US president Donald Trump has said that the US military operation “Project Freedom” guiding ships through the Strait of Hormuz will be paused for a short period. He cited a request from Pakistan and progress towards a final deal with Iran.
Published On 6 May 20266 May 2026
Share
The United States has transferred 22 crew members from the Iranian container ship, the Touska, to Pakistan, in what Islamabad describes as a “confidence-building measure” during tension in the Strait of Hormuz.
US Central Command (CENTCOM) spokesman, Captain Tim Hawkins, said the crew had been handed over for repatriation. Pakistan’s foreign ministry confirmed the transfer, saying the sailors would be returned to Iranian authorities.
list of 4 itemsend of list
The Touska was seized by US forces in the Gulf of Oman in the early hours of April 20, in what Tehran described as an act of “piracy”, after the US declared a naval blockade of Iranian ports. Iran had effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz following the start of the US-Israeli war on Iran.
On Monday, tensions continued to escalate in and around the Strait of Hormuz.
First, US President Donald Trump announced that US naval ships would help guide stranded vessels through the strait in an operation he dubbed “Project Freedom”.
Iran issued a new map of the strait with new boundaries further to the east, and warned shipping not to attempt to pass without coordinating with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
Then, state media reported that two Iranian missiles struck a US naval vessel near Jask Island in the strait after ignoring warnings from the IRGC to turn back. Washington denied any attack.
Amid continued interceptions and seizures of vessels by both sides, questions remain over whether the two countries can de-escalate and reach a broader peace agreement. Pakistan has been central to these efforts, seeking to keep diplomatic channels open, but talks hosted in Islamabad last month ended without a breakthrough.
Iran’s foreign ministry says it is reviewing Washington’s response to its 14-point proposal aimed at ending the conflict sent via Pakistan on Friday. As Pakistan continues to mediate, Trump previously described Tehran’s offer as “unacceptable”.
The Iran-flagged Touska was seized by US forces in the Gulf of Oman, close to the Strait of Hormuz, on April 20 after Washington accused the crew of failing to comply with the US naval blockade on Iranian ports. Shortly after midnight local time in Iran, CENTCOM said the USS Spruance fired its 5-inch (127mm) deck gun at the vessel’s engine room, disabling it.
According to the US military, the ship was attempting to transit the Strait of Hormuz en route to Iran’s main commercial port, Bandar Abbas.
The Touska, a small container ship operated by the sanctioned Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL), was boarded near Iran’s Chabahar port. US Marines from the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit captured the vessel after what CENTCOM said were repeated warnings over six hours.
Video released by the US military showed Marines descending from helicopters launched from the USS Tripoli and securing the Tusk.
Iran condemned the capture as a violation of international law and an act of “piracy“, before demanding the immediate release of the vessel and its crew.
Pakistan has positioned itself as a mediator between Washington and Tehran, and is now framing the transfer of the Touska crew as a step towards de-escalation of tensions. In a statement, the Pakistani foreign ministry said the move reflected a “confidence-building measure” and reaffirmed its commitment to facilitating dialogue.
US and Iranian delegations met in Islamabad last month for their first talks since 1979. Although negotiations ended without a deal, they marked a rare moment of direct engagement.
Pakistan has since coordinated with regional powers, including Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, Qatar and Egypt, while maintaining close communications with China, in an effort to build broader support for de-escalation.
In a call with Iran’s Foreign Minister, Seyed Abbas Araghchi, on Monday, Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister, Ishaq Dar, reiterated that diplomacy remains the only viable path to stability. Tehran, in turn, acknowledged Islamabad’s mediation efforts.
There are not many signs that it will.
Indeed, tensions in the Strait of Hormuz have continued to increase despite the release of the crew members.
Most notably, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard published a new map on Monday outlining what it claims is an expanded zone of control in the waterway, stretching from Iranian and Omani territory to include the territorial waters of the United Arab Emirates as well.
Analysts say this new claim exceeds internationally recognised boundaries. The UAE has accused Iran of launching drones at an oil tanker linked to Abu Dhabi’s national energy company, while Washington has dismissed Iranian reports of an attack on a US warship as false.
Military analyst Alexandru Hudisteanu, a maritime security expert who served 13 years in the Romanian navy, told Al Jazeera on Monday that the conflicting claims reflect a broader test of resolve. “Any attempt to open the strait will likely be met with resistance from Iran,” he said, adding that Tehran views control of Hormuz as its primary leverage in negotiations.
Hudisteanu warned that the situation carries a high risk of miscalculation, with both sides continuing to operate in close proximity. For Iran, the Strait of Hormuz is the “only leverage” it has for peace negotiations, Hudisteanu said.
Iranian analyst Foad Izadi argued that the ceasefire effectively collapsed when the US imposed its blockade, which he described as “an act of war”. He added that the targeting and seizure of ships along the Strait of Hormuz further undermined any notion of a truce.
“Attacking an Iranian ship’s engine is an act of war as well,” he added, despite the release of the Touska’s crew signalling some short-term goodwill between the US and Iran.
“I have all the cards,” posted the White House on its X account on Sunday, alongside an image of President Donald Trump holding playing cards from the Uno game, in a message appearing to signal Washington’s confidence in its ongoing war on Iran.
Uno is a card game in which the winner is the first to get rid of all their cards.
list of 4 itemsend of list
The post came after Trump announced on his Truth Social platform that the US military would begin guiding ships stranded around the Strait of Hormuz by the war on Monday, in a sign that the conflict could further escalate, despite the near-month-long fragile ceasefire. Tehran has been effectively blocking nearly all shipping from the Gulf for more than two months, after the US and Israel attacked Iran two months ago, disrupting global energy supplies.
“We have told these countries that we will guide their ships safely out of these restricted waterways, so that they can freely and ably get on with their business,” Trump said, dubbing the campaign “Project Freedom”. “They are merely neutral and innocent bystanders!”
The president added that US negotiators were engaged in “very positive discussions” with Tehran, which could lead to “something very positive” without further elaboration.
Iran, however, reacted by insisting that the security of the waterway was in the hands of its armed forces, and warned that “any safe passage and navigation in any situation” should be “carried out in coordination with the armed forces”.
On Monday, the Iranian Fars news agency reported that a US warship had been hit by two Iranian drones, the claim was denied by US Central Command.
So what leverage do the US and Iran hold over each other, and what happens next?
In response to Trump’s “I have all the cards” social media post, Iran’s Consulate General in Hyderabad, India, posted its own image on X.
“Yes, we have less cards,” Iran’s consulate in the Indian city of Hyderabad wrote on X, together with a photo of an Iranian military spokesperson holding four Uno cards compared to Trump’s five, pointing out that usually holding all the cards means you are losing, not winning, in the game of Uno.
In response to Trump’s “Project Freedom” declaration, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) warned that ships deemed to be in breach of its rules in the Strait of Hormuz “will be stopped by force”, while insisting there has been no change in how it manages traffic through the strategic waterway.
On Monday, it issued a new map of the Strait of Hormuz with boundaries extending further to the east than its previous one, and said any ship travelling between the two sides must coordinate with the IRGC first.
