Both Iran and US violating international law over Strait of Hormuz blockade, says expert

[0:00] Well, more than 20 vessels passed the Strait of Hormuz on Saturday. [0:03] It's the highest number of ships crossing the waterway since the 1st of March, [0:07] a day after the war began. [0:09] The red dots and arrows you can see here on this live map are oil tankers. [0:14] Those in green are other commercial vessels. [0:17] Now, five of the vessels that transited the strait on Saturday [0:20] had cargo from Iran laden with products such as oil and metals. [0:25] The rest were heading from Gulf countries such as the UAE, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, [0:29] as well as Qatar. [0:32] Well, for more, we're joined now by Mark Weller, [0:34] who is the director of Chatham House's Global Governance and Security Centre. [0:38] He's also the programme director of its international law programme. [0:42] He joins us from London. [0:43] Thanks so much for being with us here, Professor Weller. [0:46] First of all, from your point of view, [0:48] what the US did in seizing that Iranian cargo vessel, was it legal? [0:56] Well, that's a difficult question because the entire law, [0:59] the entire war against Iran is unlawful. [1:02] If you have a war, yes, then you can declare a blockade [1:07] and you can seize enemy vessels that are breaching the blockade. [1:11] But in this case, it's much more ambiguous because the war as a whole is unlawful. [1:16] And therefore, to impose this kind of measure on Iran is very doubtful. [1:21] In addition, of course, there's meant to be ceasefire. [1:23] And a blockade is definitely an act of war. [1:27] So Iran is somewhat justified when they say that this is inconsistent with the ceasefire that was agreed. [1:34] OK, so given all of that, how would you characterise the current legal status of the Strait of Hormuz? [1:39] Does anyone ultimately have jurisdiction over it? [1:41] Well, the two coastal states, Oman and Iran, have jurisdiction over the narrower part of the Strait of Hormuz. [1:52] But that jurisdiction is limited by what is called the right of transit passage of all other states. [1:59] All other states have the right in peace and in war to use the Strait of Hormuz for its shipping without any interruption. [2:08] So the Iranian argument that they will now use tariffs or tolls in order to obtain revenue forevermore is entirely unjustified and has to be rejected. [2:20] On the other hand, the United States, too, is not entitled to impose a blockade in order to bring Iran back into compliance with international law, [2:30] because that, as I said, is a warlike measure. [2:32] And you cannot use force in international law to constrain another state to start complying with its own obligation. [2:40] But, of course, we are in this overall context of a highly controversial use of force in the first place by the US and Israel against Iran. [2:48] What legal recourse do affected states or shipping or insurance companies actually have with all of this? [2:55] Well, not really. If this is a war and the United States has captured an Iranian ship, [3:04] then it would claim that its own courts can act as prize courts, condemn the seized vessel, and the US can actually seize it. [3:12] But, again, that is the kind of law of naval warfare of the past century, [3:17] before we had a clear prohibition of the use of force, a prohibition of war between states. [3:23] And the situation, therefore, is not as clear as it should be. [3:27] Are there any repercussions for either side here? [3:30] I mean, does any of this really matter if they're not going to be held legally accountable for their actions? [3:38] Well, this is a means by both sides trying to constrain the other to come to a definite ceasefire. [3:44] Iran has used the overall blockade of the straits as an asymmetrical means to, in a way, defend itself against the overwhelming power of the United States and Israel. [3:58] And it has managed in that way to build up leverage in the upcoming round two of the negotiations. [4:04] And then the US came up with a counter move, which is its blockade to deprive Iran of any revenues from its own oil and other products. [4:16] And therefore, really, from both sides, this is a means to get a better deal in the ceasefire negotiations. [4:23] If we can take a slight step back, is international law actually equipped to try and de-escalate a situation like this one? [4:30] Well, we've had the UN Secretary General, many states in the Security Council, all of the Europeans arguing for de-escalation. [4:41] At the moment, we've had one step followed by another that has escalated upwards and has spread the conflict broader to make third states, [4:51] including the importers of oil and gas like China, Japan and others, to make them the incidental victims of this war. [5:00] And I'm sure they will all be pressing the United States, Israel and Iran to, in the next round of negotiations, try and come to a solution. [5:10] And, of course, the irony is that the war really is about Iran's alleged nuclear program. [5:16] And it is unlikely that the end result will be very different from what Oman had nearly mediated on the eve of the outbreak of this war, [5:26] a kind of solution whereby Iran can undertake a peaceful nuclear program, but under the usual international supervisions. [5:35] OK, we'll leave it there for the moment. [5:36] Thank you so much. [5:37] That is Mark Weller, Director of Chatham House's Global Governance and Security Center. [5:42] Thanks for joining us. [5:44] Thank you. [5:45] Thank you.