[Today’s Iran war post launched before complete because scheduled commitments. Please return at 8:00 AM EDT or refresh this page then for the final version]
We had said this Iran War would not end in a negotiated settlement. That prediction seems to be coming to pass. Less than Trump’s inauspicious execution of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in Versailles, the two sides are engaging in escalating attacks. Many Iran-backers were disappointed that Iran had not taken any action over flagrant Israel violations of the MOU by continuing to raze southern Lebanon save stern finger-wagging.1
However, the US has made it easy for Iran to formally ditch the MOU if Iran determines that that is the best way to proceed. Escalating attacks and counter-fire between the US and Iran, Iran maintaining only it controls the Strait of Hormuz even as the US has made an escort on the Oman side of four tankers. Even though the Navy seems very unlikely to be able to regularize this activity, one can expect it will keep the oil market happy.
For a bit more on the latest developments: Even though we have argued that Iran lacked a sound basis for sending a drone into a ship transiting the Strait of Hormuz on the Oman side, meaning in Oman waters, when Oman had not given Iran authorization to engage in any operation there. David Pyne, in a fresh talk with Nima, argued that the US attacks on Iran following the Iran drone hit were unwarranted. The ship was Singapore flagged, so the US has no responsibility to protect it, and took such minor damage that it was able to continue on its voyage.
The short version of what happened next was the US attacked four sites in Iran, claiming they were drone bases and storage. Iran denied that they could be targeted (those spots are apparently underground) but conceded the US had damaged a communications tower. Iran then attacked the US operations in Bahrain (as if there are any left) but also hit a Panama-flagged VLCC and set it on fire. Even so, this looked like largely performative exchanges even if some was done.
But Trump decided to ratchet up:
The second round of strikes on Iran were harsher than the first.
Fox reporting the US is carrying out a new round of air strikes against Iran right now: This seems to be escalating and throwing into question whether this ceasefire is going to hold pic.twitter.com/PORyarq2TG
— Acyn (@Acyn) June 27, 2026
US AND IRAN EXCHANGE STRIKES AS CEASEFIRE FRAYS
US CENTCOM hit 10 Iranian military targets overnight on drone storage, air defence, surveillance and minelaying sites near the Strait of Hormuz
Trigger was Iran's drone strike on MT Kiku, a Panama-flagged tanker carrying 2 million… pic.twitter.com/4zx7SaQGQV
— Nabila Jamal (@nabilajamal_) June 28, 2026
And Iran has quickly hit back. From Aljazeera’s landing page as of 2:00 AM EDT:
- The US has bombed Iran for a second day, hitting Qeshm Island and the cities of Sirik and Bandar-e Lengeh, after a drone attack on a commercial vessel near the Strait of Hormuz.
- Iran says it has launched retaliatory attacks on US forces in Bahrain and Kuwait and warns of a “crushing response” to further attacks.
And on the state of Strait of Hormuz transits. Note the first tweet is roughly 8 hours before the first post launch time:
My analysis of the Strait of Hormuz over the last 24 hours.
If the tankers use the Iran route, they are dominantly Iran-related. If the tankers use the Oman route, they are not, and never sanctioned.
I have heard from ship owners that most tankers cannot use the Iran route… pic.twitter.com/9LnQkGuBv4
— HFI Research (@HFI_Research) June 28, 2026
Earlier the US escorted one tanker out:
One tanker passing through with all of those assets is not a proof of concept. It’s one success and no more. Unless Iran attempted to stop the vessel by force and failed, it’s only a proof that Iran did not try to do anything to stop it.
That is an enormous amount of resources… https://t.co/ayTFx0zw6t
— Daniel Davis Deep Dive (@DanielLDavis1) June 27, 2026
As far as I can tell, the total is now four. The fact of inbound transits is significant:
Two oil tankers and two LPG carriers are crossing the Strait of Hormuz **inbound** via the Omani route with their AIS turned on (under heavy US Navy / Airforce watch). Washington trying hard to keep the Omani route on.
— Javier Blas (@JavierBlas) June 28, 2026
I suspect we will hear a lot more from the US soon, if nothing else via Sunday political talk shows. But in the meantime, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has thrown down a hard marker, that Iran will control the Strait of Hormuz. From Iran Embassy in Slovenia on Twitter:
·
Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi):
🔹Under the memorandum of understanding, the Strait of #Hormuz will return to its pre-war operating capacity within 30 days under the management adopted by Iran and after the obstacles are removed by the Islamic Republic of Iran.
🔹These arrangements are currently being implemented, and responsibility for them rests solely with the Islamic Republic of Iran. No other institution or country bears responsibility in this regard.
🔹According to the memorandum of understanding signed between Iran and the United States, any interference in this matter, or any attempt to establish new or separate arrangements from those currently being implemented by the Islamic Republic of Iran, will only complicate the situation, delay the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, and increase tensions.
🔹As we witnessed over the past two nights, incidents in the Strait of Hormuz have already contributed to rising tensions and confrontations.
🔹I call on all parties not to interfere in the management of the Strait of #Hormuz or in the arrangements being made by the Islamic Republic of Iran for its reopening. They should abide by the signed memorandum of understanding and not allow it to deviate from its intended course.
The IRCG has also issued fresh warnings. From Aljazeera’s live feed:
IRGC warns it will ‘respond even more forcefully’
Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has pledged to meet any US attacks with a more forceful response as tit-for-tat strikes continue in the Gulf.
“As we predicted, the enemy is an enemy that breaks its commitments, is deceitful, and cannot be trusted. At any moment, at any stage of the negotiations, it may take certain actions,” IRGC spokesperson Hossein Mohebi told state-run SNN TV.
“Whatever action the enemy takes in this regard, we have responded to it, and we will respond to it. We repeat: If the enemy breaks its commitments and violates the ceasefire, we will respond more strongly than before, and we stress we will respond even more forcefully. We regard such moves by the enemy as natural because we know the enemy’s nature,” Mohebi said.
A wee issue is that on top of the US clearing digging to undermine that, the Gulf States are also opposed. They do not want to become Iran’s hostages.2
Jeff Currie so far has looked a bit overly bullish on the timing of the oil crunch, but that does not make him directionally incorrect:
Commodities expert Jeff Currie on the oil market and Strait of Hormuz traffic:
“There’s only two little shipping lanes that are open. You still can’t get much more than a trickle out.” pic.twitter.com/lrMwEnnlCb
— Steve Hanke (@steve_hanke) June 28, 2026
Strait of Hormuz, June 27.
Outbound: 18 vessels, 1 running dark. Inbound: 22. Outbound wet cargo ~4.12M barrels, ~3.91M crude (@Vortexa).At dawn, a general cargo ship and a crude tanker began transit and turned back. An OFAC-sanctioned tanker ran inbound with AIS on.
At Kharg,… pic.twitter.com/obb3OJ68GZ
— Windward (@WindwardAI) June 28, 2026
Before the second Iran retaliation, Anthony Aguilar discussed what he made of the US operation with Mario Nawfal. Aguilar contends that the strikes looked pre-planned:
Daniel Davis, after the second round of US strikes, questioned what the US thought it was doing, since the US is not able to subdue Iran before and remains critically low on weapons:
It may be that this escalation is the result of Trump being unable to cope with his inability to dominate Iran and is lashing out. Trump can be relied upon to be his worst enemy.
But it may be that the US is fully cognizant of the fact that their ability to bomb Iran with conventional weapons is even lower than before, due both to depleted supplies and as Davis adds, psychological exhaustion of front line forces. I am concerned that the US and Israel have a different sort of attack at ready, say yet another futile decapitation campaign or perhaps a massive cyber strike. 3
From Aljazeera’s live feed, confirming our reading at the opening of this post:
US ‘trying to find its way out of MoU, while obliging Iran to its end of terms’:
Hassan Ahmadian, an associate professor at the University of Tehran, says the attacks could set off a domino effect of strikes between the US and Iran.
“I think we’re up for escalation because, obviously, the Iranians will retaliate,” he told Al Jazeera.
Ahmadian argued that Article 5 of the MoU says that “Iran will make the arrangements for the safe passage of commercial ships” for 60 days, and afterwards, it will be “Iran and Oman that will make the arrangements”.
“And now, the United States wants different arrangements in place as opposed to the MoU that it itself signed,” he said. “What we see is the United States trying to find its way out of this memorandum of understanding, while obliging Iran to its end of the terms.”
The US has done the same in Lebanon by brokering a new framework agreement, he said.
Ahmadian added that the Iranians “will not let go of this”.
“They want only commercial ships to pass through the strait, so any ship that doesn’t coordinate might be a military one, might carry military stuff. The Iranians do not want this,” he said.
“There’s a logic behind Iran insisting that safe passage should be arranged by them, and there should be only commercial ships for the two months. So, I don’t see the Iranians stopping. I see them actually escalating if the United States is to continue to escalate.”