“There has been no change in the management process of the Strait of Hormuz,” spokesperson Sardar Mohebbi said, adding that vessels that comply with the “transit protocols issued by the IRGC Navy” will be “safe and secure”.
“Other maritime movements that are contrary to the declared principles of the IRGC Navy will face serious risks. Violating vessels will be stopped by force,” he said.
The United States’ most enduring source of leverage over Iran remains its sanctions regime, which was launched in 1979 when Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini declared Iran an Islamic Republic.
Successive US administrations over the past 47 years have hit Tehran with a series of financial restrictions targeting Iran’s banking, oil exports and access to international markets – the US says the sanctions are a response to Iran’s nuclear programme.
Sanctions have significantly constrained Iran’s economy, limiting government revenue and contributing to inflation and currency depreciation. Measures enforced through the US Treasury also deter other countries and companies from engaging with Iran, further strangling its economy.
The economic pressure has been central to US strategy towards Iran, particularly during its attempts to force Tehran back to negotiations over its nuclear programme, under both Democratic and Republican administrations.
Beyond economics, the US maintains overwhelming military superiority, especially air power. Aircraft carriers, long-range bombers and precision strike capabilities give Washington the ability to target Iranian infrastructure with relatively low risk to its own forces.
US bases across the Gulf, as well as military partnerships with regional allies – most notably Israel – reinforce this advantage.
American forces, together with the Israeli army, have killed more than 3,000 people, and struck thousands of sites across Iran in the current war, including Iran’s energy and nuclear sites.
Since mid-April, the United States has enforced a widespread naval blockade of Iranian ports and ships. The operation began on April 13 after talks between Washington and Tehran collapsed, with US forces ordered to stop or divert vessels entering or leaving Iranian ports.
US forces have since intercepted or turned back dozens of ships, and seized a container ship, the Touska. On Monday, the US announced that its crew had been repatriated to Iran from Pakistan, where they were taken after their ship was captured in the Gulf of Oman last month.
According to Trump, the blockade is designed to choke Iran’s oil exports, its main revenue source.
US officials say the measures have severely disrupted Iran’s trade, which relies heavily on sea routes.
The vital waterway is Iran’s most significant strategic asset, the narrow passage ships one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies in peacetime.
Tehran has effectively closed the strait since the war began on February 28, sending global oil and gas prices soaring and energy markets into turmoil. Iran has repeatedly demonstrated its ability to target shipping, seize vessels, or conduct military exercises, demonstrating its ability to close or restrict the strait.
The result is soaring energy prices globally, forcing many countries to implement severe austerity measures to soften the blow.
Last week in the US, the average price of a gallon (3.8 litres) of gasoline (petrol) rose to $4.30, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA), up from less than $3 before the war.
Surging energy costs have driven up inflation and deepened economic uncertainty in the US, compounding Trump’s political troubles amid overwhelming disapproval for the war amongst Americans.
Even if the US does begin escorting ships through safely – the threat from mines or Iranian strikes may be enough to prevent tankers from attempting to sail, experts say. Insurance companies are also unlikely to underwrite voyages.
Iran’s network of allied groups across the Middle East is another asset that Tehran relies on heavily. These include armed groups in Iraq and Syria, as well as Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen
Through these groups, Iran has exerted pressure indirectly, targeting US interests and allies without engaging in direct confrontation.
One critical threat Iran has previously made is for the Houthis to disrupt shipping in the Bab al-Mandeb, another vital maritime chokepoint linking the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden.
The Houthis, an Iran-aligned group in Yemen, have previously targeted shipping in this area, most notably during Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, further raising concerns about the security of global trade routes.
Roughly 4.2 billion barrels of crude oil and refined petroleum liquids flowed through the strait in 2014, accounting for about five percent of global supply.
While nowhere near the military capabilities of the US, Iran’s investment in missile and drone programmes has proven to be an effective means of deterrence. That is particularly through its ability to threaten regional US bases and impose significant costs on regional countries hosting American assets involved in military operations against Tehran.
While the US undoubtedly has a more sophisticated and powerful arsenal at its disposal, the interceptors it uses to combat Iranian drones cost around $4 million each, while Iran’s Shahed drones can be mass-produced at $20-50,000 each.
Furthermore, Iran’s ballistic missiles have proved capable of breaching Israel’s much-lauded “Iron Dome” defence system on several occasions. Iran has also dropped cluster bombs, which divide before they can be intercepted, making them much harder to stop.
Michael Clarke, visiting professor at the Department of War Studies, King’s College London, said Trump’s overwhelming conventional military strength has failed to translate into strategic leverage on the ground.
“President Trump thinks he is a great poker player,” Clarke told Al Jazeera. “He thought America’s sheer destructive potential put all the ‘cards’ in his hand” when starting the war on Iran.
But Iranian forces have consistently disrupted US expectations through asymmetric tactics, he said.
“At every turn, the Iranians have come up with asymmetric tactics – vicious, reckless tactics – that have negated everything the Americans have tried to do,” Clarke noted, describing a pattern in which traditional US military superiority has been blunted by unconventional responses.
Despite significant American forces and assets in the region – including “no fewer than three US Carrier Strike Groups, two Marine Expeditionary Units, hundreds of combat aircraft and thousands of troops”, Clarke argued that Washington has struggled to find an effective use for its multi-billion-dollar resources at its disposal.
Moreover, he said, domestic pressure on Trump is growing. Trump “can’t find a way to use them [US forces] that will make any real difference to the current stalemate in the limited time he has before his own MAGA base concludes he has lost the game”.
Clarke also highlighted the willingness of Iran’s IRGC to escalate tensions. “Whatever this war might do to Iranian society, the IRGC is prepared to gamble with its own existence in the fight,” he added.
Three of six passengers who fell ill from suspected rodent-transmitted virus have died, and one is in intensive care, the WHO says.
Published On 3 May 20263 May 2026
Three people have died on a cruise ship in the Atlantic, with at least one confirmed to have suffered from hantavirus, a rare disease transmitted to humans from rodents.
Health authorities are now investigating a suspected outbreak of the virus on the MV Hondius, which is sailing from Ushuaia in Argentina to Cape Verde.
list of 3 itemsend of list
In a statement on Sunday, the World Health Organization said that one case had been confirmed and at least five other passengers were suspected of being infected.
“Of the six affected individuals, three have died, and one is currently in intensive care in South Africa,” WHO said in a statement.
“Detailed investigations are ongoing, including further laboratory testing and epidemiological investigations. Medical care and support are being provided to passengers and crew. Sequencing of the virus is also ongoing.”
WHO added that it was “facilitating coordination” between countries to evacuate the two other passengers showing symptoms of the infection.
Hantavirus, a rare disease transmitted to humans through the droppings or urine of infected rodents, can be fatal in severe cases and cause hemorrhagic fever.
South Africa’s National Department of Health said earlier on Sunday that there had been an outbreak of a “severe acute respiratory illness”, which had killed at least two people, and that a third person was in intensive care in Johannesburg, according to the AFP news agency.
The ministry’s spokesperson, Foster Mohale, confirmed that the patient being treated in Johannesburg tested positive for hantavirus.
A 70-year-old was the first to develop symptoms. He died on the ship, with his body now being held on the island of Saint Helena, a British territory in the South Atlantic, the spokesman said.
