Hormuz is nonnegotiable for the public and the government of the state. Amidst the air of political tensions, the administration in Iran is well aware that any alternative path adopted will infuriate the public and the opposition will make the maximum benefit from this situation. The opposition will be all ready to accuse the government of putting national integrity and sovereignty at stake in case of any flexibility in the official stance regarding the islands.
In this context, the Western powers will never in a million years wish to alienate the public of Iran by granting a full open support for the United Arab Emirates over these islands. This is because, it will be considered as a direct challenge to the people of administration of Iran. This whole situation points towards a fact that the tussle between Iran and the Emirates is going to continue for a long time in the coming future and it may disturb the bilateral ties from time to time.
Iran-Saudi Conflict:
Middle East is known as one of the most complex regions in the world n the contemporary age. Among all the uprising civil wars and insurgencies, 2 countries are always at the centre of it all and those are Iran and Saudi Arabia. Both these states, mostly due to their high number of Shia and Sunni communities respectively, never directly indulged in an open war. However, both are involved in a huge network of proxy warfare. Over the region of Strait of Hormuz too, Saudi and Iranian sides have contradicting views.
Saudi claims some region of the Strait of Hormuz which is abruptly denied by the Iranian officials. Over the years, both the countries have been involved in several skirmishes. Their adversaries date back to over 40 years in which both nations have come as far as several serious deadlocks, disrupting the peace and stability of the region. Both strive for maximum strategic, geopolitical and economic influence in the region. In this scenario, Strait of Hormuz provides a valuable leverage to the Iranian people. In the strait, the largest exports among the OPEC come from Saudi Arabia and Iraq. On one side of the strait are United Arab Emirates and Oman. Both these states have strong ties with America and Saudi Arabia. The presence of allies provides a little leverage to Iranian adversaries.
The Strait of Hormuz came under a spotlight when two Saudi oil tankers were attacked near the coast of UAE in June, 2019. The tankers were on their way to transport crude oil to US customers from the Saudi soil. In this fiasco, US blamed the Iranian administration for sparking the tensions; however, Iran had seriously denied the blames. Yet, as a show of force, the Saudi ally, America, sent more troops in the region raising the tensions. As a result of this whole situation, the oil prices around the world wee disturbed and price of Brent crude jumped over two whole dollars. Riyadh responded by saying that it was an assault over global energy infrastructure and:
“Dangerous threat t safety of navigation and international security”
The new leadership of Saudi Arabia has developed a more aggressive approach towards Iran which is emboldened by a similar rhetoric as of Trump administration. Iran also does not adopt a policy of silence but openly warns Saudi Arabia against its hawkishness. Many analysts fear that these skirmishes can escalate into more serious tensions. Saudi-Iranian rivalry has become a fight over influence, making whole region a battlefield.
Kenneth Pollack, the Former Persian Gulf military analyst sums up the situation by saying:
“Both the Saudi’s and Iranians see the civil wars both as tremendous threats and also potentially enormous opportunities”.
This show how important of a region is Strait of Hormuz that it can disrupt the normal global functioning if its course is disturbed. Hence, strategically, it is the flashpoint of global political dynamics.
Current Strategic Dynamics:
The contemporary state of affairs related to the Strait of Hormuz and the prospects of it being a nuclear flashpoint depend upon the relations between the two main contesting States- USA and Iran. The year 2020 began with a near catastrophe situation when on 8 January 2020, US President Trump unilaterally decided to assassinate Qasem Soleimani, an Iranian major general in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Donald Trump undertook this daring assassination on account of alleged claim that the general was responsible for the death of millions of people, directly and indirectly.
Such irresponsible and impulsive attack was responded by Iran with the IRGC launched missile attacks against two Iraqi military bases housing U.S. soldiers. Fortunately, the crisis did not escalate from that moment forth. However, had the situation been any different, the global peace would have been shattered with the US-Iran tussle. In case USA attacked Iran, chocking Strait of Hormuz would have been the only option left with Iran to cash any chance of survival, for the poor country is no match for USA’s military and economic might.
