Hacker News Reader

Comment by IncreasePosts | Hacker News Reader

You clearly did not understand my point.

The strait of Hormuz has multiple pathways going through Iranian and Omani waters. Iran is "free" to charge a toll, assuming they are okay throwing out centuries of international law relating to freedom of the seas.

Considering vessels can just transit through Omani waters, what good would charging a fee do? Everyone would just sail on the western and southern side of the strait and traverse freely.

So for the Iranian fees to ever be collected, either Oman would need to charge similar fees (so there is no way around a fee), or Iran would have to attack vessels in Omani territory.

For the record, Oman signed the No Fees/No Tolls pledge with the rest of the EU literally two days ago.

https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/pledge-maintaining-integrity...

View on HN

No, I got your point.

Ultimately, when international law devolves into “might is right”, expect your adversaries to apply the concept as well. Iran has always been the de facto operator of the strait (by fact of being the strongest regional power bordering the strait), and this will remain going forward. Nitpicking how and why Iran is doing this is not going to change the reality on the ground. It is better to spend energy on preventing wars of aggression of this nature from reoccurring :)

So long story short, is it legal for Iran to restrict access to the strait via Omani waters? Nope. Is there a realistic way to prevent it from doing this by force? Also no. Did Iran wake up and decide to arbitrarily take over control of the strait? Absolutely not. Would Iran be willing to revert to pre-war state if their demands are met? Perhaps. Welcome to realpolitik :)

Oh and as far as restricting access via Iranian waters, Iran is mostly adhering to IL because it hasn’t ratified UNCLOS.

> For the record, Oman signed the No Fees/No Tolls pledge with the rest of the EU literally two days ago.

Thanks for the link, but is this pledge binding in any way, or is it just a symbolic gesture? Because my impression so far has been that Oman is willing to play ball.

> centuries of international law

Did they sign an agreement to adhere to this "law"? And if they did, what were the cited consequences of breaking it?

You are missing the point actually. We are talking about a world where might is right. That's the world US is making with our flagrant violation of international law.

WHY should the laws be applied selectively? If Iran has ballistic missile capability to enforce its toll in Omani waters then they can and should do so. Might makes right, right? If America/Israel can just decide to bomb a foreign nation, kill its leader, the leaders family, bomb school children, in comparison Iran controlling the strait and asking for tolls seems benign.

Or are you a racist who doesn't see Iranians as human beings?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com