The patient’s 69-year-old wife also fell sick and was evacuated to South Africa, where she died in a Johannesburg hospital, he added.
Mohale told AFP that authorities have not confirmed the nationalities of the deceased. But the person in intensive care was reported by AFP to be a 69-year-old Briton.
Israel’s military reportedly seized 22 vessels sailing among the Global Sumud Flotilla.
Published On 1 May 20261 May 2026
More than 160 activists on board aid ships forming a flotilla bound for Gaza have been taken to the Greek island of Crete after Israeli forces seized their vessels in international waters near Greece earlier this week, Freedom Flotilla organisers have said.
The organisers told the Reuters news agency on Friday that 168 members of the flotilla crew had been taken to Crete while two activists remained with Israeli authorities.
list of 3 itemsend of list
According to the group’s tracker, 22 boats have been intercepted so far by Israel, while 47 others are still sailing.
On Wednesday, Israeli military forces intercepted the boats travelling with the Global Sumud Flotilla from Barcelona in Spain, using drones, communications jamming technology, and armed raiding parties to halt the humanitarian fleet in the middle of the Mediterranean as it headed to Gaza, according to organisers and Israeli media.
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said the activists on the intercepted boats would be taken to Greece.
On Friday, an Israeli army ship transferred 168 members of the flotilla crew to Greek boats, which then took them to Crete, where buses and an ambulance car waited for them, organisers said and Reuters footage showed.
A source who asked not to be identified also told Reuters that the remaining 47 boats at sea were still sailing off southern Crete and planned to anchor there at some point before continuing onwards to Gaza.
Each ship is carrying about a tonne of food, medical supplies and other equipment, the source added.
In an interview with Al Jazeera on Wednesday, Gur Tsabar, a spokesperson for the Global Sumud Flotilla, described Israel’s boarding of its vessels as “a straight-up attack on unarmed civilian boats in international waters”.
“This is illegal under international law. Israel has no jurisdiction in these waters. Boarding these boats amounts to illegal detention, potentially kidnapping on the high seas,” Tsabar added.
Officials around the globe have condemned the interception of the boats bound for Gaza as a violation of international law, with Turkiye calling it an “act of piracy”.
“By targeting the Global Sumud Flotilla, whose mission is to draw attention to the humanitarian catastrophe faced by the innocent people of Gaza, Israel has also violated humanitarian principles and international law,” Turkiye’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement.
Spain called the interception “illegal”, while Germany and Italy expressed “great concern” and called for the release of detainees.
But in a statement on Thursday, the US Department of State threatened “to impose consequences” against those who support the flotilla, which it cast as “pro-Hamas”.
Pro-Palestinian activists say Israel and the United States wrongly conflate their advocacy for Palestinian rights with support for Hamas fighters.
Last October, Israel’s military intercepted about 40 boats from the first Global Sumud Flotilla as they tried to carry aid to besieged Gaza, arresting more than 450 participants, including the grandson of South African leader Nelson Mandela, Swedish campaigner Greta Thunberg and Member of European Parliament Rima Hassan.
Detained and taken to Israel, several of the flotilla activists claimed they were subjected to physical and psychological abuse while in Israeli custody.
Israel later expelled the arrested crew members and activists.
On March 11, the Thai cargo ship Mayuree Naree was struck by two projectiles while crossing the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important waterways located between Iran and Oman. A fire broke out in the engine room, and while 20 sailors were rescued, three remained trapped inside the stricken vessel. Their remains were found weeks later when a specialised rescue team boarded the vessel, which had run aground on the shores of Iran’s Qeshm island.
At about the same time, a “shadow fleet” of tankers continued to navigate the very same waters safely. Operating with fake flags, disabled signals and unspecified destinations, this covert armada survived because it operates outside the traditional rules of maritime trade.
list of 4 itemsend of list
Iran threatened to block “enemy” ships passing through the Strait of Hormuz – a crucial chokepoint for a fifth of the world’s oil – in the wake of the United States-Israeli war launched on February 28. Soon, navigation through the strait was disrupted amid fears of attacks.
Following a temporary ceasefire on April 8, the United States imposed a full naval blockade on Iranian ports on April 13. Theoretically, traffic through the strait should have come to a complete halt.
However, tracking data reveals a remarkably different reality.
An exclusive Al Jazeera open-source investigation tracked 202 voyages made by 185 vessels through the strait between March 1 and April 15, navigating both under fire and across blockade lines.
To understand how the strait operated under extreme pressure, Al Jazeera’s Digital Investigative Unit monitored the waterway daily, cross-referencing vessel International Maritime Organization (IMO) numbers with international sanction lists from the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), the European Union, the United Kingdom and the United Nations. An IMO number is a unique seven-digit figure assigned to commercial ships.
Of the tracked voyages, 77 (38.5 percent) were directly or indirectly linked to Iran. Notably, 61 of the ships transiting the strait were explicitly listed on international sanctions lists.
The investigation divided the conflict into three distinct phases to map the fleet’s behaviour:
When the US blockade took effect, the shadow fleet adapted immediately.
The Iranian cargo ship “13448” successfully broke the blockade. Because it is a smaller vessel operating in coastal waters, it lacks an official IMO number, allowing it to evade traditional sanction-monitoring tools. The vessel departed Iran’s Al Hamriya port and reached Karachi, Pakistan.
Similarly, the Panama-flagged Manali broke the blockade, crossing on April 14 and penetrating the cordon again on April 17 en route to Mumbai, India.
The investigation uncovered widespread manipulation of Automatic Identification System (AIS) trackers. Vessels such as the US-sanctioned Flora, Genoa and Skywave deliberately disabled or jammed their signals to hide their identities and destinations.
To obscure ultimate ownership, the shadow fleet heavily relies on a complex web of “false flags” and shell companies. The investigation identified 16 ships operating under fake flags, including registries from landlocked nations like Botswana and San Marino, as well as others from Madagascar, Guinea, Haiti and Comoros.
The operational network managing these ships spans the globe. Operating firms were primarily based in Iran (15.7 percent), China (13 percent), Greece (more than 11 percent) and the United Arab Emirates (9.7 percent). Notably, the operators of nearly 19 percent of the observed vessels remain unknown.
Despite the intense military pressure, energy carriers dominated the traffic, with 68 ships (36.2 percent) transporting crude oil, petroleum products and gas. Ten of these tankers were directly linked to Iran. Non-oil trade also persisted, with 57 bulk and general cargo ships crossing during the open war phase, 41 of which were tied to Tehran.
Before the war, at least 100 ships crossed the Strait of Hormuz daily. Today, a staggering 20,000 sailors are trapped on 2,000 ships across the Gulf – a crisis the International Maritime Organization described as unprecedented since World War II.
A shadow Iranian fleet, meanwhile, has been navigating seamlessly as part of a parallel maritime system born from 47 years of US sanctions on Tehran. Washington slapped sanctions on Tehran following the 1979 Islamic revolution that toppled the pro-Washington ruler Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. The two countries have had no diplomatic ties since 1980.
