Iran does not fully control the Strait but disrupts shipping: Analysis

[0:00] And let's now get the view from Tehran and speak to Zohreh Karazmi, who's an assistant professor at the Faculty of World Studies at the University of Tehran and is joining us from the Iranian capital. [0:10] Professor, thank you so much for your time. Some significant developments near the Strait of Hormuz in the last few hours. How does Iran view this escalation? Will this derail the prospects of negotiations? [0:22] What Iranians' understanding of this context is that the blockade itself was an act of war based on the international law. [0:34] And now with these news of the intervention and the Strait of Hormuz that seizing Tuska or even alarming it to actually having any sort of, I mean, conflict that two other different sides are having different narratives on, [0:53] still it indicates that we are just going up the escalation ladder. [0:58] And for Iranians, they understand that they actually, they take it as this innocent passage toward Hormuz, having control of the innocent passage is their right because they don't like to see the, [1:18] across Hormuz to be actually the platform of act of aggression against them. And the, the, the, you're comparing it with the United States that 11,000 kilometers away. [1:30] So they don't have any rights to have such a presence in the region and have this solid block to actually ban others, particularly Iranians, to actually transit in a Strait of Hormuz. [1:44] So I think that it's a very bad escalation and can be a sign that can be added to the military buildup of the United States. [1:52] So what reaction can we expect from Tehran to this escalation as you described it? [2:01] Iran is determined, I think, to have retaliations, but the retaliation can have different ways. [2:08] For example, Bab al-Manda can be closed as a very actually good tool and instrument to pressure the United States and his allies, particularly regarding that 10% of the energy flow is passing Bab al-Manda. [2:23] 40% of the, you know, container shipment is passing there. [2:30] So I think that it can be one of the choices. [2:33] And as Iran also already mentioned, it doesn't need even the Houthis to do so. [2:38] The Iranian missiles can pass 2,000 kilometers and do it on its own. [2:44] So I think that it can be one of the options. [2:46] Now, what about the talks? [2:48] Is there anything that can convince Iran within the next 24 to 48 hours to attend these talks in Islamabad? [2:56] So what Iranians understanding of this situation is, as already also mentioned, the U.S. is not serious about the talks because just right after Islamabad talks, they started this blockade. [3:14] And exactly before the second round of talks, they have this intervention with Iranian ships. [3:20] So at the same time, you see that Trump's rhetoric is still having lots of threats about annihilating the Iranian power plants, about just hitting and striking over Iranian bridges and infrastructure. [3:37] So I think that the United States still is very ignorant about the psyche of Iranians, that under the pressure, they are not coming to concessions and capitulation. [3:47] And this is something that still the United States is feeling to actually have such calculation that pressure in Iran may bring change. [3:56] So in Iran, it's not concluded that the Iranian team is going to Islamabad or not. [4:01] Yeah, I was going to ask you, Professor, is Iran going to send a delegation to Islamabad or not? [4:07] It's not concluded yet that the team is going or not. [4:12] But the actually first calculation is that if this blockade continues to exist, maybe the second round can be cancelled. [4:23] If the blockade is lifted, will they go? [4:27] It is mentioned that it's one of the conditions that maybe the second round actually can win. [4:36] OK. [4:37] But nobody is certain here because, yeah, it's not still concluded. [4:40] Indeed, there's a great deal of uncertainty. [4:43] But there had been some indications that the U.S. may push for a broader framework deal, leaving the core issues, the core sticking points like uranium enrichment and sanctions for later. [4:55] Would Iran accept such an approach? [4:58] I think Iran is not giving up its sovereignty, talking about any of these conditions, about the enrichment of the uranium, about the control over hormones or any other actually, the frozen assets to be released. [5:14] This is something that needs the United States to be serious and honest to. [5:18] And having good faith actually is the problem of Americans. [5:21] If they don't have the good faith, and