As readers know, I differ with the Iranian reading, since the US and Iran can make undertakings only with respect to their legal and practical power. Iran has a solid case for deeming Israel to be a military dependency of the US. Thus, the US commitment in the first clause of the MOU, for a ceasefire and effectively to an Israel withdrawal, requires the US to bring Israel into compliance. By contrast, Oman is a neutral state, was not consulted in the MOU process and has not made any commitments to Iran with respect to the MOU. Oman allowed traffic on its side of the Strait during the hot phase of the conflict. So Iran asserting it has rights over passage on the Oman side of the Strait is a big stretch, particularly since that section also requires Iran to “make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels.” Attacking commercial ships is a violation.
We have skipped over the disgraceful negotiations between the Quisling government in Lebanon and Israel. As some readers may appreciate, the reason that Hezbollah is defending the lives and property of Lebanese citizens in southern Lebanon is not just the fact that the government is captured. The US has kept it boot on Lebanon’s neck by making sure that Lebanon never had a military capable of doing much of anything, in particular checking Israel. So when Hezbollah stepped into that vacuum, the cardboard Lebanon military has been unable (I suspect also unwilling, but this is speculation), the official military has been ineffective, as it was designed to be.
Araghchi also weighed in on the US violation of the MOU by not forcing Israel’s compliance with its first clause, which called for a ceasefire and effectively, an Israeli withdrawal:
Araghchi warns against interference in Strait of Hormuz reopening, says US responsible for ending attacks on Lebanon
——
Speaking alongside Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein in Baghdad, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi called for a new regional security framework led… pic.twitter.com/zlHRGlJsyx— The Cradle (@TheCradleMedia) June 28, 2026
The Middle East Eye live feed reports fresh Israel bombing of south Lebanon, and the death of an Israeli soldier, and:
- Lebanese President Joseph Aoun confirmed implementation of the Lebanon-Israel framework agreement and continued efforts to restore state authority.
- Netanyahu said Israel and Lebanon had agreed on two pilot security zones and announced a phased withdrawal from selected villages in southern Lebanon.
- Israeli defence minister Israel Katz instructed the military to prepare for a long-term presence in designated security zones in southern Lebanon.
- Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem rejected the framework agreement, calling it a surrender of sovereignty and insisting the provisions of the US-Iran memorandum should be fully implemented.
On the energy front, Mario Nawfal had a very informative discussion with commodities/investment expert Chris Martenson. Martenson weighted in on the debate over how close the US oil cliff might be, based on the depletion of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Martenson says it could arrive in 2 weeks or 10. He contends that the US is required to keep 10% above the absolute operational minimum for disasters and potential military needs. Clearly, Trump could continue to walk on the wild side and draw into that 10% emergency buffer. But the 2 weeks now is consistent with Trump’s statement about ten days ago that there were only 4 weeks to economic disaster.
Martenson also describes at length how the paper oil markets are being manipulated to keep the price via massive short interests. Martenson is a bit gobsmacked at the firepwower being deployed. He points to a similar effort in the 1960s, in the dying days of the gold standard where the suppression worked until it ended and prices exploded.
Two days ago, Larry Johnson gave a long-form report of the reading by an energy expert on the state of diesel supplies in the US. Recall that economies run on diesel, not gasoline. Larry suggested in 13-18 DAYS: THE PRACTICAL DIESEL BUFFER… Does It Preclude Bombing Iran? that the dire state of diesel inventories would stay the US hand in resuming a hot conflict. But that does not seem to be happening. From the body of the post (which does present a lot of supporting detail and analysis):
According to this person, who has 35 years experience in the oil industry:
The U.S. does not have a month of freely deliverable diesel in a stress event. The headline EIA number shows 106.1 million barrels of total distillate fuel oil stocks and 3.631 million b/d of four-week average distillate product supplied, implying 29.2 days on paper. But that national inventory includes barrels in pipelines, refineries, terminals, regional storage, and operational positions that cannot all be allocated immediately to critical distribution hubs.
Operational estimate: applying a 45%-60% practical deliverability factor to total distillate stocks leaves roughly 48-64 million barrels of usable, allocable diesel-equivalent supply. At 3.631 million b/d, that is approximately 13.1-17.5 days, rounded to 13-18 days….
Let’s use the worst case: 13 days. Thirteen days means that if anything disrupts the supply chain — a refinery outage, a pipeline failure, a crude supply disruption — the effects reach the real economy within two weeks. There is no meaningful time to arrange alternatives. A tanker from a replacement crude source takes longer than 13 days to arrive. A refinery turnaround takes longer than 13 days to complete. The buffer is shorter than the lead time for almost every possible remedy.
The geography makes it worse. The 13-day figure is a national average, which means some regions have more and some have less. The Southeast is particularly exposed, being heavily dependent on the Colonial Pipeline, which is itself a single point of failure that demonstrated its criticality when it was shut down for six days in 2021. Six days is nearly half the total national buffer.
What about aviation fuel? Here is where the two problems collide mechanically, and why it creates a genuine bind rather than just a theoretical tradeoff.
Diesel and jet fuel are not different products from different parts of the refinery. They are competing claims on the same physical fraction of crude oil — the middle distillate cut that comes off the atmospheric distillation column in the same boiling range. Every refinery scheduling decision is, at its core, a daily argument about how to divide that fraction between the two products.
With a 13-day diesel buffer, the refinery cannot let diesel output fall. The economic and political consequences of a diesel shortage materialize too quickly and too severely. Diesel production becomes, in practical terms, the floor that cannot be breached.
Now layer in a wartime demand for military jet fuel. JP-8 is pulled from the same middle distillate fraction. The military’s operational requirements are also non-negotiable — aircraft do not fly on goodwill. So you now have two inelastic demands competing for one fixed supply of middle distillate from each barrel of crude processed….
The 13-day buffer is what makes this bind acute rather than manageable. With sixty days of diesel inventory, a refinery operator can tolerate shifting the middle distillate split toward jet fuel for several weeks without civilian consequences. With thirteen days, the same shift starts a visible countdown almost immediately. Now do you understand why Donald Trump signed the MoU with Iran?
If the United States decides to renew its bombing campaign of Iran, that would likely trigger the stress event outlined above. Based on that fact I believe that Donald Trump, notwithstanding his threats, will not run the risk of crashing the US economy by bombing Iran again.
But he has. So what gives?
Mind you, there are theoretical ways to come up with an equitable solutions, such as the US and Gulf States paying off Iran bigly (release of all frozen assets, Gulf states really truly leading the way in funding the $300 billion in reparations, sanctions waivers, a JCOPA-like uranium enrichment regime) in return for Iran giving up control of Hormuz, with an explicit proviso that it can reassert control in the event of a resumption of war or re-imposition of non-UN approved sanctions. But as they are wont to say in Maine, “You can’t get there from here.”
____
1 Mind you, Iran could well have suspended the technical talks, set to resume on June 28, based on the US failure to implement Article 1.
2 See starting at 3:50:
3 From an admittedly American perspective, which is why I relegated it to a footnote: Admiral Montgomery contends Iran is losing leverage. The US is now sending counter-drone systems and they seemed to be effective when used in the fresh defense of Bahrain. But they are not cheap and it will take time to adequately kit out the Gulf states that might want them. He also argues that the Omani route plus pipeline shipments can get adequate oil supplies to market. Of course, Ansar Allah can interfere with shipments out of the Saudi pipeline to the Red Sea.
144 comments
Comments are closed.
It looks Trump’s 6.13 post appears twice, with the second appearance in the place where the Al Jazeera post should be.
Thanks! Fixed!
Yeah, and the first one is itty-bitty.
Aiie, fixed now!
The itty-bitty version was better!
Itty-bitty is the amount of attention that should be granted Trump.
‘Nabila Jamal
@nabilajamal_
US AND IRAN EXCHANGE STRIKES AS CEASEFIRE FRAYS
US CENTCOM hit 10 Iranian military targets overnight on drone storage, air defence, surveillance and minelaying sites near the Strait of Hormuz’
That’s fourteen sites in Iran that have been attacked for two strikes on ships and return fire on two US bases. That’s way out of proportion. I’m guessing that the US wanted to attack those sites all along and were just waiting for an excuse to do so. This is not Trump wanting to inflict pain on Iran so that they won’t do it again but the US preparing the ground for further operations. This might be the last chance this year before a lot of those in-theater assets start to disperse.
US is bombing IRGC sailors’ laundry hung out to dry in sight of US observers on the other side of the strait!
Trump told me they have no air force and their navy is sunk!
well, didn’t they attack USN sailors’ laundry on USS Ford?
“They” also attacked sailors’ laundry suspiciously looking like American flags on the USS Liberty too.
All done! Please refresh this page and re-skim if you were an early arrival.
Thanks. Impossible to keep up with any of this without your posts!
YeS!
I’m with Yves.
I suspect USrael is plotting another decapitation/violent internal uprising in Iran.
The Islamic Republic of Iran really has its hands full.
Who is left to kill? And what could the Zionist entities gain by killing more Iranian negotiators?