Islamabad, Pakistan – Pakistan has opened six overland transit routes for goods destined for Iran, formalising a road corridor through its territory as thousands of containers remain stranded at Karachi port because of the United States blockade of Iranian ports and ships trying to pass through the Strait of Hormuz.
The Ministry of Commerce issued the Transit of Goods through Territory of Pakistan Order 2026 on April 25, bringing it into immediate effect. The order allows goods originating from third countries to be transported through Pakistan and delivered to Iran by road.
list of 4 itemsend of list
The announcement coincided with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi’s visit to Islamabad for talks with Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and army chief Asim Munir, the latest in a series of diplomatic engagements as Pakistan seeks to mediate an end to the two-month war between Washington and Tehran.
Federal Minister for Commerce Jam Kamal Khan described the initiative as “a significant step toward promoting regional trade and enhancing Pakistan’s role as a key trade corridor”.
Iran has not publicly commented on the move, and Al Jazeera’s query to the Iranian embassy in Islamabad went unanswered.
The notification does not extend to Indian-origin goods. A separate Commerce Ministry order issued in May 2025, following the India-Pakistan aerial war that month, bans the transit of goods from India through Pakistan by any mode and remains in force.
The six designated routes link Pakistan’s main ports, Karachi, Port Qasim and Gwadar, with two Iranian border crossings, Gabd and Taftan, passing through Balochistan via Turbat, Panjgur, Khuzdar, Quetta and Dalbandin.
The shortest route, the Gwadar-Gabd corridor, reduces travel time to the Iranian border to between two and three hours, compared with the 16 to 18 hours it takes from Karachi – Pakistan’s biggest port – to the Iranian border. The Gwadar-Gabd route could cut transport costs by 45 to 55 percent compared with costs from Karachi port, according to officials.
But for Iran, firms sending their goods to the country, and transporters, all routes into Iranian territory today are viable options, with the principal maritime passage they have traditionally used – the Strait of Hormuz – blockaded by the US Navy.
The current US-Iran war began on February 28, when US and Israeli forces launched attacks on Iran.
In the weeks that followed, Iran restricted commercial navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway through which roughly a fifth of the world’s oil and gas passes during peacetime, disrupting one of the most critical arteries of global trade.
Pakistan brokered a ceasefire on April 8 and hosted the first round of direct US-Iran talks on April 11, in Islamabad. The negotiations lasted nearly a day but ended without a deal. Two days later, Washington imposed a naval blockade on Iranian ports, throttling Tehran’s maritime access.
A second round of talks has since stalled. US President Donald Trump cancelled a planned visit to Islamabad by special envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner last weekend.
Iran has ruled out direct negotiations with Washington while the blockade remains in place, though Araghchi told Pakistani officials that Tehran would continue engaging with Islamabad’s mediation efforts “until a result is achieved”.
The transit order appears to be a direct economic response to that impasse.
More than 3,000 containers destined for Iran have been stuck at Karachi port for several days, with vessels unable to collect the cargo. War-risk insurance premiums have surged from about 0.12 percent of a vessel’s value before the conflict to roughly 5 percent, making shipping to the region too expensive for many operators.
The corridor also signals a shift away from Afghanistan, whose relations with Pakistan have deteriorated sharply.
The two sides engaged in clashes in October 2025 and again in February and March this year, with skirmishes continuing along the northwestern and southwestern borders.
The Torkham and Chaman crossings have ceased to function as reliable commercial routes since tensions escalated, limiting Pakistan’s overland access to Central Asian markets.
“This is a paradigmatic shift. Pakistan’s relations with the Afghan Taliban, the de facto rulers in Kabul, have no reset switch,” Iftikhar Firdous, cofounder of The Khorasan Diary, told Al Jazeera.
“Kabul has been diversifying away from Pakistan towards Iran and Central Asia, but this move flips the equation. Pakistan can now bypass Afghanistan entirely for westbound trade. The impact on Kabul’s transit relevance and revenue is strategic, not immediate – but it is real.”
Firdous said the implications extend beyond bilateral ties.
“This corridor also reduces Pakistan’s reliance on longer maritime routes through the Gulf. Geopolitics, security, and infrastructure will ultimately determine which corridors dominate, but it places Pakistan as the main overland gateway for China-backed trade routes into West Asia and beyond,” he said.
Minhas Majeed Marwat, a Peshawar-based academic and geopolitical analyst, urged caution. “A cornered Afghanistan is a destabilised Afghanistan, and Pakistan knows better than most what that costs,” she wrote on X on April 27.
“The opportunity here is real. So is the risk. Security on the northwestern and southwestern borders remains the variable that could unravel everything. Pakistan is positioned well. It is not yet positioned safely. Those are different things.”
China has detained nearly 70 Panamanian-flagged ships after a Supreme Court ruling on the Panama Canal, US officials say.
Published On 29 Apr 202629 Apr 2026
Bolivia, Costa Rica, Guyana, Paraguay, Trinidad and Tobago, and the United States have released a joint statement in support of Panama, while criticising Chinese economic retaliation, after a Hong Kong-based conglomerate lost a legal dispute over the management of ports on the Panama Canal.
Panama’s Supreme Court in late January annulled contracts that had allowed a subsidiary of Hong Kong’s CK Hutchison to administer the Balboa and Cristobal port terminals on the Panama Canal after deeming the decades-old agreements unconstitutional.
list of 4 itemsend of list
In their joint statement on Tuesday, the six countries claimed that following the court ruling, China has retaliated against Panama with “targeted economic pressure” on Panamanian-flagged ships.
China detained nearly 70 Panamanian-flagged ships in March, according to the US Federal Maritime Commission, a number “far exceeding historical norms”.
“These actions – following the decision of Panama’s independent Supreme Court regarding the Balboa and Cristobal terminals – are a blatant attempt to politicise maritime trade and infringe on the sovereignty of the nations of our hemisphere,” the signatories said.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said separately on X that Washington was “deeply concerned” by China’s economic pressure on Panama.
“We stand in solidarity with Panama. Any attempts to undermine Panama’s sovereignty are a threat to us all,” he said.
China has previously accused the US of “bullying” and trying to smear its reputation in Latin America, while it described the Panamanian Supreme Court ruling as “absurd” and “shameful”.
US Federal Maritime Commission head Laura DiBella said last month that Beijing’s detention of Panamanian ships had repercussions for both Panama and the US.
“These intensified inspections were carried out under informal directives and appear intended to punish Panama after the transfer of Hutchison’s port assets,” DiBella said.
“Given that Panama‑flagged ships carry a meaningful share of US containerised trade, these actions could result in significant commercial and strategic consequences to US shipping,” she said.
Panama’s decision to invalidate the contracts held by CK Hutchison’s subsidiary Panama Ports Company was made at a time of heightened media attention around the Panama Canal amid threats by US President Donald Trump to seize the strategic waterway.
Trump had made the approximately 80km (49-mile) waterway a focus of his second administration, alleging in his inaugural address in January 2025 that China was “operating” the canal and pledging that the US would “take back” control.
US officials allege that, in addition to targeting Panama and its interests, China has also retaliated against shipping giants Maersk and the Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC), whose subsidiaries were granted 18-month contracts to administer the Balboa and Cristobal terminals after CK Hutchison was removed.
