Forum Topic

Suckered by a US hawk toward a war with Iran?

Suckered by a US hawk while Tories fight over who will take us out of EU?"Iran’s reaction [to the UK seizure of their tanker] was immediate and furious. It claimed Britain had acted illegally because the EU embargo on oil supplies to Syria, which Hunt claimed to be upholding, applied only to EU states and not to third countries such as Iran. In any case, Tehran said, the ship’s destination was not Syria.Iran’s outrage was shared, to a lesser degree, by Josep Borrell, Spain’s socialist foreign minister. Borrell resented the British incursion into Gibraltar’s territorial waters, which Madrid does not recognise. He also appears to have been annoyed that Spain was drawn in – in Tehran, the Spanish ambassador had been summonsed by the foreign ministry to explain Madrid’s role. His reaction was to distance Spain from the affair. The Iranian tanker had been seized “following a request from the United States to the United Kingdom,” he said. And even though Britain was supposedly upholding EU regulations, the External Action Service, the EU’s foreign policy arm, has remained silent throughout.Iran’s retaliation in snatching the Stena Impero has further exposed Britain’s diplomatic isolation and its military and economic vulnerability. The government has advised British ships to avoid the Strait of Hormuz, an admission it cannot protect them. But between 15 and 30 British-flagged tankers transit the strait each day. If trade is halted, the impact on energy prices may be severe.Hunt’s appeal for international support for Britain has so far fallen on deaf ears, France and Germany excepted. China, Japan and other countries that rely on oil from the Gulf show no sign of helping. The US plan for a multinational coalition to protect Gulf shipping has few takers. Meanwhile, Trump’s promise to back Britain has scant practical value – and carries inherent dangers.The Bolton gambit succeeded. Despite its misgivings, Britain has been co-opted on to the front line of Washington’s confrontation with Iran. The process of polarisation, on both sides, is accelerating. The nuclear deal is closer to total collapse. And by threatening Iran with “serious consequences”, without knowing what that may entail, Britain blindly dances to the beat of Bolton’s war drums."https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/20/britain-lured-into-deadly-trap-on-iran-by-trump-hawk-john-boltonhttps://theconversation.com/eu-silence-over-british-seizure-of-iranian-tanker-is-a-telling-glimpse-of-post-brexit-future-120437

David Ainsworth ● 2670d20 Comments

"I'm also slightly puzzled. If Grace 1 was delivering oil to Syria then why was it detained off Gibraltar...seems an awfully way off course."Well, I expect that there are several possible explanations:-It might not have been going to Syria. However anywhere in the Mediterranean would have involved the Suez Canal. But they might not have been embargoed countries. It may have wanted to avoid inspection going through the Suez Canal, but apparently the Suez Canal authorities have no right to prevent any ship from any country from passage. With the surveillance of the seas that is now available and the knowledge that the USA is out to destroy you, a shorter sea journey would seem easier to keep secret than a 14,000 mile trip.It is too big a tanker to go through the Suez Canal fully loaded with oil. It would be OK if it was empty. But that would just be a rather pointless maritime outing."That route from Iran to Syria is about 23,300 km (14,500 mi), compared with just 6,600 km via the Red Sea and Suez Canal. A ship the size of the Grace 1, known as a Very Large Crude Carrier, or VLCC, can’t pass through the canal fully loaded. The shorter route would require it to discharge half its cargo, load it on to a smaller ship or send the oil through the Sumed Pipeline, and pick it up again in the Mediterranean.Iran can’t pump oil through the [Sumed] pipeline, which spans Egypt from the Red Sea to the Mediterranean, because the link is owned by companies from Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Qatar. The pipeline’s owners have not permitted the transit of Iranian crude since August 2012."https://www.worldoil.com/news/2019/7/4/british-forces-seize-oil-tanker-for-violating-syria-sanctionsSo it seems that the tanker had to go the long way or no way.

David Ainsworth ● 2670d