If the ministers involved in the current negotiations are killed, doesn’t that clear the way for the hardliners in the IRGC to have their chance to lead? Doesn’t that mean we have zero chance of peace? In that case, I would hope the US is doing everything it can to insulate Aragachi and others from Israel attacks.
I’d bet on a US cyberattack. Although I kind of suspect Israel already tried it and it only worked the first time, sort of.
Russia helped Iran get its AD back up in record time during the 12 day phase 1 of the war after a cyber-attack. I suspect Russia has been under continuous cyberattacks for 4 years now, and they have the tools to help Iran. But when all you have is a hammer, you might as well swing it versus clearly counterproductive (!!snark!!) activities like giving peace a serious effort.
Uh, I read the post, admittedly, my morning coffee hasn’t hit, where did she say that?
I took away from this morning’s missive (thanks again, Yves) that the war “would not end in a negotiated settlement.” And Iran trying to assert control over the Omani side of the Strait is problematic.
Or perhaps, your first sentence is not meant to be connected with the second, and the latter is simply your take.
At any rate, I don’t think the US can get anywhere by returning to regime change as a goal, at least in the short term. Attacking Iran has the opposite effect of rallying the populace around the flag. And all the groundwork that had been laid before June 2025 has been ruined, Starlinks confiscated/destroyed, Mossad assets neutralized, new hardliners in power, etc. It will take years. Which Taco doesn’t have.
I do have a sick feeling that the neo-cons behind this war may be fine sacrificing the GOP for a long war against the hardliners, with a view towards a Syrian-style outcome. It took 14 years to get rid of Assad, but in the end, they got what they wanted, albeit not very cleanly and Assad is still alive and well in Russia.
No I said that.
Ok, thanks. Need more coffee.
“Based on that fact I believe that Donald Trump, notwithstanding his threats, will not run the risk of crashing the US economy by bombing Iran again.
But he has. So what gives?”
Perhaps crashing the US (and world) economy is precisely what Trump is aiming for? Crashed economies are good for consolidating “emergency” powers, just as manufacturing war was good for pushing the PATRIOT Act and FISA. I’m sure Trump has similar measures just ready and waiting to go.
Shock Doctrine.
The notes regarding 2 weeks to 10 (days? weeks?) in Martenson segment made me think- (discount the Montana Wingnut tin-hat here) sleeper cells wreaking havoc on US Oil and Gas infrastructure.
The sleeper cells could be Saudi, Israeli, Navy Seals, CIA, Rothschilds/Epstein, Russia/China, ELF- no end of enmity and motivations. Lotsa options.
That could be physical/direct, it could be power, it could be cyber. Vulnerability in the time of extreme complexity.
I still smell micro-nukes in the offing… the Israel/ Iran broader mid-east is intractable. The attention -grabbing slap to get the hysterical child to stop and breathe? A chance to see what they do real-time on a
Self-licking Ice Cream Cone: Crisis- the plea of the Tyrant— Disrupted economies and trading bonuses, Martial Law, suspension of elections— an Autocrat’s wet dream.
Lotta wet dreams out there… reading some tabloid about Trump’s arm-candy blonde gal… purportedly gushing that Daddy is The Alpha and the Omega.
The parts are many, they move in mysterious and not so mysterious ways, and it really is oftentimes these days too much to take in, much less to recognize as really happening.
I wonder if Ploymarket is making book on whether Taylor Swift/ Epstein Class– or the War Department’s planes —get the Jet Fuel.
“I wonder if Ploymarket is making book on whether Taylor Swift/ Epstein Class– or the War Department’s planes —get the Jet Fuel.”
Hypothetically, if I had my own country and military bases all around the planet, the military wouldn’t be sharing the same reserves as the country’s base population. Cutting distance to access would be strategic.
The Great American Fire-Sale
Distressed assets for pennies on the dollar, crashed economies are heaven for the cash-rich, and talk about leverage for
slave-ownersthe managerial class: “If you don’t want to do the job, I’ve got ten others outside the door who will!”It’s only the voiceless 99% who will get nuked, and from some perspectives, far too many of those “useless eaters” on this planet anyway.
It’s gonna be the best depression evah.
Also, plenty of available parking!
Perhaps, but it also would cost very powerful billionaires a lot of money, and that would make them very unhappy. And they can easily destroy Trump through the media and political isolation, and well, regime change bribery of his administration or internal secession.
Note, even in a brutal dictatorship like Hussein’s Iraq or the late Roman Empire, all these factors are in play – they are not voting-related.
Emperor Nero has entered the chat.
Wow doom looms. One thing Larry Johnson said in that oil report is that the US for now is self sufficient in the gasoline portion of the distillate column–long term–and that diesel/plane fuel is the crunch. And ironically this must mean that the tycoons who fly over my house in their turboprops and Lear Jets will suffer more than the Cessna owners flying on hi test gasoline.
Gasoline is delivered by diesel trucks.
Life is full of these adorable paradoxes. Good point.
We really need to factor trains into the mix, as nearly all locomotives used for freight in the US are deisel-powered.
Those old coal and wood-fired locomotives currently in our railway museums might soon see service again.
Economies run on diesel, not gasoline.
As noted, diesel is the key energy source underpinning – the whole economy – albeit even it/and gasoline is subject to synthetic oil/lubricants needs/demand. I recommend everyone find some simple YT video that unpacks how its made and how critical it is in today’s world. Without it your back to pre WWII tolerances on moving parts and heat.
I wonder if someone in the War Dept is having a peek at this issue lmmao
The structural problem with the MOU is that Iran has always taken the position that it now controls the Strait of Hormuz, and the Americans (and everyone else, Gulf States, Israel, EU) take the opposite tack. I suspect that Trump wanted a “deal” so they figured they could just paper over a fundamental disagreement on first principles. Now Trump has his MOU, but Iran will not relent on its control over Hormuz, and whether Iran is maliciously and perversely distorting the meaning of the MOU, as a practical matter, Iran can not relent given the strategic importance of the Strait to defeating American/Western efforts to isolate and destroy Iran.
I don’t know what the Americans were expecting with setting up the Oman route, but this outcome was 100% predictable. Maybe they think this will buy them more legitimacy for aggression, or preserve alliances or something. If they think they can avoid going over the oil cliff now without more concessions to Iran, that’s wishful thinking. Given Trump, he probably thought they could sign a “deal” and play games and Iran would be too intimidated to interfere or that he had sufficiently bought them off or something so Iran would back off and the West could restock petro inventories in anticipation of the next round. . . or maybe Trump was just desperate for something he could use to claim a win and claim financial markets short term and there was no thought about how to make it work in the medium term.
Potential “legal” problems were entirely predictable, too, though. Iran does not exclusively own SoH. Oman has legal obligations under international law. The situation could be fudged while there was fighting, but, with peace sort of temporarily restored, Oman can’t be made to give up its obligations legally. Abiding by MoU means Iran gives up on the assertion to control SoH for the time being.
Iran, not a signatory to UNCLOS, will collect service fees over the Strait, and will then remit a portion of the fees to Oman, who cannot collect fees because they are signatories to UNCLOS. Oman will go along with it or they won’t get the money. Oman has no means of challenging Iran militarily over the Strait. This will not go into effect until Iran controlling Hormuz is a fait accompli, or otherwise, the US/Israelis will smash Oman. The only thing that will prevent it is some player bringing sufficient hard power into the problem to stop it, and America tried and failed so good luck.
No, it can collect fees only AT MOST on the channel in Iranian territorial water. It can’t do that on the Oman side.
From a lawyer who holds very strong anti-globalist views, via e-mai:
I would expect Iran to put a regime of control over both Oman and Iran’s territorial waters (and you could argue in violation of international law), as they basically are now. Eventually, when the heat was off Oman, I would imagine an agreement that Oman would agree to allow Iran to manage their territorial waters (which would include Iranian service fees), and Iran would provide “foreign aid” in return to Oman, and that way Oman maintains its international treaty obligations. Iran gets a fig-leaf of legitimacy for its service fee regime, in exchange, Oman gets kickbacks (which remain in control of Iran). I suspect this is the so-called “dialogue” in the Fifth Point of the MOU. [Any why the US threats against Oman, which is the weak link.]
I guess the response is that legally that is bullshit. However, what is legally bullshit or not may shift if you defeat the World’s Superpower, push them out of the ME, and control the chokepoint for 20% of the world’s oil supply. At some point, the world starts to admire your new clothes and your subtle legal argument. As a practical matter, the world will want the Strait opened, even if they don’t like the new management.
Bottom line, I say the world has a choice since survival is at stake for Iran: Either they control the SOH or they test that nuclear bomb they threatened to detonate not long ago. Pick your poison.
Part of being a lawyer is the ability to argue anything. If you don’t have the facts on your side, hit the law. If you don’t have the law, argue the facts. If neither, pound the table.
Besides, international law has always been a very troubled area. There is no neutral third party to issue opinions/rulings. There are only two bickering parties who claim they’re right. Might always wins in the end.