Representatives of Maersk and MSC were both summoned by China’s Ministry of Transport for “high-level discussions”, the Federal Maritime Commission said in March, while Chinese shipping giant COSCO has suspended operations at the Balboa terminal.
CK Hutchison, through its Panama Ports Company subsidiary, is separately pursuing international arbitration against the government of Panama and seeking more than $2bn in damages.
David Smith, an associate professor at the University of Sydney’s US Studies Centre, said that the Panama Canal dispute and China’s retaliation were the latest example of how shipping has become a political target, from Latin America to the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea in the Middle East.
“We have taken for granted that the world runs on container ships just freely sailing around the world,” he told Al Jazeera.
“What we’re seeing now is that states know how vulnerable shipping is. They know they can cut shipping lanes off if necessary. It should not surprise us from now on if ships and shipping in general become pawns in international politics.”
The United States is considering a new proposal from Iran to end the ongoing war amid a fragile ceasefire between the longtime adversaries.
The offer focuses on reopening the strategic Strait of Hormuz while postponing a deal on Iran’s nuclear programme, arguably the most contentious issue between Tehran and Washington.
list of 3 itemsend of list
According to US media outlets, the proposal has drawn scrutiny in Washington, and officials there have expressed scepticism.
Early indications from the Trump administration suggest the plan is unlikely to be accepted in its current form, potentially further delaying any prospect of permanently ending the currently paused US-Israel war on Iran, which has killed thousands and sent global energy prices soaring.
Here is what we know so far:
Iran’s latest proposal aims for de-escalation in the Gulf without immediately placing restraints on its nuclear programme, as the US has demanded. Tehran has offered to reopen the Strait of Hormuz on the condition that the US lifts its naval blockade on Iranian ports and agrees to end the war.
Iran has effectively closed the strait to shipping, creating global economic pressure by driving up energy prices and disrupting supply chains. In peacetime, one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies are shipped through the narrow passage, which links Gulf oil producers to the open ocean.
Days after the ceasefire began on April 8, Trump announced a blockade on Iranian ports and ships, restricting Tehran’s ability to export oil and cutting off a crucial source of its revenue.
However, a central feature of Iran’s offer to reopen the Strait to all traffic is that discussions over Iran’s nuclear activities would be postponed until after the war ends.
The proposal was conveyed to Washington through Pakistan, which has been acting as a mediator.
“These messages concern some of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s red lines, including nuclear issues and the Strait of Hormuz,” Iranian state media Fars News Agency reported.
“Informed sources emphasise Mr Araghchi is acting entirely within the framework of the specified red lines and the diplomatic duties of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.”
The news agency said the messages relayed were “unrelated to negotiations” and are “considered an initiative by Iran to clarify the regional situation”.
Iranian analyst Abas Aslani said Iran’s latest proposal is based on an “altered” approach.
Aslani, a senior research fellow at the Centre for Middle East Strategic Studies, told Al Jazeera that Tehran believes its previous model – which was based on making compromises on its nuclear programme in exchange for economic sanctions relief – is no longer a “viable path towards a potential accord”.
“Iran believes this can also function as a trust-building measure to compensate for the trust-deficit issue,” he added.
On Monday, Tehran’s envoy to the United Nations, Amir Saeid Iravani, said “lasting stability and security” in the Gulf and the wider region can only be achieved through a durable and permanent cessation of aggression against Iran.
US President Donald Trump met with top security advisers on Monday to discuss the Iranian proposal, the White House confirmed.
However, according to media reports, the US response has been largely dismissive. According to Reuters, an unnamed US official said President Trump was unhappy with the proposal because it did not include provisions for Iran’s nuclear programme. The official noted that “he doesn’t love the proposal”.
Citing two people familiar with the matter, US media outlet CNN reported that Trump was unlikely to accept the proposal. It said Washington lifting its blockade of Iranian ports without resolving questions over Tehran’s nuclear programme “could remove a key piece of American leverage in the talks”.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio told Fox News on Monday that the proposal was “better than what we thought they were going to submit”, but questioned Tehran’s intentions.
“They’re very good negotiators,” he said. “We have to ensure that any deal that is made, any agreement that is made, is one that definitively prevents them from sprinting towards a nuclear weapon at any point.”
Al Jazeera’s Mike Hanna, reporting from Washington, said, “There’s been a complete lid over what was discussed” during the meeting between Trump and his national security team.
“It was so tight that we do not know exactly who in his national security team was present at that meeting,” Hanna added.
“Normally, there is some form of readout or some form of more information giving, fleshing out the details of a meeting like this.”
While the “US and Iran feel that time is on their side, the longer this goes on, the more difficult it’s going to be,” Mohamed Elmasry, an analyst for the Doha Institute of Graduate Studies, said.
“I really don’t think time is on anyone’s side. I really do think the Europeans are losing patience,” he told Al Jazeera.
On Monday, German Chancellor Merz stated that the “Iranians are negotiating very skilfully”, Elmasry noted. He said this shows that Trump is coming under increasing pressure from his allies, “who believe he [Trump] got them into this big mess and isn’t able to clean it up”.
“Trump isn’t going to be happy hearing that and the chancellor is hitting Trump where it hurts.”
A prominent shipping organisation has condemned the United States and Iran’s tit-for-tat capture of commercial ships and is calling for the immediate release of their crews.
In an interview with Al Jazeera, John Stawpert, marine director of the International Chamber of Shipping, said seafarers must be allowed to go about their business “freely and without persecution”.
list of 4 itemsend of list
Stawpert, whose organisation is the top trade association for merchant shipowners and operators worldwide, called the capture of the vessels an affront to freedom of navigation as enshrined in international law.
“All these people are doing is transporting trade. And really, we can’t have a situation where ships are being seized, ultimately for political ends, to prove a political point,” said Stawpert, whose organisation represents about 80 percent of the world’s merchant fleet.
“These are innocent farers and they should be allowed to go about their jobs without fear of, essentially, imprisonment.”
Stawpert said Iran’s stated wish to charge tolls in the Strait of Hormuz had no basis in international law and would set a dangerous precedent.
“If you can do it in the Strait of Hormuz, why can’t you do it in the Strait of Gibraltar, say, or the Straits of Malacca?” he asked.
Stawpert also said the US President Donald Trump’s naval blockade of Iranian ports had heaped further uncertainty on shipping companies already reeling from Iran’s effective closure of the strait.
“We don’t know what conditions are in place. We don’t know what the targeting criteria of Iran are really,” Stawpert said. “And so we then have another state coming in, effectively doing the same thing through the blockade of the straits”.
The US and Iranian militaries have each announced the capture of two commercial vessels over the past week as Washington and Tehran continue to face off in the strait and in waters beyond the Gulf.
The US defence department on Thursday said it had captured the Iran-linked Majestic X as it was transporting sanctioned oil in the Indian Ocean, days after announcing the interception of another ship, Tifani.
Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps on Wednesday said it seized the Panamanian-flagged MSC Francesca and the Greek-owned Epaminondas for “operating without the necessary permits and tampering with navigation systems”.
The Philippines’ Department of Migrant Workers on Wednesday confirmed 15 Filipino seafarers were on the two vessels.
