Iranian Seizure of British Tanker Adds to Gulf Volatility

Map of the Persian Gulf region

by Aveek Sen

Iran’s Revolutionary Guards announced on July 20 that they had seized the British-flagged tanker Stena Impero in the Strait of Hormuz. It was seen as a tit-for-tat move in retaliation for the British detention of the Iranian tanker Grace 1 off Gibraltar earlier this month. This was only the latest of several provocative incidents in the Persian Gulf region over the past three months. 

In May, four ships were attacked, apparently with limpet mines, in the Gulf of Oman. A month later two more vessels were attacked in the Gulf of Oman, for which the U.S. blamed Iran (Iran denied the charge). Shortly after that second attack, Iran downed a U.S. drone that allegedly entered its airspace. Donald Trump supposedly called back a retaliatory attack on Iran at the last minute. Earlier this month the U.S. claimed to have downed an Iranian drone that approached one of its naval vessels, a claim Iran also denied. The current volatility in the Persian Gulf is reminiscent of the days of the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s.

LobeLog spoke with Joel Rubin, President of the Washington Strategy Group and a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State. He says that “the situation is very tense and the tit-for-tat military back and forth is highly destabilizing. The region is a tinderbox. The American people oppose another American war in the Middle East, and the Iranians are being provocative. The danger is that there is no American policy beyond maximum pressure, which, rather than leading to a negotiation, is predictably leading us towards further conflict.”

Indeed it is the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure campaign”—begun last year when Trump pulled out of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA) and reimposed sanctions against Tehran—that has led to the current situation. Not only has that decision destabilized the Persian Gulf, it’s also led to an almost total unraveling of the JCPOA itself. With European leaders unable or unwilling to risk U.S. sanctions to protect Iranian commerce, Tehran has in recent weeks begun exceeding JCPOA limits related to its uranium enrichment program. That in turn has raised fears that Iran plans to abandon the agreement altogether.

Barbara Slavin, Director of the Future of Iran Initiative at the Atlantic Council, says that “this escalation is the direct result of the US decision to quit the Iran nuclear deal and try to impose an embargo on the export of Iranian oil. Even during the 1980s, the U.S. did not do that. Iran’s response, however, will only make a bad situation worse and risks touching off a new conflict with the U.S.”

From Iran’s perspective, however, it’s the UK that escalated tensions by seizing the Grace 1 at Gibraltar. In detaining the Stena Impero, the IRGC was only retaliating in kind. Iranian leaders do not seek further escalation, but neither are they willing to appear weak when challenged by Western countries.

Diako Hosseini, Director of the World Studies Program at the Center for Strategic Studies in Tehran, which is affiliated with Iran’s Presidential office, says that “it seems soaring tensions between Iran and the U.S. are gradually getting out of control. We are sleepwalking on the edge of war. The hawkish policies of the U.S. and recently the UK’s reckless decision in seizing the Iranian oil tanker in Gibraltar have provoked Iranian responses. Obviously, Iran doesn’t want war and doesn’t even want to elevate the crisis, but at the same time, it cannot stay aloof and allow itself to be intimidated by saber-rattling and to let its people be terrorized through sanctions. The United States and Britain should stop their provocations and instead open effective diplomatic channels to revive a necessary level of confidence. Otherwise, it’s expected that the chain reactions and mutual misreading would lead us into an inadvertent war.”

The UK is now spearheading a European coalition to protect shipping interests in the Persian Gulf. If Iran’s seizure of the UK vessel triggers a European backlash, it could spell the end of any European efforts to salvage the JCPOA and lead to even harsher sanctions against Tehran. Iran finds itself in a challenging position. On the one hand it has to defend its interests. On the other hand it has to ensure it is not acting so provocatively so as to provoke European leaders to join the Trump administration’s maximum pressure campaign. As it tries to walk the fine line between those extremes, volatility in the Persian Gulf is only likely to increase.

Aveek Sen is an independent journalist working on cybersecurity and the geopolitics of India’s neighborhood, focusing on Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, and Bangladesh. @aveeksen.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
avatar

Guest Contributor

Articles by guest writers.

SHOW 6 COMMENTS

6 Comments

  1. Another article that just doesn’t really look at the real problem with the Ayatollahs and their concept of international order. As usual the author is criticising the US and UK and giving the benefit of the doubt to the Ayatollahs. For example we all know why ships that break European sanctions are stopped in European waters. But the author decides to ignore it. So you have to ask the question, why do they write like this, and why is it that they are trying to twist the truth. Is it that they are afraid of the truth? Or is it just plain disinformation. Do they have an agenda to spread fake news and fake analysis?

  2. ALI MOSTOFI

    What was wrong with Guatemala under Arbenz?

    Iran under Mossadeq?

    Chile under Allende?

    Americans are the problem not non-Americans.

  3. This article pretends that is Iran who’s in the corner and need to escalate or fold. That is not true at all, actually the ball is on the west’ side. It the US that is in the corner and has cornered herself she now needs to escalate or recede. Donald Trump is well aware what he and his advisers done. They know Donald Trump will not get elected as a war president since he only will draw votes by his base, but the anti war crowd that did not go out to vote for Hillary in last election will go out and vote for the democrat president that for sure will pick an anti war and negotiate platform do defeat Trump the war president. That is how he won the last election he was the anti war president, anti war democrats sat home and didn’t show up at polls he won the electoral by having his redneck and Evangelicals base to go and vote for him. All Iran has to do is resist seat and wait like she has done for 40 years. That’s the reason he didn’t want to retaliate against downing of 200 mill drone. He think he is the head of a family like a mafia boss, and not head of a nation.

  4. Aveek Sen wrote “[The US May 2018 JCPOA] decision … led to an almost total unraveling of the JCPOA itself.” That is a ‘fake news’ presentation the US administration likes the world to read. Correctly, it should read ‘Immediately following the illegal US May 2018 JCPOA decision, Iran initiated the Dispute Resolution Mechanism in JCPOA (paragraphs 36-37), claiming the US was not meeting its commitments. Iran continued to fully meet its JCPOA commitments for a year, and recently has announced that, since the other JCPOA participants are not meeting their commitments, it will exceed certain JCPOA limits, as foreseen and allowed by the JCPOA (para 36).’

    Aveek Sen quotes Diako Hosseini as saying “chain reactions and mutual misreading would lead us into an inadvertent war.” That is another ‘fake news’ statement. You can be sure that if the US enters war with Iran, it will NOT be ‘inadvertent’. It will mean Bolton/Pompeo are successful in getting President Trump to go to war with Iran. And they are promising him a winnable, low-casualty war, over in a week – using nukes. If you do not believe that, read again the President’s press conference with the Pakistani president, and then read Scott Ritter in The American Conservative.

Comments are closed.