The US was the aggressor here; they attacked Iran on Feb. 28th with no authorization from either Congress or the U.N. So I would argue Iran is within its rights to fight back using any means possible.
That’s the way I fundamentally see it. War tends to trump law, unfortunately.
What’s the point of laws when they are amorphous to one side and inflexible to you? IANAL. Laws only work when there’s a consensus that they are valid. When that consensus erodres things like Luigi start happening.
IMO This isn’t going to to be over until a significant state fails: Iran, Israel, or the US.
Isn’t possession 9/10 of the law?
Imo international law is western originated/based. I think I read free passage through straits originated with British war ships asserting that right, and with other western nations establishing such laws. And in modern days China, today’s major mercantile power, no doubt agrees.
But cheap drones and missiles are ending gunboat and bomber diplomacy as we speak. This is a case where boots on the ground are required to enforce western rules based order and even un laws. If Iran can continue to both take hits and dish out more than they receive, imo they can prevail in controlling Hormuz and gulf states will just have to pay the tolls. Plus Iran could stop saudi and other pipelines if they chose, seems they’re being relatively gentle with saudi.
I assume China is very unhappy with the blockade effects on world economy, but they know the alternative is us controlling gulf output, which would be far worse. Maybe internal factions advocating more internal consumption and less export surplus will prevail.
Oman could also declare that it’s leaving the UNCLOS treaty. According to the goog-machine there is a mechanism for that and a specific timeframe.
The question is, does Iran have the leverage to do that.
I recommend against assuming can openers.
Oman is small and has pretty much no defense whatsoever
The US can pound it into dust quite easily even in its diminished state.
Oman condemned the Iran attack on Kuwait, which tells you where they think the wind is blowing: https://www.fm.gov.om/en/49472/
And from Responsible Statecraft in April:
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/oman-iran-hormuz/
“Oman is small and has pretty much no defense whatsoever
The US can pound it into dust quite easily even in its diminished state.”
In other words, international law is in the eye of the gun-holder.
I don’t have an ultimate answer, but I’d like to make two points.
First of all, I don’t think the legal issues are particularly constraining during the ceasefire stage. As Trump said a little while back, “in that part of the world, ‘ceasefire’ is when you’re shooting in a more moderate manner.” I think firing an occasional drone across the strait fits within that rubric, especially when compared to what the Israelis are doing in Lebanon. I don’t think we are close enough to an end state to guess what the final legal regime will be. If Yves is correct and there is no negotiated settlement, Hormuz could be in a state of exception for a long time like the DMZ in Korea.
Second, it seems strange to me that the discussion is only about the Omani coastal waters. Oman owns a little piece out on the point but most of the coast along the Hormuz elbow is UAE territory. This is not a two-sovereign problem it is a three-sovereign problem, and relations between Iran and UAE have been much worse than between Iran and Oman.
‘The US has kept it boot on Lebanon’s neck by making sure that Lebanon never had a military capable of doing much of anything, in particular checking Israel.’
Even though the Lebanese army is the one that is suppose to disarm Hezbollah, I do not think that the US was serious about this. As part of that Tripartite deal the US promised to give the Lebanese army a grand total of – wait for it – $30 million dollars. That is somewhere between pocket change and couch lint for a modern army.
I think Aoun would have to be suicidal to order the Lebanese army to attack Hezbollah. But anything’s possible.
How many soldiers in the Lebanese army would have brothers, sons, fathers, cousins and neighbours in Hezbollah. They may end up being more loyal to Hezbollah that the so-called Lebanese government.
When I saw the $30 million number my first thought was “bribe cash”.
Has there been any analysis or discussion about why Israel isn’t currently a target for Iran? I know Iran mentioned before the MoU that they would attack and that the attacks would not be predetermined, but now, nothing seems to be happening.
Of all the things they could do to affect what they claim to want, attacking Israel seems to be the easiest option. Surely the Saudis and others wouldn’t care. Surely the US would spend our last AD to protect Israel as best we could. Surely attacking Israel would support Hezbullah. Surely China and Russia wouldn’t care if Israel is hit hard. The language in the MoU gives Iran the cover to do it while making Israel look like the perpetrators of ethnic cleansing in yet another region. So why isn’t Iran doing that right now?
Not advocating for more death and destruction here. Just trying to understand what I’m missing.
I think the basic problem is that it is difficult for Iran to hit Israeli targets that really hurt and they don’t want to start shooting too little, too early. Long range missiles are expensive and I have a hunch that Iranian stockpile is not too big on them (hitting Gulf states with short legged missiles, otoh, is both easy and scalable). OTOH, Iran hitting Israel with a big mass of big missiles, to inflict “real” pain, is not something they can do too often and it will cost them diplomatically since it will completely bury the MoU, which, even is highly flawed, provides them real benefits (sorta peace for a couple of months, temporary sanctions relief, etc) that they don’t want to blow too easily.
One concentrated flight of Iranian missiles targeting the US embassy complex in Beirut might convince the Lebanese government that there are drawbacks to the path of endlessly ingratiating themselves with the Empire.
Trump has been visibly deteriorating ( See the pics from the G7), those I have witnessed with dementia don’t get better, they have plateaus that last for a little while and then slide downhill to a new plateau until at some point they lose it entirely.
It seems reasonable to expect that Trump’s behavior will become increasingly erratic while his existential need need to dominate continues to grow.
Both the AI bubble and the Private Credit system needed the appearance of stability to continue, that is gone and both systems are looking very wobbly.
Trump’s reaction to what happens at “Home” over the next few Months is not likely to be proportionate or well thought out.
It’s going to be a lively Summer.
Lively indeed. Trump wants to be remembered as the best President in history. Not like all those other loser Presidents. But if the economy blows up under his watch and indeed was caused by this war of choice against Iran, he could lose it. His whole legacy could be a worldwide depression and it would have his name plastered all over it – the Trump Depression. I’m not sure how he would react to that but you can bet that it would not be good.
I could make a case that neo-Jesus (currently neo-Atlas) doesn’t really have it to lose anymore.
Isn’t he in the process of building something like a Führerbunker? End-game precedent, there.
All he needs now is Eva Braun.
Calling Laura Loomer.
I was 18 when John Kennedy was shot. Kennedy was my dad’s age. Today 18 year olds have had to live with two geezers who are great-grandpa age. Us baby boomers have done this and we should be ashamed of ourselves. For the last 8 years our country has been led by presidents who barely remember when they were young even if dementia were not an issue. We protested the Vietnam war but I think that those who did were just scared to be put in harms way. Frankly, were I again 18 now I would be more scared of letting people who are too old have so much power that they wield for there own limited interests. Some things are worth fighting for.
I have heard that subtle insult before. Of course there are always some who avoid the call of duty for fear of death. But the 60’s were filled with mostly the young, who had no memory of WW2, but were brought up constantly reminded of the need to defeat the evil fascists and the rigors of war. Our parents were proud of their victory. However many of our parents were also convinced of the legitimacy of, what is now obvious to anyone paying attention, the forever conquest of the globe.
Many of us saw this even in our naivety. Personally I viewed the Vietnam war as infringing on a sovereign peoples right to self determination all for the purpose of countering an ideology half way around the globe. I was not going to be a party to that.
So many justify their participation in that war by denigrating those who moved to stop it. They know it was a bullshit war but they were drafted and went anyway, maybe to protect their precious future job prospects or because they were reluctant sheep. Remember the most patriotic thing you can do is not give your life for your country. It is to educate yourself to be an informed voter and raise your children well.
My American cousins had a different view. There was very little mention of fighting fascists, only German and Japanese militarists. They remembered being propagandised daily – by politicians, the media, and their teachers and preachers – to hate the Communists, who were either going to nuke them out of sheer malignancy, or were creeping through the world’s undergrowth to suddenly emerge and impose socialism on the American people, crushing them under the jackboot of free healthcare, education and cheap housing, etc, out of sheer malignancy.
Judge Nap explicitly asked Amb. Freeman yesterday if he thought Trump was mentally impaired. Freeman gave an incontrovertible “No.” as his answer.
And? I can think of three or four other guests he has on a regular basis that would disagree.
Facts and actions are more important than opinions.
Mental impairedness is not a “yes” or “no” thing.
Mentally impaired is always relevant to some standard. Was the standard mentioned?
Donald Trump has an antisocial personality disorder.
As a diagnostician I am certain of the diagnosis beyond a reasonable doubt.
While he may be experiencing displaying cognitive decline today, his frontal lobe has always been faulty.
There’s plenty of precedent for Iran’s “protection” of the Omani side of the Strait: Israel’s seizure of Gaza, Southern Lebanon, southern Syria, etc. And then there is the half century of the Zionists’ perpetual “ceasefires with Israeli characteristics.” If people want to complain about Iranian behavior, they need to first answer for their silence on Israel’s lack of defined borders and limits.
