by Leonid Tsukanov
| Victory? That’s certainly one perspective. But give it a little more time and a consensus will appear. |
To legitimize its efforts, the sultanate even secured the support of the International Maritime Organization and presented its initiative as purely humanitarian.
However, Iran quickly made it clear to its neighbor that it would not allow cheating, prompting further "symbolic strikes" from the US military.
"AGREED" ROUTE
News of the opening of a "green sea corridor" through Oman's territorial waters first surfaced on the evening of June 24, directly from the Sultanate's authorities. "Oman, in coordination with the International Maritime Organization, has opened the temporary sea corridor to all vessels," the country's Ministry of Foreign Affairs reported.
A key competitive advantage over Iran's "green corridor" via Hormuz is the complete absence of any transit fees for civilian vessels. Shipping companies only had to formally notify Muscat of their transit plans and then follow the instructions of coastal authorities to avoid detours.
It is not surprising that most captains and shipowners, fearing American sanctions for payments to the Iranians, happily lined up for transit.
From the perspective of the Omani authorities, the initiative was intended to benefit everyone: it would relieve congestion at the ports of the Arabian monarchies and repatriate foreign sailors who had been involuntarily blockaded in the Persian Gulf following the outbreak of conflict between Iran and the United States with Israel. Moreover, the Omani route was promoted as "approved by everyone," including Washington and Tehran, so the first ships sailed it without fear.
However, in practice, this "alternative corridor" didn't last long. On the morning of June 25, less than 24 hours after its opening, the first incident occurred. An "unknown projectile" struck the Taiwanese cargo ship Ever Lovely, which was sailing under the Singapore flag through Omani territorial waters.
As a result of the attack, the container ship's engine room was damaged and the vessel stopped sailing approximately 7.5 nautical miles from the Omani port of Dahit. The crew was urgently evacuated.
The Iranian side did not claim responsibility for the incident. However, representatives of the Islamic Republic made it quite clear that it was no accident.
Thus, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazim Gharibabadi stated, citing the IRGC's position, that any logistics routes drawn up without Iran's participation (and without taking its interests into account) cannot a priori be considered safe, and Tehran will "rigorously suppress" any attempts to deceive itself.
IRAN AGAINST
Tehran's decision to violate the new status quo is largely consistent with the established incident response logic during the conflict. Iranian armed forces and their allied proxy groups have previously carried out "pinprick strikes" on ships violating the regime.
However, in the current case, Iran's arguments are noticeably different. Judging by the emphasis placed by Iranian officials, Tehran was less displeased by the opening of an alternative route than by the Sultanate's attempts to present it as the only safe route and redirect flows into its territorial waters.
This effectively nullified the effect of the work of the Persian Gulf Administration, which was specifically created by Iran to control transit through the strait.
The Persians were also clearly offended by Oman's attempt to disguise its intentions by presenting the opening of an alternative corridor as part of a broader humanitarian effort, thereby portraying Iran as an aggressor and manipulator in the eyes of other countries.
Moreover, after the attack on the Ever Lovely, the International Maritime Organization suspended the evacuation of civilian sailors from the Persian Gulf, which caused a surge of negativity towards the Islamic Republic.
Finally, the sea corridor that Oman has decided to make public has a controversial history. Previously, the US Navy, with the assistance of the Sultanate's Coast Guard, secretly escorted friendly tankers and bulk carriers along the same route.
Even during the height of tensions in the Gulf, Iran left these vessels alone—apparently in gratitude for Omani diplomatic efforts. With this latest attack, the Islamic Republic has demonstrated that it is acutely aware of its opponents' attempts to establish alternative logistics and is prepared to harshly suppress them.
Despite the general discontent, Iran is still reluctant to openly escalate, leaving the scandal amid uncertainty. The IRGC or friendly proxy groups are not acknowledged as responsible for the attack near Dahit. On the contrary, the Islamic Republic is bolstering its case with diplomatic elements. Specifically, Article 5 of the US-Iran memorandum, which outlines a mechanism for consultations with Tehran on shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.
Iran demands approval for any route changes, regardless of the other side's good intentions. In this context, the current incident in the strait serves rather as an illustration of the consequences of ignoring warnings from official Tehran.
RETRIBUTION FOR RETRIBUTION
The incident in the Strait of Hormuz did not go unnoticed in the United States. President Donald Trump lashed out at Tehran, calling the attack on the Taiwanese container ship "stupid and unjustified." However, he did so only two days after the incident—prior to that, Washington had repeatedly attempted to portray the incident as an accident and defuse the conflict.
Among other things, the American press circulated information about the alleged existence of a "direct line of communication" between Washington and Tehran regarding shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. However, this information was quickly denied by Iranian officials.
This apparently angered the White House even more. A couple of hours after Trump's briefing, US Central Command (CENTCOM) reported a series of "retaliatory strikes" on Iranian territory. According to the US, missile and drone depots, as well as several radars on the country's southern coast, were hit. Iran responded with harassing strikes on US bases in the region.
True, the actions were more symbolic—after conducting a demonstration bombing, American forces returned to their permanent bases, and CENTCOM declared its continued commitment to the letter of the US-Iran memorandum. Iran also expressed a similar position.
In effect, both sides let off steam and returned to the same shipping configuration in the Strait of Hormuz that existed before June 24. The incident with the unplanned opening of a corridor in Oman's territorial waters gradually faded into the background.
But despite the setback, Iran still emerged victorious from the battle, managing to retain one of the key levers of influence in the current conflict in the Gulf.