Officials said they had been assured by Iranian authorities that all the crew were “unharmed” and “safe.”
Montenegro’s maritime minister, Filip Radulovic, said in an interview with the state broadcaster earlier this week that four Montenegrin crew on the MSC Francesca were “fine”.
There have been no official updates on the condition of the crews on the vessels captured by US forces.
“It seems they’re not being maltreated,” Stawpert said. “But even so, that’s not really the point. The point is they shouldn’t be in custody in the first place”.
Stawpert also expressed concern for the well-being of an estimated 20,000 seafarers who have been left stranded in the Gulf due to the effective closure of the strait.
“Their welfare is also a priority for us,” he said. “The psychological burden, I think, will be beginning to tell on them after seven weeks now of what’s, to all intents and purposes, house arrest”.
Stawpert called on both the US and Iran to respect freedom of navigation.
“Let’s resume freedom of navigation and respect the right to innocent passage as soon as we possibly can,” he said.
The blockage of the strait, which usually carries about one-fifth of global oil and natural gas supplies, has driven up fuel prices worldwide and forced many governments to start emergency energy-saving measures.
Traffic in the waterway remains a fraction of pre-war levels, with reports saying just five ships transited the strait in the last 24 hours.
Before the US and Israel launched their war against Iran on February 28, the strait saw a daily average of 129 transits, according to the United Nations Trade and Development.
On April 20, the United States fired at and then seized an Iranian-flagged container ship close to the Strait of Hormuz in the northern Arabian Sea, amid its blockade of Iranian ports.
It was similar to a scene which played out in the 1980s during the so-called Tanker War between Iran and Iraq, during which both countries fired on each other’s tankers in the Strait of Hormuz, seeking to cripple each other’s economies.
list of 3 itemsend of list
As naval tensions rise again in the Strait of Hormuz – this time between Iran and the US – we break down what happened in the 1980s and examine the parallels and differences between the situations then and now:
The war between Iran and Iraq began in 1980 when then-Iraqi President Saddam Hussein launched a full-scale invasion of Iran following Iran’s 1979 Islamic revolution.
In 1984, this war reached the Gulf when Iraq attacked Iranian oil tankers, seeking to cripple its oil-revenue-dependent economy. Iran retaliated by firing at oil tankers belonging to Iraq and its allies in the Gulf.
According to a report by the University of Texas’s Robert Strauss Center for International Security and Law, Iran also threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz then, but did not do so since its own economy, already crippled by the war, was dependent on exporting oil to the rest of the world through it.
In November 1986, when Iran struck Kuwait’s ships, Kuwait asked for foreign help. The former Soviet Union was the first to respond and helped escort the nation’s ships in the Gulf.
The US, led by then-president Ronald Reagan, launched Operation Earnest Will in July 1987, also seeking to protect tankers in the Gulf and render more assistance than Moscow. The operation involved reflagging Kuwaiti tankers with the US flag so they could legally sail under US protection.
According to an article by the Veterans Breakfast Club, a US-based website which shares experiences of former US military veterans, during Washington’s very first escort mission in July 1987, a reflagged tanker hit an Iranian mine in the Gulf.
“The convoy continued, but the incident made clear that the United States had entered a shadow war with Iran at sea,” the article said.
“Over the next fourteen months, dozens of US warships rotated through the region escorting tankers and protecting shipping lanes. US forces also conducted special operations to hunt Iranian mine-layers at night and conducted strikes against Iranian military positions and ships. The mission wasn’t a small one, consuming 30 US Navy ships at one time,” the article added.
Then in April 1988, the US frigate USS Samuel B Roberts was damaged by an Iranian mine in the Strait of Hormuz. Historian Samuel Cox, writing for the US Naval History and Heritage Command (NHHC), noted in 2018 that by the end of 1987 that vessel was so badly damaged, that “the only thing actually holding the ship together was the main deck”.
So, the US launched Operation Praying Mantis, seeking to destroy Iranian vessels.
The tanker war eventually ended in August 1988, following a United Nations-brokered ceasefire agreement between Iran and Iraq.
Cox noted that by the end of 1987, “Iraq had conducted 283 attacks on shipping, while Iran attacked 168 times. Combined, the attacks had killed 116 merchant sailors, with 37 missing and 167 wounded, from a wide variety of nationalities.”
“Initially, there was great concern that the attacks would cut off the vital flow of oil from the Arabian Gulf, but all they really did was drive up insurance rates. The world’s need for oil was so great, that over 100 dead merchant seamen was apparently an acceptable price,” he wrote.
The current hostilities between the US and Iran in the Strait of Hormuz began when Tehran, whose territorial waters extend into the strait, closed passage to all vessels after the US and Israel began bombing the country. On March 4, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) declared that it was in full control of the strait, and ships would need to get clearance from them to pass through it.
Shipping through the strait collapsed by 95 percent, sending the price of oil – 20 percent of global supplies of which are shipped this way – soaring above $100 a barrel.
Iran, through its imposition of control over who passes through Hormuz, has for almost eight weeks now, determined which vessels can exit the strait from the Gulf into the Gulf of Oman.
At first, Iran indicated that it would allow “friendly” ships to pass if they paid a toll. On March 26, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told Iran’s state TV: “The Strait of Hormuz, from our perspective, is not completely closed. It is closed only to enemies. There is no reason to allow the ships of our enemies and their allies to pass.”
Vessels from Malaysia, China, Egypt, South Korea, India and Pakistan passed through the strait through most of March and early April.
Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) provided these vessels with an alternative route through the Strait of Hormuz to avoid potential sea mines. US officials, including Donald Trump, have said mines have been placed there by Iran, although it has not officially confirmed or denied this.
But on April 13, alarmed that Iran was continuing to ship its own oil out of the strait, the US imposed a naval blockade of all Iranian ports. Since then, US Central Command has said US forces have directed 33 Iran-linked vessels to turn around or return to an Iranian port.
On Monday, the US military fired on and then captured the Iranian-flagged container ship Touska close to the Strait of Hormuz in the northern Arabian Sea, and, a day later, detained another oil tanker sanctioned for transporting Iranian crude oil as it sailed in the Bay of Bengal, which links India and Southeast Asia.
In a post on social media after detaining the Touska, the Pentagon wrote: “As we have made clear, we will pursue global maritime enforcement efforts to disrupt illicit networks and interdict sanctioned vessels providing material support to Iran – anywhere they operate. International waters are not a refuge for sanctioned vessels.”
Since the US naval blockade of Iranian ports began, Tehran, which was earlier allowing vessels from “friendly” nations to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, has further tightened its grip on the strait.
Justifying the decision not to allow any foreign ships to pass until the US ends its naval blockade on April 19, Iran’s First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref said the “security of the Strait of Hormuz is not free”.
“One cannot restrict Iran’s oil exports while expecting free security for others,” he wrote in a post on X.
Last Saturday, Iran reportedly fired at two Indian-flagged merchant vessels in the strait. The IRGC said the two ships were attacked because they were “operating without authorisation”, according to state media reports.
Then, on April 22, Iran captured two container ships seeking to exit the Gulf via the Strait of Hormuz after firing on them and another vessel.
