American naivety or engineering a war?

American-led economic sanctions against Iran have backed that country into a corner from where it is threatening to seriously disrupt the global oil flow by closing  the Strait of Hormus and threatening American naval presence in the region. In recent days there have also been reports about American military personnel arriving in Israel, indicating that some move out of that quarter might be imminent and the world is dangerously close to possibly another major conflict in the Middle East.

In a report on Monday for the Canadian-based geopolitical research house Global Research Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya summarised the situation as follows: “After years of US. threats, Iran is taking steps which suggest that it is both willing and capable of closing the Strait of Hormuz. On December 24, 2011 Iran started its Velayat-90 naval drills in and around the Strait of Hormuz and extending (it) from the Persian Gulf and Gulf of Oman (Oman Sea) to the Gulf of Aden and the Arabian Sea. 
“Since the conduct of these drills, there has been a growing war of words between Washington and Tehran. Nothing the Obama Administration or the Pentagon have done or said so far, however, has deterred Tehran from continuing its naval drills. “
When America and other Nato powers started with moves to impose, and unilaterally enforce a global boycott of Iranian oil, it would have been the height of naivety to think that Iran would not play one of the few strong strategic cards it holds.

The fact is to transit through the Strait of Hormuz all maritime traffic, including the US Navy, must sail through Iranian territorial waters. Almost all entrances into the Persian Gulf are made through Iranian waters and most exits are through Omani waters.

Pot calling the kettle black?

Part III of the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Seas (CLS) maritime transit passage-provisions stipulate that vessels are free to sail through the Strait of Hormuz and similar bodies of water on the basis of speedy and continuous navigation between an open port and the high seas.

Tehran has always followed the navigation practices of the Law of the Sea. However, ironically like the United States, Iran is not legally bound by the CLS. Like Washington, Tehran did sign this international treaty, but never ratified it.

However the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee is currently studying legislation to create an official Iranian position on military maritime traffic through its territorial waters.

Whether by miscalculation or design, a provocative American move in December  pushed up the temperature in the Gulf-area considerably. The US aircraft carrier John C. Stennis passed through the area where Iran was been conducting its naval drills.

Iran responded by advising the John C. Stennis and other US Navy vessels not to return to the Persian Gulf while Iran was conducting its drills. It also warned that “Iran is not in the habit of repeating a warning twice.”

The Pentagon, in what looked like a partial backdown, responded with a statement saying: “No one in this government seeks confrontation [with Iran]. It’s important to lower the temperature.”

A spokesperson of the US Navy’s Bahrain-based Fifth Fleet, however also warned that “the free flow of goods and services through the Strait of Hormus is vital to regional and global prosperity. Anyone who threatens to disrupt freedom of navigation in an international strat is clearly outside the community of nations; any disruption will not be tolerated.”

In the meantime there seems to be a strong possibility that the European Union (EU) will be introducing an oil boycott against Iran at the end of January, when its first monthly summit of its 27 minister of foreign affairs takes place.

Iranian minister of foreign affairs, Ali-Akbar Sakehi described the threatening oil boycott as a trade war and said Tehran will take “appropriate actions” to protect its interests. The Islamic Republic is experiencing tough economic times and the danger of public unrest is on the rise, which according to some commentators is increasing the danger of a military conflict.

At the same time new evidence surfaced towards the end of 2011 that the Israeli-government is seriously contemplating delivering a military blow to the Iranian nuclear programme.

According to Michel Chossudovsky in another article for Global Research “… given the integration of Israel's air defense system into that of the US, Israel cannot, under any circumstances, wage a war on Iran without the US. Moreover, since mid-2005, following the signing of a protacol between Nato and Tel Aviv, Israel has beocme a de facto member of the Atlantic Alliance.

“The Pentagon calls the shots. The planned deployment of US troops in Israel is part and parcel of a US sponsored war.”

In his article Nazemroaya concludes that “Washington has been on the offensive against Iran using all means at its disposal. The tensions over the Strait of Hormuz and in the Persian Gulf are just one front in a dangerous multi-front regional cold war between Tehran and Washington in the broader Middle East.

“Since 2001, the Pentagon has also been restructuring its military to wage unconventional wars with enemies like Iran. Nonetheless, geography has always worked against the Pentagon and the US has not found a solution for its naval dilemma in the Persian Gulf. Instead of a conventional war, Washington has had to resort to waging a covert, economic and diplomatic war against Iran.”