givesomefucks@lemmy.world
on 17 Jun 22:29
nextcollapse
Upon the signing of this M.O.U., 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 demining 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 discussion with other Persian Gulf littoral states in line with the applicable international law and the sovereign rights of coastal states of the Strait of Hormuz.
…
Literally saying Iran can charge tolls for any traffic thru the strait…
That’s a fucking huge amount of economic power, and everyone has to pay whatever they demand
International law doesn’t allow taking tolls on natural waterways that are international trade routes I’m pretty sure.
givesomefucks@lemmy.world
on 17 Jun 22:40
collapse
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 discussion with other Persian Gulf littoral states in line with the applicable international law and the sovereign rights of coastal states of the Strait of Hormuz.
That part just means they have to talk about it…
Like if I walked up to you and said I wanted your house. You 100% can say no, but we just had a dialogue about it
That meets the obligation
teamshinanagin@lemmy.world
on 17 Jun 23:18
collapse
NYT reporting this
Mr. Trump has said the passageway must be “permanently toll-free.” But Iran has said it plans to charge “fees” in exchange for unspecified “services” it provides there.
So definitely not a toll some other fee for providing some unspecified service…lol
WoodScientist@lemmy.world
on 18 Jun 03:58
nextcollapse
“We’ve filled the strait with a hundred thousands autonomous smart drones programmed to blow up any vessel they see. However, we’ll rent you this encrypted transponder that will keep the drones away. We’re not charging a toll. We’re just offering our anti-drone services for a reasonable fee. We won’t force you to pay it, you’re perfectly free to try your luck in the Strait.”
atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
on 18 Jun 11:55
collapse
“Protection”. Because you’ve got such a nice ship and it would be a real shame if anything were to happen to it…
WoodScientist@lemmy.world
on 18 Jun 03:54
nextcollapse
It’s one they have to exercise judiciously. Too high a toll and you just encourage the building of pipelines to get the oil out by land.
thisisbutaname@discuss.tchncs.de
on 18 Jun 08:39
collapse
It’s also a potential catalyst for more countries imposing tolls on the straits they control, the way they used to do in the past. If that ever happens it’d put a huge strain on global commerce.
Giving Iran a good deal was Trump’s only option to end this and I am very glad he chose to do that.
Kennedy chose to escalate in Vietnam. Ditto Jonson and Nixon. Bush stared the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, then chose to do a “surge” in Iraq. Obama had a “surge” in Afghanistan if you remember.
The counter factual is not US got a good deal, but US started a catastrophic escalation that leads to tens or hundreds of thousands of deaths before the US agrees to a bad deal.
Obviously, attacking Iran in the first place was a blunder, but after that, TACO was the best deal America was ever going to get.
CannonFodder@lemmy.world
on 18 Jun 00:08
nextcollapse
They could probably get free navigation in the straight, and get Iran to give up all nuke ambitions if they offered to disarm Israel.
WoodScientist@lemmy.world
on 18 Jun 04:00
collapse
Yeah, I would say, “you have to hand it to him,” but you don’t get points for selecting the least-bad option for a situation you are entirely responsible for.
brucethemoose@lemmy.world
on 18 Jun 03:38
collapse
The tone of mainstream outlets is wild:
On one hand, they cannot give Trump credit for de-escalating. Nor Iran. They just cannot do it.
…Even though this is far from over.
And on the other, they’re dancing around the the little detail that the US jumped into this for no reason, and ended in a worse position than we started, because Trump bailed on a better deal from his successor out of sheer spite.
threaded - newest
…
Literally saying Iran can charge tolls for any traffic thru the strait…
That’s a fucking huge amount of economic power, and everyone has to pay whatever they demand
International law doesn’t allow taking tolls on natural waterways that are international trade routes I’m pretty sure.
That part just means they have to talk about it…
Like if I walked up to you and said I wanted your house. You 100% can say no, but we just had a dialogue about it
That meets the obligation
NYT reporting this
So definitely not a toll some other fee for providing some unspecified service…lol
Possibly an ‘I won’t bloat up your dumb boat’ fee.
Possibly some form of insurance. “Be a real shame if someone were to lob a drone at your big, slow, expensive oil tanker…”
I can imagine the invoice.
“We’ve filled the strait with a hundred thousands autonomous smart drones programmed to blow up any vessel they see. However, we’ll rent you this encrypted transponder that will keep the drones away. We’re not charging a toll. We’re just offering our anti-drone services for a reasonable fee. We won’t force you to pay it, you’re perfectly free to try your luck in the Strait.”
“Protection”. Because you’ve got such a nice ship and it would be a real shame if anything were to happen to it…
It’s one they have to exercise judiciously. Too high a toll and you just encourage the building of pipelines to get the oil out by land.
It’s also a potential catalyst for more countries imposing tolls on the straits they control, the way they used to do in the past. If that ever happens it’d put a huge strain on global commerce.
Giving Iran a good deal was Trump’s only option to end this and I am very glad he chose to do that.
Kennedy chose to escalate in Vietnam. Ditto Jonson and Nixon. Bush stared the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, then chose to do a “surge” in Iraq. Obama had a “surge” in Afghanistan if you remember.
The counter factual is not US got a good deal, but US started a catastrophic escalation that leads to tens or hundreds of thousands of deaths before the US agrees to a bad deal.
Obviously, attacking Iran in the first place was a blunder, but after that, TACO was the best deal America was ever going to get.
They could probably get free navigation in the straight, and get Iran to give up all nuke ambitions if they offered to disarm Israel.
Yeah, I would say, “you have to hand it to him,” but you don’t get points for selecting the least-bad option for a situation you are entirely responsible for.
The tone of mainstream outlets is wild:
On one hand, they cannot give Trump credit for de-escalating. Nor Iran. They just cannot do it.
…Even though this is far from over.
And on the other, they’re dancing around the the little detail that the US jumped into this for no reason, and ended in a worse position than we started, because Trump bailed on a better deal from his successor out of sheer spite.