An unexplored factor is the World Cup and how it plays into Trump’s thinking. Hosting it generates enormous positive publicity for the US. Does the US care enough about that to hold off restarting the war or does Trump’s own obsessive attention-seeking override that? Whatever happens in the Strait, Iran’s behavior pales in comparison to Trump’s unbridled aggressiveness.
So you would have the world devolve to might makes right, just as Trump advocated, and Iran act just like genocidal Israel, the most hated country in the world? Seriously? The fact that you seem able to come up only with Israel, who flagrant violates international law but human decency, as the justification for Iran’s position, is an admission that you can’t mount a sound case.
Shorter: Two wrongs don’t make a right.
Not advocating for mass barbarism here, but JohnH has a point. Why is Israel the only country allowed to do that when Iran is threatened existentially by the current arrangement? I understand that kind of thing has not been Iran’s negotiating posture. I understand that such an approach would mean global depression and hardship for so many. I don’t see that Iran has many options though.
The US and Israel will not agree to anything that limits them. The US and Israel will not agree to stop attacking Iran economically or physically. The US and Israel would love to splinter Iran into ethnic blocks that are easier to control. The US and Israel are committed to preventing Iran from ascending to world power status. So either Iran is going to come out swinging and take what they want, or they will see their gains erode in negotiations that will only ever be enforced one way.
This is tu quoue, which is a logically invalid argument. Please stop. I’m not about to go into wrestling with pigs mode to dignify arguments that are logical/rhetorical failures. This is way way way below the critical thinking standards this site seeks to promote.
I hate to get tart, but when you strip it down, your argument is no different than a toddler yelling “It’s not FAIR.”
Yes, it’s not fair. But if Iran were to attack Oman to get its way, I can pretty much guarantee it will lose the support of the entire world, including China and Russia. If it acts like Israel, it will become a global pariah like Israel. And Iran does not have a joined-at-the-hip superpower backer like Israel does.
Not arguing with your premise here, but Iran has its own “superpower.” It can destroy the infrastructure that produces 20% of the world’s oil and gas. That may be a stretch, but if ‘events’ become a danger to the continued existence of the regime in Teheran, overreaction is a possibility.
Say, if Israel nukes Teheran, I suspect that a “dead hand” command structure would come into play. Then, all bets would be off.
Stay safe.
In the Middle East, the world has already devolved might makes right, led by the former global hegemon and its nuclear armed partner. We saw this not only from Israel, but the US in Serbia, Iraq, Venezuela, Libya, Iran (twice in the last year,) and in the regular, unprovoked assassination of fishermen in the Gulf of Mexico.
Unfortunately at some point the issue becomes survival, particularly when your well-armed opponents play dirty.
Yes, we should decry Iran’s violations…but only while emphasizing the awful context in which its powerful opponents force it to behave.
Indeed. Let’s not forget that the US/Israel assassinated Iran’s leadership in the middle of peaceful negotiations and what did the legal entity that is supposed to solve these kinds of conflicts do? Sanction US/Israel? Send in peacekeepers? No, the UN in its infinite wisdom issued a statement condemning Iran for attempting to defend itself.
It’s the West that has shredded the law here. What exactly is a nation supposed to do in the face of that type of lawlessness? Just lie back and think of England?
What we’re likely to see going forward is this kind of behavioral, power-hunger-fueled, geopolitical Gresham’s Law:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham's_law
Where it becomes apparent that one cannot win or prevail without fighting dirty.
I’ve been thinking a lot about the way that so many of Iran’s leaders have been assassinated, requiring that they be replaced by the second tiers of the many institutions that they led. This second tier may end up being more bloody minded than those who planned for this confrontation for decades.
And down, down we go. 😔
Snowman melting from the inside,
Falcon spirals to the ground.
I often think about what I would do if I were playing poker with someone that I knew was definitely cheating. I could continue to play honestly and hope I wouldn’t get taken to the cleaners, I could start cheating myself and thus resume playing a “fair” game, or I could leave the game and find one that had honest players.
The last option is obviously the preferred one, but is not available in the present geopolitical situation. One has to play and go on playing.
Neither of the other two options are terribly palatable and pit your honesty and morality against your survival.
The problem is that the world has already devolved to might makes right (and it did so long before Trump). The supreme international crime is aggression, and the US is getting away with it all the time, including now against Iran, in addition to the longstanding and suffocating economic siege of the country. When a state is fighting for its very survival, and that due to the unpunished lawless behaviour of others, we can hardly expect it to remain legally impeccable. If the world wants the Strait of Hormuz to be used in accordance with international law, it should rein in the US and make sure international law is applied to its actions as well. Instead, countries are keeping quiet, equivocating or actively supporting the tyrant. They are assessing Iran’s actions in the light of international law, while completely ignoring the US’ blatant violations of that same law. In this way, they are de facto accepting the US’ being above the law as part of the ‘international order’. Such an ‘order’ is not legitimate. And it already is based on the principle ‘might makes right’.
I would add that while Iran’s taking the strait hostage is certainly illegitimate, the US regularly abuses its ability to control international financial flows and trade in the same way. The difference is that Iran’s actions are ultimately defensive.
For this to end well the empire has to be defeated at home. You may think your vote is wasted, as many do here, so then take to the streets.
I’m not sure about that, I find it more likely that if the Empire is defeated in the near future, the decisive impetus will come from the outside. In any case, I’m actually in a small European country on the periphery of the West, a provincial backwater (not complaining, that has some advantages), and while I do go to relevant protests from time to time, the influence of my own government on these events is rather limited. I’m not an Anglo – my screen name is an inside joke of sorts, a wordplay on the meaning of my real name in my native language.
I wouldn’t call myself a “when they go low, we go high” type of guy, but I still don’t think it’s remotely in Iran’s best interests to take legal precedents from Israel, of all places, if they plan to be seen as a sane and reasonable part of the international community going forward. Mainly for obvious humanitarian reasons, but even if you’re entirely cynical, allies and international (well, non-Western) support is nice to have, and powerful allies like Russia and China are especially good.
China in particular has been beating the drum of international law for many years, though of course there’s a lot to criticize about not only their own actions (or lack thereof) throughout the myriad crises of the last decade or so, but also the UN’s conduct in general over the decades in preventing conflicts and genocides. But regardless of whether you think it’s a good plan or not, China seems to want the t’s crossed and the i’s dotted, and may find it difficult to lend oodles of support to Iran if they start copying Israel’s homework.
That being said, at the end of the day, Iran has the drones and missiles and the critical world chokepoint. Perhaps we can equip a battalion of the West’s ten thousand finest lawyers and see if they, with their briefcases and extensive knowledge of international law in tow, can do to Iran’s missile cities what the missiles and bombs could not. It does seem like we’re rapidly descending into a historical period of international lawlessness, and so I hope that Iran bucks the trend and finds a legal justification, or agreement, or *something*.
I have made this point myself, I agree with you, but the critical difference is that you cannot ethnically cleanse a strait as no one actually lives there. I am pretty sure that Clausewitz would have just occupied the strait and then dared anyone to oppose it.
The blood is optional.
It’s not Trump (he’s a manager but not the real decision maker): it is both Uncle Sam (Wall Street, deep state) and Iran (mostly IRGC, which holds the real power) fighting about Lebanon via Hormuz. The strikes are, as you say, somewhat performative but what is at the stake is Iran’s ability to exploit Hormuz as weapon while a comprehensive peace has yet to be reached (and must include Lebanon, IRGC won’t abandon Hizbollah and Khamenei remains the religious head of all Twelver Shias, also those of Lebanon).
Negotiating is so boring, better to get back to what real men do. Bomb bomb bomb, bomb Iran, as sung by John McCain.
2-3 weeks until the Big Kahuna sounds about right. Considering that crude, gasoline, and diesel inventories stored in pipelines are mostly unusable.
You note, “Oman allowed traffic on its side of the Strait during the hot phase of the conflict.” This is the first I’ve heard of this and I would ask how much of that was happening compared to now post MOU signing? If it is significantly greater now then I wonder if this was in fact the US plan in negotiating the settlement. In any event it would appear Iran got snookered by agreeing in the MOU to open Hormuz over the course of these negotiations without making that directly contingent upon other things taking place first.
There were a fair number of transits on that side with transponders turned off. We picked them up from time to time in tweets on Gulf traffic, as did Sal Mercogliano in his accounts.
See one from April, admittedly just cruise ships:
And from Bloomberg on June 10:
https://gcaptain.com/oil-tankers-go-dark-to-sneak-more-gulf-barrels-through-hormuz/
0647 PDT
Trump again threatens Iran with annihilation as Kuwait and Bahrain report attacks
https://www.cnbc.com/2026/06/28/trump-threatens-iran-with-annihilation-kuwait-bahrain-report-attacks.html
Who wants to bet that these threats magically stop, say around 6PM EST, when the futures markets open?
Followed by a 7AM EST Twoof Social post that “The MoU is back, baby!”
Is it possible that Iran is caught in its own version of an escalation trap? What does it look like when both sides in a conflict are stuck like that?
That is a VERY good question.
MAD?