as I said, you should add it to the compilation of the munitions and the Navy vessels in the region. [5:31] So these are not good signs from the American side. [5:35] So what are you saying? [5:37] Is Iran on a war footing? [5:39] Is Iran prepared to go back to war? [5:41] Iran is well prepared. [5:46] I think Iran is actually very much predicting that the United States is deceitful. [5:53] They are using always, you know, they're frequently using the negotiations as a cover of conspiring military assholes. [6:01] And now you see that 50,000 troops are on the ground in the region. [6:07] So there are lots of signs that the second phase of military strikes would begin soon. [6:13] Thank you so much for talking to us and bringing us a view there from Tehran. [6:18] Professor Zohreh Karadzmi from the University of Tehran joining us on Al Jazeera. [6:22] Well, let's discuss both the security and diplomatic implications of these developments with our guests now from the U.S. [6:29] In Washington, D.C. is David DeRosh, a professor at the Thayer Marshall Institute. [6:33] And in Boston, Donald Heflin, former ambassador, American ambassador and a senior fellow at the Fletcher School at Tufts University. [6:41] Thank you both for joining us on Al Jazeera. [6:45] David DeRosh, if I can start with you. [6:47] How do you view these latest developments in the Strait of Hormuz? [6:50] How significant is this moment both politically and militarily? [6:55] Well, politically, it's extremely significant because what it shows us is that the Iranian government is factualized and that the people we were negotiating with were not the people who made decisions. [7:09] So it was quite striking that you see Tasneem, the official Iranian news agency, putting out a long statement saying that, you know, the Strait will remain closed, that the foreign minister has exceeded his brief, etc., etc. [7:24] Militarily, it's extremely significant because, quite frankly, Iran doesn't really control the Strait. [7:32] They're just disrupting it. [7:34] By that, I mean they're not able to—somebody who controls the Strait can ensure that whatever shipping they want goes through it. [7:42] They can only deny it to neutral civilian states. [7:45] So this is not really a military problem. [7:47] It's more akin to, say, when an extortionist blackmail, you know, poisons, say, soda cans, and there will be four million soda cans on shelves all around the country. [8:00] Two of them have cyanide in them. [8:02] The only way to solve that really is by over—you know, you have to take all four million cans off the shelf. [8:08] It's a very low bar to do it. [8:09] So you have to convince the extortionists not to continue to do this. [8:13] That requires an extreme military action. [8:17] The level of effort to disrupt the Gulf is very low. [8:20] Right. [8:21] In order for commercial confidence to be restored, the Iranian regime has to basically renounce ability to do that, and that's going to take a little bit more coercion. [8:30] But as you heard from our previous guests, they're now threatening a counter reaction to this seizure of their vessel, including—our previous guest was mentioning—perhaps closing Bab el-Mandab. [8:42] That would be a big escalation, wouldn't it, David? [8:45] It would be an escalation. [8:48] I don't think it would be a big escalation because the Bab el-Mandab effectively is already a risky area. [8:55] It would be much more significant if it hadn't been rolled out in slow motion over two years. [9:01] So right now, the risk of attack is already baked into the cake by commercial insurers, and the Bab el-Mandab is—most high-value cargo already bypasses it. [9:12] There's an additional fact here, which is the Houthis really are not eager to be involved in this. [9:17] Their retaliation against Israel and part of this, you know, when Iran ordered its proxies into action, Lebanese Hezbollah went into action. [9:26] The Houthis have made only a token effort here. [9:29] They really want to focus on consolidating their control in the areas that they rule over in Yemen and are not eager to engage in another conflict. [9:40] So it has some potential, but not a lot. [9:44] Ambassador Heflin, let me bring you into the conversation. [9:47] How do you view these latest developments as President Trump is also talking about sending a delegation, including his vice president, for further talks with Iran in Islamabad? [9:56] I think this is just the way this peace process is going to go. [10:00] It's not going to be one of these where both sides agree to ceasefire on a handshake and then negotiate a written