In the present situation of heavy US sanctions on Iran, this strategic chokepoint can be the next nuclear flash point. For instance, on 22 April 2020, President Trump announced:
“I have instructed the U.S. Navy to shoot down and destroy any and all Iranian gunboats if they harass our ships at sea”.
As a response, the Iranian IRGC Commander Hossein Salami proclaimed that:
“We have ordered our naval units to target any vessel or combat unit of the terrorist U.S. forces who want to threaten the security of our non-combat ships or combat vessels”.
This confrontational tone of discourse between the representatives of these two states reflects that US-Iran war can be an unfortunate possibility. If the world goes down that road, Strait of Hormuz will become the most strategically significant location in the world as it is the only vulnerability of USA the Iranians have. Moreover, in view of the rising tensions as well as the nature of the narrow waterway, where shipping lanes in either direction are only two miles wide, , incidents are almost unavoidable. Therefore, the current scenario of the Strait can never said to be free of any sort of threats, currently as well as in the future.
Future Prospects of the region:
Despite the on-going threats by Iranian administration to close the strait and frequently rising tensions, the Strait of Hormuz has never been closed off. The experts are of the view that there exist minimal chances of its closure anywhere in the future too. This is highly due to the fact that the economy of Iran is highly dependent on the smooth passage of the strait. The shipment of oil through the strait maintains the balancing effect in the economy of Iran. Moreover, any closure will generate unprecedented tensions around the globe. It will infuriate the global powers and its allies and would likely to advance towards a war. It will also cause the enragement of rising economic and political giants like China and India which will totally isolate the Iranian regime turning out to be catastrophe for the developing state.
Instead of closing the strait, the experts are of the opinion that the passage of the shipment in the region can be disturbed by other tactics of Iran. This may include acts like seizure of ships or raiding facilities.
Afshon Ostovar, a senior analyst at the nonprofit research organization CAN say:
“The Iranians would probably adopt a combination of things that would not really close the Hormuz Strait but make traversing it very difficult and risky so that people would not go through”
Analysts fear that the ways which can be adopted by Iran to showcase its power can include seizing ships to raiding facilities offshore. Small ships can be used to damage the tankers or slow down shipping of merchant ships by boarding. These all acts include in the vicinity of harassment. These attacks can be adopted to reduce the traffic along the Strait of Hormuz. This will eventually increase the insurance cost of the shippers. The important point is that it is not necessary that these kinds of attacks have to occur near the strait which will eventually confuse the parties. Although these tactics are possible but are not easy.
Anthony Cordesman, a strategy expert with the Center for Strategic and International Studies say:
“Everyone uses ‘close the gulf’ as sort of a slogan, but Iran has demonstrated that it would look at a whole range of different ways to put pressure on the Arab Gulf states and the West”.
In the light of recent developments, doubts are intensifying about potential military conflict in one of the world’s most important chokepoints for oil shipments. It would have a main shock on global oil prices. Even though oil markets have not been defiantly affected by latest events, insurance costs for shipping companies transiting the Persian Gulf have already heightened.
Concluding Remarks:
Years of conflicts and skirmishes have led to the loss of millions of lives and billions of dollars. The U.S.-Iran conflict has affected the overall economic well being of an average Iranian citizen. Similarly, numerous times, it has fanned the speculations of an onset of war. In the same way, the conflicts in the Middle East originating from the geo-strategic gains of the Strait of Hormuz has sparked fury among the local public and put million of lives at risk. Moreover, an unsteady global economy can infringe the lives of average people in both developing and developed nations.
On the brighter side, the Strait of Hormuz has a potential for an extremely well coordinated mount in the global economy. The only route to open ocean for over one-sixth of global oil production and one-third of global liquefied natural gas must be utilized for the best interests of all the nations. Global peace and security is highly dependent upon the mature outlook of the stakeholders of the Strait of Hormuz; otherwise, the world is going to witness an unprecedented havoc.