It’s only a trap for the country with fewer rungs (that it is willing to pay the price to use). Sustainability plays a key role in the strength of these rungs. The US cannot replace, much less ramp up production, Iran is ramping up production and gaining access to new capabilities from Russia (and likely China).
Absent the US willing to mass mobilize and invade through Turkey (against waves of missiles and drones and IEDs) or willing to lose a lot of its irreplacable airframes to drop dumb bombs or use nukes/biowarfare/chemical warfare, the US has no new escalations. It can repeat what it has done, but why would it have held back and then signed a surrender MOU?
Iran has multiple escalatory steps it can still take, especially wrt Israel. Ben Gurion wipeout is one. Taking out US naval vessel. Etc.
Iran can do those things, but what if that doesn’t work?
I think that’s the question that every country contemplating military action should ask. Maybe Colin Powell had it right – go in with overwhelming force, then leave.
Or, for the Gen-Xers out there, there might be a lot of wisdom in this quote from the end of WarGames: “A STRANGE GAME. THE ONLY WINNING MOVE IS NOT TO PLAY.”
Either Iran tests a weapon, or is under someone’s nuclear umbrella, or the US starts the nuclear war that could eliminate a response to this or any other question being needed. Ever. Which is why it is a very dangerous situation.
Or congress does its duty (Hah!).
Do you mean, what if us has more standoff stuff than has been guessed? Then this goes on until they do run out and/or we run out of diesel and us gives up again.
Their only real unused escalation is to attack Israel, sinking a carrier might be a bad idea. Seems they hope the market makes us go away rather than force us/israel to go through their last standoffs.
“What does it look like when both sides are stuck like that?”
Your wonderful question raises another question as to where does the primacy of the rule of law, predicated on the establishment of political sovereignty, come from?
Perhaps, in this case, it is from both sides (Iran and the U.S.) finally realizing that attempts at total self-aggrandizement becomes mutually self-destructive and that the accelerating instability of escalation literally may mean there is a risk no one ends up with anything.
Hence, what emerges is the pragmatic necessity of creating some kind of mutually self-limiting framework–denominated as the rule of law in which promises are kept.
Stated in more general terms, the pursuit of rampant self-interest finally triggers the awareness that only by going beyond immediate self-interest and establishing a stable, legal institutional structure, can self-interest be attained.
But, is the US pursuing self-interest? Or is it pursuing the self-interest of competing powers? Or the interests of the religious fanatical state of Zion? Self-interest is not compatible with religious fanaticism.
As with Trump, applying logic is weak tea for analysis – psychology does better.
This conflict started Feb 28.
Nov 4 is a viable anchor for clarified resolution. In early April, Trita Parsi was talking about the upcoming midterm elections. Yves noted a scenario in which ‘the global economy would be stone cold dead by November.’ We’ll know more the day after the election. Feb 28 through Nov 4 is 250 days.
Early in this conflict, it was estimated around a month or two to recover from each week the Strait was closed (1_week : 1.5_months). In ‘Interstellar’ there is a time-dilation scene where Hans Zimmer scored ticks at 1.5 seconds equaling a year of life on Earth passed (1.25_seconds : 1_year). Mapping the score to the scene, we are now here.
Using art to illustrate an eleventy-dimensional chess perspective, we’re only halfway through the score, and still stuck on Miller’s Planet. The wave hitting is the primaries, as anti-Israel candidates have reified the changing sentiment of the US polity. “We don’t want to die for Israel.” Unhooking American support for Israel goes a long way to resolving Iran’s existential crisis. And degrading American wealth, weapons, and influence meets criteria of Chinese unrestricted warfare.
If the United States decides to renew its bombing campaign of Iran, that would likely trigger the stress event outlined above. Based on that fact I believe that Donald Trump, notwithstanding his threats, will not run the risk of crashing the US economy by bombing Iran again.
But he has. So what gives?
My guesses:
1. You were wrong in that Trump is, in fact, willing to risk crashing the US economy by bombing Iran again
2. Trump believes (rightly or wrongly) that weakening Iran’s position in Lebanon and via Oman will provide a better deal (incidentally, don’t forget that only a week or two ago, he threatened to bomb Oman if the country didn’t allow transit on its side)
3. Trump believes (rightly or wrongly) that he can keep the level of escalation under control once they start, so the risk is not in fact very high
4. Trump believes (rightly or wrongly) that even if he loses control over escalation , it will be temporary, because Iran will be talked into coming back for yet another round of negotiations, leaving the US not much worse off
On the last point, I personally believe that Russia’s and Iran’s policy of restraint largely helped both countries, but there are drawbacks and risks to them, and I guess we are seeing some of the adverse consequences to them now.
As for US/Isreal planning coups, cyber attacks, assassinations, etc–>certainly possible (even likely), but neither country showed any particular need to manufacture a casus belli up until now; I am not sure what changed recently to alter their stance on this point.
I kind of think that if they had any kind of plan for cybersttack, assasination, or regime change they would have tried it already.
No, that pager attack was decades in the making and Israel held that back. They have engaged in several assassination rounds in Iran. I don’t think the bar for that is as high as you think. Former CIA counterterrorism officer John Kiriakou had said is not hard to hire someone to hang out near a target’s home or office to record their comings and goings to develop a pattern of life.
How dare you attack me based on your deficient reading comprehension. That was material quoted from a Larry Johnson post. Straw manning and attacks on the site and site authors are each violations of our written site Policies.
I trust you will find your happiness on the Internet elsewhere.
Please forgive me if I’m missing something, but I thought PoUP meant Larry Johnson was wrong?
It is definitely Trumpian to never honor the terms of any agreement, whether reduced to writing or not. Everything is up for negotiation, and any sort of handshake deal on terms unfavorable to him is subject to being revisited, usually after a power play like threatening to declare bankruptcy, or actually filing for Chapter 11. Or not paying contractors.
More than anything, he resembles a mafioso. Although I’d argue there was far more honor in the case of Tony Soprano or Al Pacino in “Scarface.” Those were fictitious criminals, who lived in a world of criminal activity. This guy is the POTUS, and he demeans and dishonors the office with every single breath he takes.
I have come to believe that at this point, he really does not care whether the GOP historically loses the mid-terms. His behavior this week in trashing a bipartisan housing bill illustrates this. The bill would have allowed GOP senators in tough races to run on a legislative accomplishment. Now, they’re screwed.
I also think that the evidence thus far is that the economy won’t crash before the midterms. Whether China stepped up by drawing off their enormous SPR, or some other factor, the market seems under control. That removes a big piece of leverage from Iran.
I’m going to offer an opinion that I realize is Pollyanna-like. Because hostilities have clearly resumed, Taco is blatantly violating the War Powers Act. There is no more gray area or weak-ass excuses, such as a 30-day extension. We’re well past 60 days, and 90 as well. The War Powers Act is clear that, absent an authorization from Congress, a President must withdraw US forces from the zone of danger after 60 days. And to boot, we have a (non-binding) resolution from both houses of Congress disapproving of the war and demanding immediate withdrawal of forces, unless both houses either:
1. Declare war
2. Pass an AUMF
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/104
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce8j6g3v3r4o
I’d argue that we are in a Constitutional crisis now. If impeachment proceedings don’t commence soon, we might as well send Congress home for the rest of the year to play tiddlywinks.
You know, you’re right, but indeed I’m afraid that in this late-stage-empire moment, rules are either gonna be flouted, or made up as they go… Depending on the context. It’s going to be expediency all the down.
As a corollary to my point, if the US is not going to even follow its own legal rules, why should Iran feel obligated to adhere to an MoU that isn’t even binding?
Who knows? There are levels and levers here that we’re all unaware of. Which is what makes this time so dangerous. As to what following rules and holding to agreed upon positions gives you in these circumstances, there’s a quote from Mass Attack 3 which comes to mind:
I think we could find ways to thrive in anarchy. But what we have now is the potential for chaos. We’ll see what comes of the next 18 weekends since that is all the time Trump has to wage war before the midterms without ruining the market’s illusions.
Assuming the us is forced to retreat for any reason before the midterms and/or diesel etc shortages tank the economy and or market, there will be sufficient gains for dems that impeachment would be likely. Granted, he might try to declare martial law in midterms, but military might not be sympathetic after this fiasco.
Since when has US been a “nation of laws”.
As long as no Frank Church cuts the cash flow, US is going to run a profit trending war….
Today, there is enough “black budget” to thwart the purse strings rein.
Kiev from 2014 was quietly armed……
You missed my point … sure, in the past, when confronted by Congress, the executive would sulk for a bit, and then resort to covert means. See, Iran-Contra. Or, Obama’s refusal to directly go after Assad, but allowing the CIA to do the wet work.
Now they don’t even bother with that; they just ignore Congress and the law altogether. We’re in a post-constitutional episode.
The earlier such episode was DOGE. Private sector actors going hog wild in the federal bureaucracy. But for the elite America has been a nation of men, not laws, for quite a while now. Thanks Obama!