agreement, and the shooting stops the entire time. [10:09] It's going to be two steps forward, one step back. [10:12] This is Trump's negotiating style going back to when he was a businessman. [10:15] The Iranians have used this style before. [10:18] There will be half agreements. [10:22] There will be shooting continuing to go on. [10:26] There will be misunderstandings, statements about the other side not having good faith. [10:34] But at the end of the day, both sides have an incentive to reach a permanent ceasefire, and they will. [10:39] But do you think you can negotiate credibly, especially from the American side, when you're seizing ships and threatening infrastructure? [10:47] I mean, that's only going to harden the Iranian position, isn't it not? [10:50] The Iranians attacked an Indian vessel yesterday. [10:54] There's a little bit of it going on on both sides. [10:57] Yeah, I'd prefer the neater, cleaner ceasefire process where all the shooting stops immediately and then you work out the details. [11:05] Given the nature of the two parties here, the Trump administration and the revolutionary government, that just doesn't seem to be the way it's going to go. [11:13] There will probably be some shooting going on while the negotiations are still going on. [11:16] That's not unheard of in diplomatic history. [11:19] It's not the preferred way to do it, but it can be made to work. [11:22] With the vice president on the way to Islamabad, I think the Iranians at the end of the day will send somebody to Islamabad tomorrow. [11:30] David, your thoughts about that, and do you think the ceasefire can be salvaged? [11:35] I think the ambassador's on money. [11:39] I think it can be salvaged, but not as a continuous undertaking. [11:46] I think that there will be lapses in it. [11:48] There will probably be retaliatory strikes. [11:50] I think there may be one tonight, but I think that ultimately we'll see a sort of stop-and-start ceasefire, and the spectrum will go to more ceasefire rather than less ceasefire. [12:06] David, how do you expect the Iranians to retaliate? [12:09] Will it be just a one-off retaliation action or something more substantial? [12:14] Well, that's a good question. [12:17] So the problem is there's no free press in Iran. [12:20] Iran controls all the information there, so we don't really know how much damage has been inflicted. [12:27] Based on their capability, if I were the Iranian commander, the first thing I'd do is I would fire as many missiles in as many directions as I could [12:36] to create the impression that they have a limitless arsenal that hasn't been touched. [12:41] I would basically attack everything in every direction all at once to show that they have the ability to do it, even if they don't, even if it is more bluff than reality. [12:52] That would be my reaction. [12:53] All right, gentlemen, let's assume the negotiations will resume in Islamabad. [12:57] And take a look now at some of the main sticking points between the two sides that remain in any deal that's being discussed between Tehran and Washington. [13:06] President Trump wants Iran to halt its nuclear program altogether, but Iran says any such restrictions must be for a limited number of years. [13:14] Trump has declared the U.S. will take custody of Iran's enriched uranium while Tehran says that will not happen. [13:20] Iran insists it will maintain restrictions on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz until Washington lifts its blockade on Iranian ports. [13:27] But Trump says the blockade will remain in place unless a deal is reached. [13:32] Iranian officials are demanding sanctions relief and the unfreezing of assets worth $20 billion as part of any lasting agreement. [13:40] Tehran is also demanding compensation for damages caused by U.S. and Israeli attacks amounting to about $270 billion. [13:50] Ambassador, your thoughts about these sticking points. [13:53] I mean, it's unlikely that they would agree on any of this if they meet in Islamabad in the next few days. [13:58] There's talk about a framework perhaps that they could agree on and then discuss these key issues at a later date. [14:04] What do you think they might come up with? [14:06] The key issues are medium to long term issues, not short term issues. [14:10] The first one is the nuclear program. [14:12] I think that in the end, Iran will negotiate this away. [14:16] They've learned in the last few weeks that their ability to disrupt 20 percent of the world's oil supply is their super weapon. [14:23] They don't really need nuclear weapons. [14:25] And it's been very problematic. [14:27] And