Just like during the Tanker War of the 1980s, shipping has been severely disrupted by the US-Israel war on Iran, upending global oil and gas prices.
According to an April 17 article by the World Economic Forum, from the mid-1980s when the Tanker War took place, to the start of the new millennium, a barrel of crude oil averaged $20.
On Friday, while a ceasefire between the US and Iran was in effect, a naval battle was still playing out in the Strait of Hormuz, and Brent crude, the international benchmark, topped $106 per barrel. During open warfare between the US, Israel and Iran in March and early April, oil rose as high as $119 per barrel.
Mines in the sea are another problem common to both time periods.
While vessels were damaged by mines during the 1980s Tanker War, there has so far been no report of vessels being damaged by mines in the current war. However, the risk is the same.
US President Donald Trump has said the US will ramp up efforts to remove mines from the Strait of Hormuz. This has not begun yet, however.
According to CNN, there are only a few US minesweeping ships in the Gulf. The US Navy also told the broadcaster that four dedicated minesweepers stationed in the Gulf region were decommissioned last year.
John Phillips, a British safety, security and risk adviser and former military instructor, told Al Jazeera: “There are some clear parallels between the current situation in Hormuz and the Tanker War of the 1980s. In both cases, the basic idea is the same: pressure at sea can have effects far beyond the water itself.
“A relatively small amount of naval disruption, whether that means mining, harassment of shipping, missile threats, or attacks on tankers, can create real strategic and economic consequences, especially in a chokepoint like the Strait of Hormuz. So in that sense, the original Tanker War is a useful reminder of how vulnerable global trade can be when the maritime domain becomes part of a wider political or military confrontation.”
During the Tanker War, the US escorted ships to protect them from Iranian attacks and also deployed vessels to remove mines. NATO countries like the United Kingdom, Belgium, the Netherlands, France and Italy also joined.
But in the current standoff in the Strait of Hormuz, US allies like the UK and other NATO nations have refused to join Washington in reopening the Strait of Hormuz, or begin minesweeping operations, fearing they will be dragged into the war.
In a post on Truth Social in early April, the US president took aim at allies, “like the United Kingdom”, which, he said, have “refused to get involved in the decapitation of Iran”, telling them to either buy US fuel or get involved in the rapidly escalating war.
“You’ll have to start learning how to fight for yourself, the U.S.A. won’t be there to help you anymore, just like you weren’t there for us. Iran has been, essentially, decimated. The hard part is done. Go get your own oil!” Trump wrote.
The framework of the US-Israel war on Iran is different from that of the war between Iraq and Iran in the 1980s, experts say.
“In the 1980s, the Tanker War was part of the broader Iran-Iraq War, so the shipping attacks were tied to a much larger land conflict between two regional armies. Today, the situation is more about Iran’s standoff with the United States and its allies, and the maritime activity is less about asymmetrical war at sea and more about deterrence, signalling and the threat of escalation,” said Phillips.
“The military lesson, really, is that Hormuz is still one of those places where limited actions can have outsized effects, but the modern setting is more fast-moving, more technologically advanced and potentially more volatile than the original Tanker War,” he added.
Analysts have also pointed out that, unlike in the 1980s, Iran is currently stronger when it comes to withstanding attacks and naval blockades by the US.
In the Tanker War, Iraq was militarily supported by Western allies, while Iran was under a US arms embargo imposed in 1979 after the Iranian revolution. While this gave Iraq a military advantage, Iran’s IRGC used asymmetric warfare tactics by striking Iraq’s allies’ ships and oil tankers.
Experts also say that since the 12-day war between Iran and Israel last year, Tehran has shifted its military doctrine from one that is primarily about defensive containment to an explicitly offensive asymmetric posture.
“Iran today appears more structurally aggressive in doctrine where it is formally embracing earlier and more extensive use of regional missiles, drones, cyberattacks and energy coercion [when energy resources and infrastructure are targeted or cut off], but is operationally constrained by battle damage, sanctions and internal instability,” Phillips, the risk adviser and a former military chief instructor, told Al Jazeera in an interview on March 2.
A former US ambassador to Bahrain, Adam Ereli, also told Al Jazeera that Iran and the IRGC have “revolutionary fervour”, which means they can “survive”.
“They can tolerate pain for a lot longer than I think most American decision-makers and planners calculate,” he said.
The IRGC says the aggression came in response to what it described as the US seizure of an Iranian commercial vessel.
Published On 22 Apr 202622 Apr 2026
An Iranian gunboat has fired on a container vessel near the coast of Oman, according to a British maritime monitoring agency, in an incident that occurred hours after United States President Donald Trump said he would extend a ceasefire with Iran.
The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) centre said on Wednesday that the ship’s captain reported that the vessel had been approached by a vessel of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) before shots were fired.
list of 4 itemsend of list
It “has caused heavy damage to the bridge. No fires or environmental impact reported,” the agency added. No casualties were reported, and all crew members were said to be safe.
British maritime security firm Vanguard Tech said the ship was sailing under a Liberian flag and had been informed it had permission to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most strategically important waterways.
Iranian news agency Tasnim, however, said the vessel had ignored warnings issued by Iran’s armed forces.
The incident followed a warning from the IRGC’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters after what it described as the US seizure of an Iranian commercial ship in the Sea of Oman, the IRNA news agency reported.
It accused Washington of violating the ceasefire and carrying out “armed piracy” after allegedly firing on the Iranian vessel and disabling its navigation systems.
Trump earlier announced he would delay a planned military attack on Iran after requests from Pakistan’s army chief Asim Munir and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif.
Writing on Truth Social, Trump said the decision was made because Iran’s government was “seriously fractured” and needed time to present a unified position.
“We have been asked to hold our Attack on the Country of Iran until such time as their leaders and representatives can come up with a unified proposal,” he wrote.
He added, however, that the US naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz would remain in place and said the military had been ordered to stay “ready and able”.
The announcement marked a shift from comments made a day earlier, when Trump said it was “highly unlikely” he would extend the truce beyond Tuesday.
Al Jazeera’s Tohid Asadi, reporting from Tehran, said Iranian officials were sending mixed messages over the ceasefire and the prospects for negotiations.
“Tehran is saying they won’t negotiate under imposed terms and conditions … when we compare the initial 10-point and 15-point proposals by the Iranians and Americans, we can understand that the two sides are poles apart,” he said.
“The atmosphere is also clouded by this mistrust in Tehran towards the United States, as well as the simultaneous military rhetoric related to a potential failed negotiation … It is a warning that another round of confrontation may be ahead.”
He said Iran still viewed the Strait of Hormuz as a key source of leverage in any talks.
“It’s trying to exercise authority over the ships and vessels transiting this strategically significant chokepoint,” he said.
Asadi added that Iranian officials framed their regional position as based on mutual security. “Iranians are saying that the basis of their foreign policy behaviour, particularly when it comes to Israel, is security for all versus security for none,” he said.
The global fallout of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz may create the impression that the world cannot function without fossil fuels. Nothing could be further from the truth. Every single industry can and must decarbonise.
For global shipping, this process would be relatively easy because technological solutions exist and a single United Nations agency can set legally binding rules for all ships. The first steps have already been made.