You can actually blame Cheney for that one. After 9/11 he said that America must become a nation of men and not laws. So how is that working out for everybody?
https://www.nplusonemag.com/online-only/online-only/wake-up-and-smell-the-reality/
“For many Democrats in Congress, the only sin more unforgivable than starting an illegal war is trying to end one. The terms of the MoU are “disgraceful,” Connecticut senator Richard Blumenthal fumed, an “unconditional surrender.” “One of the worst deals ever made,” according to Illinois senator Tammy Duckworth. The House minority whip, Katherine Clark, declared it an “outrageous betrayal” that “further emboldens Iran.” “We have capitulated to the enemy,” declared New Jersey senator Cory Booker. “Democrats will not be helping Trump send $300 billion to Iran,” tweeted Chuck Schumer, vowing to oppose the MoU, in the unlikely and irrelevant event that it comes to the Senate for a vote.”
Impeachment for starting a war isn’t going to happen. Ever. Pelosi showed us that 20 years ago now.
Don’t let’s forget that an MoU or similar document is only secondarily a text. More importantly it’s an indication of what the states concerned want to do, or are prepared to accept: the bit of the iceberg you can see, if you like. Accusations of MoU violations are essentially about politics, unless one side judges that the violation signifies that the other side intends to fundamentally change its behaviour. I don’t think we are there yet.
The MoU continues to reflect the underlying situation: the US has lost the kinetic war, and any resumption would just mean a bigger loss. The issue therefore becomes politico-economic, and all that Trump can hope for is that somehow it will all work out. Remember that the Iranians did not “choose” the MoU rather than continuing the war. They already have military dominance, and they can reply to any further attempted US attack with overwhelming force. On the other hand, it’s hard to see what they could do militarily to pre-emptively change the situation, so their best strategy is to continue to wait, to let US capability in the area continue to degrade, and to continue to hold US bases and Gulf States and Israel effective hostages.
The point I worry about is one I’ve hardly seen raised, and it’s the gap between the reality of how Washington works, and the picture as seen from Tehran. Isolation works both ways, and I’m not sure that the political leadership, or even their advisers, actually has a good practical grasp of the functioning of the US system and how to get what you want. They may simply be assuming that the US can deliver more than its political system will allow.
That was my first thought after reading one of your recent posts; how much knowledge does Iranian leadership really have of what happens in DC? For that matter, the same goes for everyday Americans. When complex systems get out of steady state, who knows what might come out the other side?
Do they think they can get wartime and war related calssified information from the internet and
the news?
I think the other factor that no one mentions is: how much does Iran really care?
While I think Iran follows the old adage of knowing your enemy to be prepared for peace and battle, that is very different from caring how your opponent reacts, especially when they can do little to stop you. Let’s be honest, Iran is not trying to play nice with the US because it is the US. They are doing so for China, Russia, and various regional states.
This is not to say there is not an element of “isolation thinking” in the mix, but I think this hurts the US far more than Iran.
I think you’re half-right.
The MOU documented what the winner (Iran) was prepared to accept.
The US had other plans. IMO US actions have undermined the MOU/Iranian intent to the point of bad faith.
USA has driven a truck through every inch of ambiguity:
As for the Iranian grasp of US system, Iran has repeatedly said that they don’t trust the US and their LEGO videos exploited the US system very well.
I don’t think they are assuming that the US can deliver more than its political system will allow. I think they win either way. If USA/Trump refuses to abide its MOU-obligation to force Israel to leave Lebanon, to the point of risking a restart of the war, then Iran will exploit that – more LEGO videos. There’s a reason Israel/Netanyahu wants to control all USA media!!
The US is acting like the scorpion in the scorpion and the frog. Despite acknowledging that continuing the war – Trump’s four weeks to economic mayhem – it can’t help itself but to attack and undermine the mou that was it’s narrow path out of the mess it caused.
The US appears to not be capable of accepting a loss. It was similar in Afghanistan were it was clear – even to US decision-makers – that the war was lost a decade before the troops were forced to flee Kabul. It was also clear during Trump’s first term that Kabul was about to be overrun, hence the deal with the Taliban were the US got a ceasefire to withdraw on good order. The sane thing for the Biden administrationen would have been to go through with it, but instead they ripped it up. And Kabul was overrun. Yet despite the clear loss much of the US debate afterwards has been about if it was good or bad of Biden to withdraw. Accepting the fact that the US lost the war appears impossible.
Guess it’s in its nature.
Commentary appears in FARS news arguing that Iran must pursue a nuke:
https://x.com/i/trending/2071218195688538195
It would be a real shame if some of Russia’s spare nukes fell off the back of the truck somewhere in the Caucasus region. Then again, who knows whether this is a deliberate attempt to frame Iran and make it sound like they’re pursuing a nuke, as a causus bellum for Orange Julius to go nuclear himself.
This is red meat for the chickenhawks. I picked a bad week to stop drinking paint thinner.
I agree with Mrs Smith that Iran is not doing itself any favours by attacking vessels on the Omani side of the SoH, and that taking a leaf out of the USraeli book is poor optics at the very least. Might makes right may be the underlying reality of the world, but even Iran’s backers don’t like it to be invoked formally. And there’s always the problem of self-misassessment: thinking might lies on your side when it doesn’t. That’s what the Melian Dialogue was ultimately about, seeing as Athens lost in the end.
However, it may well be that choosing power play over the SoH is the option that causes the least regional harm, because, if the goal is to exercise economic pressure to extract from the other side the resources they want to fix the damages and restore their economy, the only option with a semblance of defensibility would be for Iran to turn on the other GCC countries for real. The case for attacking them already exists, seeing as they’re still hosting US military – personnel and facilities. Having the Omani sea lane open is pointless if the oil infrastructure that uses the SoH is bombed back to the time of the Arabian Nights, isn’t it? And if Iran in addition destroys that pipeline to the Red Sea and UAE’s Fujairah, they can announce with a straight face any vessels may now cross the SoH. They have a clear casus belli and I doubt Pakistan would start a war against Iran because of their mutual defence pact with SA.
Notice that while breaching the part of the MoU about Hormuz, Iran is still taking a hands-off approach with regard to Israel given that the MoU states it’s the US who must rein its client state in. It does seem that Iran pragmatically chose the weak link to target, which also is the link more directly connected to a way for obtaining extra revenue for reconstruction. Attacking Israel directly might be good optics for the Middle East muslim populations, and for Lebanon, but it won’t get Iranians a single dime. The alternative – the defensible one – with the same goal might have been to blow Ras Tanura up.
To the extent that attacking ships on the Omani side is the least bad choice, I agree that the path of least regional harm may be in play here. What other options does Iran have?
1. Attacking Israel – turn Ben Gurion airport or downtown Tel-Aviv into a smoldering crater. Pros – no more flights full of rapture-seeking evangelists; USAF has to find another place to park refuelers. Cons – IDF would surely retaliate. Likely to end in escalation to all-out regional war, again.
2. Bomb more US bases. Already done. How much more rubble can they bounce? Plus, ballistic missiles are expensive and Iran doesn’t have unlimited stocks.
3. Pursue a nuke. Bad idea – it would validate the Walruses and the Little Miss Lindsay’s of the world. Congress might finally pass an AUMF if the neocons can plausibly claim a nuclear threat.
Iran can stick to cheap drones to attack vessels and maybe a pipeline or two. That is a low-cost option to extend the economic damage and given Taco’s perfidy, why not?
Yes.
The US is still flying missions from Jordan, the UAE, and Kuwait with refuellers in Israel. Can the US really fly missions from Cypress? So lots more rubblelization (probably on civilian airports in those countries) could be done to effectively deny US Gulf access. Or host nations can decide to save their infrastructure and ban the US military.
Note, Cypress is well within Iranian range, as is southern Italy. Perhaps the US military can fly missions out of Ramstein?
That said, Russia seems to be getting closer to rubbelizing NATO in Europe, so perhaps the US will only be able to fly missions from the homeland with the big lumbering, not stealth B2 bombers, which are irreplaceable.
I personally think it unlikely Iran is attacking ships on the Oman route. First, the Ever Lovely suffered a broken window on the bridge from the Oman side within range of Omani shore, from an “unidentified projectile”. Something to do with a skiff might have been near. Second, the Kiku, same story, same “unidentified projectile”, albeit this time without saying what damage there was other than that it was somewhere on the bridge and no mention of a skiff. No photos for either, no evidence. The source of the info is UKMTO, which to me is suspect anyway given its a country aligned against Iran. I’m afraid this doesn’t meet my threshold for an “attack by Iran”, am wondering if I might be missing something, but, lordy, are we ever running with this version and milking as the basis for the claim Iran is in contravention of its own MOU terms despite that an MOU is nonbinding.
0956 PDT
Netanyahu: ‘No room’ for Palestinian state between Mediterranean Sea and Jordan River
https://www.jns.org/news/israel-news/netanyahu-no-room-for-palestinian-state-between-mediterranean-sea-and-jordan-river
I’m shocked, shocked, to find that genocide is going on in here.