it's the main reason they're under sanctions. [14:29] They really, really want to see the sanctions go away. [14:32] I think they'll be willing to trade for that. [14:36] I think that the point about we need for the blockade to stop before the ceasefire starts, [14:42] whereas the U.S. says we need for the ceasefire to be finally concluded before the blockade stops. [14:47] That's classic. [14:48] I mean, you see that in ceasefire and peace negotiations all the time. [14:51] That'll get resolved by the Pakistanis, who, by the way, deserve great praise for their patience thus far. [14:56] David de Roche, your thoughts and where do you see the Iranians showing flexibility on any of these issues? [15:02] I think they'll show flexibility. [15:07] The problem with making a definitive statement is we don't know how much damage the Iranians have suffered because of their control of the media internet blackout. [15:16] We don't really know how threatened the regime thinks it is. [15:20] When we saw the deployment of Iranian ground forces, that wasn't to repel an American invasion. [15:26] That was to keep the Iranians from rising up. [15:28] So it's possible that the regime may feel itself endangered. [15:31] If that's the case, they'll be more trackable on all these points. [15:34] But I think the ambassador's point about the Iranian calculus that, look, the nuclear program has brought us more grief than benefit. [15:44] And we have our own weapon that is much more potent, easily used, doesn't have the same international opprobrium by disrupting neutral civilian shipping. [15:53] I think that's a very good insight. [15:55] And I think that that level, regardless of the level of destruction, the Iranians will flow to that same way that water flows downhill. [16:04] Ambassador, your thoughts? [16:05] The Strait of Hormuz is Iran's biggest weapon today. [16:08] What do you expect they can agree on with regards to that? [16:12] Are we likely to go back to the status quo prior to the conflict on the Strait of Hormuz? [16:17] I think that there will be status quo prior to the conflict. [16:21] Go ahead, Ambassador. [16:23] No, go ahead, David. [16:25] No, no. [16:26] Ambassador, I'm so sorry. [16:27] I'm sorry. [16:28] I'm sorry. [16:29] I think, yes, I think we can get back there in terms of the Strait and shipping. [16:34] The thing is, Iran's ability to disrupt the shipping is like the sword of Damocles. [16:40] They may not use it for a year, they may not use it for five years, but it's always hanging there, ready to be used. [16:45] Okay, David, your thoughts about that? [16:47] I think that's exactly right. [16:51] Iran is, it's kind of like one of these Hollywood movies where, you know, Julia Roberts wears a fat suit in the first two hours of the film and then she discovers she's beautiful at the end. [17:05] There's a hidden advantage here that Iran has not really exploited. [17:09] They've exploited it now and they realize it's significant. [17:12] Merely possessing it gives them an amount of situational power that few other countries have. [17:17] They don't have to use it. [17:18] So I think it's, I think that they will start to say this publicly as a means of preparing the regime hardliners for a climb down on some of the other things that they've said were red lines that they're going to have to blow through. [17:32] All right. [17:33] But they retain that ability. [17:34] Let me ask you both before we end, what indicators you would watch in the next 48 to 72 hours to assess whether this pyrols further or is controlled? Ambassador. [17:46] First, whether the Iranians show up in Islamabad or not. [17:52] And second, if the two sides can agree on some sort of concession. [17:57] It might have to do with the blockade. [17:59] It might have to do with free passage of the oil tankers. [18:02] Something small to medium size just to show good faith and progress. [18:07] David DeRosh, what indicators are you looking out for? [18:10] I'm looking for a strike on Iran. [18:14] I think that a targeted strike, for example, the base and the command and supporting facilities of the speedboats that fired on the Indian Ocean tankers. [18:24] I think that a strike there would kind of help set the ground rules for further negotiations and may actually move the process along. [18:32] Thank you both for joining us and sharing your insights. [18:35] David DeRosh and Ambassador Donald Heflin joining us both from the US. [18:39] Thank you very much. [18:40] Completely? [18:41] Thank you. [18:42] Thank you very much. [18:43] Thank you very much. [18:44] Thank you. [18:45] Amazing. [18:49] Thank you.