In 2025, member states of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) agreed on a policy mechanism to cut shipping emissions: the Net-Zero Framework (NZF). But they opted to postpone a decision on formal adoption of this landmark agreement.
This delay is emblematic of obstructive tactics used by countries opposing climate action.
The IMO Framework – the world’s first global carbon price on any international polluter – took years of compromises and watering-down. As it stands, it is the lowest possible bar Pacific Island states like the one I represent can accept. We cannot give in another inch.
While I join the First Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels in Santa Marta, Colombia, next week, delegates will gather again at the IMO in London to decide whether to uphold their unanimous commitment to phase out fossil fuels in a just and equitable way.
The delegates of Vanuatu who travel to London have a mandate to push for the adoption of the NZF this year.
Should anyone reopen the framework to water it down, our position is clear: We will revert to our original Pacific demand for a universal levy on emissions of $150 per tonne of carbon dioxide.
Last year my country abstained from the vote on the NZF agreement. We reached that decision because the mechanism is not nearly ambitious enough. Even so, it is a starting point we can work with.
But since then, the tide has shifted dramatically.
After the delay in adoption, a small group of countries is now suggesting further weakening the ambition in the framework to meet the demands of particularly influential states whose current policy positions are not aligned with climate ambition. This strategy is problematic as reducing our collective actions to align with those that want no climate action at all is incompatible with our people’s continued survival.
The world’s poorest countries, and the planet, simply cannot afford anything less than what is already on the table.
The framework, as it is, gives the world and the industry some chance of meeting the climate obligations that IMO countries committed to in 2023, namely reaching net-zero emissions by 2050 in a just and equitable way.
The NZF introduces penalty fees – eg emission pricing for noncompliance with the regulation. This provides the regulation with a “stick” to ensure ships comply or else they must pay.
The penalties also represent revenues, up to $10bn to $12bn a year, to both incentivise industry transition and enable a fair transition for all. This fund is a lifeline for developing – and especially least developed – states to be able to afford clean maritime energy upgrades and compensate for the rising trade costs because of this transition.
Some claim that revenues raised by the NZF will blow out transport costs. This is preposterous.
The penalties charged through this framework come down to less than $1.50 per year for every living human being – although the biggest polluters should pay this cost. If the richest 10 percent of the world’s population foots this bill, it adds up to less than $15 per person. That’s a few coffees a year, which the world’s richest can easily spare.
Losing both financial penalties for noncompliance and financial support for countries like mine in the name of a political compromise with rich oil-producing states is a bad deal. Not just for all climate-vulnerable states but also for the industry that demands and deserves clarity.
If anything, we need more action and more ambition in the framework.
For years, Pacific states have pushed for the IMO regulation to be in the form of a universal levy on emissions, by pricing all emissions. We managed to get the majority of IMO member states on board, including the European Union, South Korea and Japan, as well as important Global South states, such as Panama and Liberia. However, the US has been very effective in exerting its influence in this area, which is resulting in shifts to some positions to the detriment of us all.
Our position was always backed by the best available scientific evidence.
A levy on all shipping emissions is the best way to send an unambiguous signal to the industry: Invest in the future now! The revenues, up to 10 times more than those from the NZF, serve as both a bigger stick for polluters and a bigger carrot for first movers and cash-poor countries.
This is not a handout: Hitting net zero by 2050 is not possible if our countries cannot invest in clean ships.
The bridge we have built in the form of the NZF through years of compromise and evidence is still standing. Let us cross it together by adopting it as agreed without any further dilution.
Pacific states stand ready to fight for what science and justice demand, and we call on our partners to stand with us.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.
Tens of thousands of people forcibly displaced by Israeli attacks on Lebanon use first day of ceasefire to return home.
Source link
Shipping companies said several things had to be clarified, including the presence of mines, Iranian conditions, practical implementations.
Published On 17 Apr 202617 Apr 2026
Shipping companies have cautiously welcomed Iran’s announcement that the Strait of Hormuz is open but said they would require clarifications, including about the risk of mines, before vessels move through the entry point to the Gulf.
Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Friday that the Strait of Hormuz was open to all commercial vessels during a 10-day Lebanon ceasefire accord, prompting a fall in oil and other commodity prices while stock markets rose.
list of 4 itemsend of list
All commercial ships, including United States vessels, can sail through the strait, although their plans need to be coordinated with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, a senior Iranian official told the Reuters news agency.
Transit would be restricted to lanes which Iran deemed safe, adding that military vessels were still prohibited, the official said.
“We are currently verifying the recent announcement related to the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, in terms of its compliance with freedom of navigation for all merchant vessels and secure passage,” said Arsenio Dominguez, secretary-general of the United Nations shipping agency, the International Maritime Organization.
The Norwegian Shipowners’ Association said several things had to be clarified before any ships could transit the strait, including the presence of mines, Iranian conditions and practical implementation.
“If this represents a step towards an opening, it is a welcome development,” said Knut Arild Hareide, CEO of the association which represents 130 companies with some 1,500 vessels.
Shipping association BIMCO cautioned members on returning to the strait.
“The status of mine threats… is unclear and BIMCO believes shipping companies should consider avoiding the area,” said Jakob Larsen, BIMCO’s chief safety and security officer.
The threat posed by mines in parts of the strait is not fully understood, and avoidance of the area by ships should be considered, a US Navy advisory on Friday, seen by Reuters, also said.
German shipping group Hapag-Lloyd on Friday said it was working for its ships to sail through the strait “as soon as possible”, but added that several questions remained.
“Our crisis committee is in session and will try to resolve all open items with the relevant parties within the next 24-36 hours,” it added.
Its Danish peer Maersk said it was closely monitoring the security situation and would act based on its risk assessment.
France’s CMA CGM and Norwegian oil tanker group Frontline declined to comment.
A recent route imposed by Tehran through its territorial waters near Larak Island would present navigational challenges even if vessels were not required to pay a toll, and would raise questions regarding compliance and insurance, said Matt Wright, lead freight analyst at data intelligence firm Kpler.
US President Donald Trump on Friday said Iran had agreed to never close the strait again, and that it was removing sea mines from it.
One of the world’s most important maritime chokepoints, disruption in the strait has forced shipping companies to suspend sailings, reroute cargo and rely on costly workarounds to keep goods moving in and out of the Gulf.
Iran says ‘passage for all commercial vessels through Strait of Hormuz’ open during the Israel-Lebanon ceasefire.
Published On 17 Apr 202617 Apr 2026
The Strait of Hormuz is “completely open” for all commercial vessels and will remain so during the Israel-Lebanon ceasefire, Iran’s foreign minister has said.
“In line with the ceasefire in Lebanon, the passage for all commercial vessels through Strait of Hormuz is declared completely open for the remaining period of ceasefire,” Abbas Araghchi said in a post on X on Friday.
list of 3 itemsend of list
A 10-day ceasefire was agreed between Israel and Lebanon late on Thursday.
The passage of vessels through the strait will be on the coordinated route as already announced by Ports and Maritime Organisation of Iran, Araghchi added.
United States President Donald Trump confirmed in a social media post that the strait was “completely open and ready for business and full passage”.
More to come…