(self-quibble: I usually prefer “ethnic cleansing” as a more accurate – and less inflammatory – description of Israeli SOP, but “genocide” fit the quote better…)
Is there a US-backed coup happening in Iraq right now? Seeing some mixed things on twitter and not sure what to believe. Could be the first step to a ground invasion?
Iran also has the means to mount a Cyber attack, when I looked at the Electrical grid nigh two decades ago it was wide open and there’s no reason to think that has changed.
There are also chokepoints like the pumps that send water through the Tehachapi’s to Southern California, “Son of Stuxnet” would do the job there.
And it won’t take Mad Skilz to do it
There are ( At least) tens of thousands of people in California that could take down the grid or those pumps using a laptop purchased with cash on Craigslist and free WiFi at a large mall…
America’s critical infrastructure was built at a time the USA was a high trust Society, which is no longer the case.
It’s going to be a lively Summer.
Well, I used to do process control for air separation plants. If the grid control system was designed and built properly there’s no chance of someone at the mall shutting down the grid. Stuxnet required a USB filled with malware dropped in a parking lot and used.
Now the above if may not be true.
It’s also worth noting that Trump may be doing a very difficult balancing act between trying to bring the war to a halt, and keeping his own base happy. I’m guessing that the latter requires a continual stream of militarist and intemperate actions. Americans seem to be happiest when their president is blowing sh**t up.
Say what you will about Trump (and I will too) but the guy has a reputation for being politically savvy. Aside from the deterioration of his brain or whatever, he is also trying to thread a very difficult needle now. The fact that he forged the needle himself doesn’t change things.
Huh? Politically savvy?
I think you are confusing his desire to keep his backers like Miriam Adelson happy with the people that voted for him. His approval rates are among the lowest in US history, and he is currently buying off portions of the US public by keeping gas prices artificially low at the cost of wrecking the US oil reserve.
There is nothing politically savvy about any of his current actions.
I would go further and say that Trump is not just keeping his Zionist backers happy … Trump is, himself, a Zionist.
Given all he’s done for Israel, the fact that so few talk about that, even as a possibility, is remarkable. Cognitive capture, narrative control, or both?
Goofy observation: the current phase of this war is more “turn-based Strategy” than RTS. One side does its builds, moves its pieces, and sends messages (diplomacy + propaganda), then hits “Next Turn”, then the other side takes its shot. I imagine that this is rather like traditional Pentagon war-gaming?
Notably, each side now views its actions as retaliation for the other side’s most recent attacks. I’d love to see a clear (quantified?) review of the escalation at each step; that would tell us a lot about the goals and attitudes of each “player”.
(I tried to break down the action so far – starting with the “attack” on Ever Lovely, but quickly realized that I don’t have the data needed to evaluate each step – weapons used, casualties, and damage. The only only obvious inference so far is that the first US “turn” – attacking Sirik, Iran – was a huge escalation, involving far more weapons and damage than Iran’s tap on Ever Lovely)
In any case, I hope that this recent flare-up subsides, and soon. I believe that Iran wants this, too; their retaliations seem far more proportionate than the US “turns” so far. So, the next steps hinge on Trump’s notoriously fickle choices…
The good news is that I’ve heard nothing about USA restarting the blockade of ships using the Iranian route. That means that at least some supplies are getting through to Asia, which is a Good Thing.
IMO, Iran could – and should – accept that it can’t control all of the traffic through the SoH. The Omani route cannot handle the entire load (too shallow and skinny), and further attempts to shut it down will eventually lead the USA to shut down Iranian exports again. IMO, Iran can’t – or shouldn’t – risk that.
Iran *does* need relief from US/Western Sanctions, but even if the US complies, it will renege sooner or later. The only way out of this is for China to break the ability of the USA to force other countries to enforce the US Sanctions regime. I suspect that China is ready to do that, but only slowly and quietly.
In the longer run, the knowledge that Iran can wreck the Global Economy again if it faces another existential attack would likely deter the USA from trying it again. OTOH, that doesn’t give Iran any deterrence from Israel; it will need (more? and better?) hypersonics for that.
From Pascal’s Pensees:
298. Justice, might.—It is right that what is just should be obeyed; it is necessary that what is strongest should be obeyed. Justice without might is helpless; might without justice is tyrannical. Justice without might is gainsaid, because there are always offenders; might without justice is condemned. We must then combine justice and might and, for this end, make what is just strong, or what is strong just.
Justice is subject to dispute; might is easily recognised and is not disputed. So we cannot give might to justice, because might has gainsaid justice and has declared that it is she herself who is just. And thus, being unable to make what is just strong, we have made what is strong just.
TRUMP’S IRAN DEAL IS FAILING HARD, IRAN BOMBS BAHRAIN & KUWAIT – w/ JCPOA’s Alan Eyre Mario Nawfal
I had not previously encountered Alan Eyre. Good insights delivered by Steve Buscemi’s voice doppleganger.
JEFF CURRIE’S WARNING: WHY OIL’S “PEACE” RALLY IS A DANGEROUS TRAP
A fragile Israel-Lebanon deal was signed just hours ago promising a small Israeli pullback and Lebanese forces moving in to contain Hezbollah. Within minutes unconfirmed explosions rocked Iran and the United States launched fresh strikes on Iranian missile, drone, and radar sites in direct response to an Iranian drone attack on a Singaporean ship.
THE ISRAEL-LEBANON DEAL REALITY
➡️ Israel pulls back from a tiny slice of territory while Lebanese military takes control to keep Hezbollah out.
➡️ The agreement is already drawing protests in Lebanon and carries zero guarantees of lasting enforcement.
➡️ Currie labeled it the “memorandum of misunderstanding” because something can go wrong at any moment.
THE US STRIKE THAT CHANGED EVERYTHING
➡️ Friday after the close, exactly on schedule, US forces hit Iranian storage and coastal radar facilities.
➡️ The trigger was yesterday’s Iranian drone strike on a commercial vessel in the Strait of Hormuz that violated the fragile ceasefire.
➡️ America is sending one unmistakable message: it will not surrender control of the world’s most critical oil artery.
THE OIL MARKET THAT REFUSES TO HEAL
➡️ 160 million barrels suddenly flooded out of the Strait after weeks of being trapped, crushing front-month prices into deep contango.
➡️ Yet 5.5 million barrels per day of production remains shut in and daily flows are still a fraction of normal.
➡️ Record $ 50-plus refining margins sit right next to crushed crude — the system is overwhelmed, not fixed.
➡️ The entire market is positioned short and extremely vulnerable to any surprise upside shock.
THE CHINESE DEMAND MYSTERY NO ONE CAN EXPLAIN
➡️ Chinese imports collapsed roughly 6 million barrels per day with two million still completely unaccounted for.
➡️ No visible strategic reserve draws despite prices now sitting below China’s average purchase cost.
➡️ This missing demand is the single biggest reason prices keep falling when every other signal screams caution.
THE STRAIT OF HORMUZ LEVERAGE PLAY
➡️ Iran’s strongest card is closing the Strait — and they know it spikes US gasoline prices right before the midterms.
➡️ With only four months until those elections, the political timing could not be more dangerous.
➡️ Currie warned the single biggest risk of full-blown resumption sits exactly here.
THE BOTTOM LINE
The market is pricing in victory and peace. Jeff Currie sees an escalation trap where both sides still have every incentive to keep pushing. One calculated Iranian move on the Strait and the entire oil complex rips violently higher with no warning.
This is Groundhog Day with live ammunition — and the next trigger pull could come any morning.
credit Mark
@Mark4XX
The latest from Barak Ravid:
U.S. and Iran agree to halt strikes and meet this week, U.S. official says
If true, it’s expanding the meaning of “weekend warriors”…
When The Oil Crisis hits home in The USA “Who Started This War ?” becomes history. As the masses singular attention will be on “How is the government gonna fix this mess ?”
As is evident, the stoush over The Strait is all about creating the perception that THE IRANIANS ARE
doing everything to prevent the flow of oil: ‘Spoilers’ ‘not playing ball’ etc…
Such is the Whitehouse strategy. The campaign to create the perception of Iran’s Intransigence will be
blasted over the US airwaves during the coming months [Framing the Narrative / Staying On Message}…
“We’ll debate ‘Who started This War ?’ AFTER the Oil Crisis is over.”
The masses dont follow complex arguments – that’s why the masses are fed complex situations reduced to slogans…
Every post by Donald Trump is aimed at the US voters, to influence the voters perceptions…
That is: the looming midterms are a deciding factor shaping the messages…
…….
In his 1934 “What Is Class Consciousness ?” Dr Wilhelm Reich (Ernst Parnell) underlined how all
the Class Analysis Of Imperialist Capitalism etc by Communist Party Intellectuals couldnt compete
with Hitlerian Bread & Butter issues propaganda, and it contributed to the desertion of numerous
CP rank and file, who went over to the Nazi…