This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/11/world/middleeast/iran-british-tanker.html

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 3 Version 4
Iranian Boats Tried to Block British Tanker in Persian Gulf, U.K. Says Iran Tried to Block British Tanker in Persian Gulf, U.K. Says
(about 11 hours later)
LONDON — A British warship forced three Iranian boats to back off after they sought to block a British tanker from passing through the Strait of Hormuz, the Defense Ministry said on Thursday, in the latest escalation of tensions between Tehran and the West. LONDON — Three Iranian boats on Thursday briefly tried to block passage of a British tanker in the Strait of Hormuz, Britain’s Defense Ministry said, in the latest sign that Tehran is seeking any possible pressure point it can exploit in its escalating confrontation with the West.
“Contrary to international law, three Iranian vessels attempted to impede the passage of a commercial vessel, British Heritage, through the Strait of Hormuz,” the British government said. “We are concerned by this action and continue to urge the Iranian authorities to de-escalate the situation in the region.” The tanker, British Heritage, was under escort by a warship, the Montrose, and after a brief standoff but no exchange of fire the three Iranian boats complied with “verbal warnings” to retreat, the ministry said in a statement.
Iran denied any attempt to stop the tanker, according to Iranian news agencies. “We are concerned by this action and continue to urge the Iranian authorities to de-escalate the situation in the region,” it said.
The dispute on Thursday is the latest complication in a three-way drama involving Iran, the United States and Europe that has played out since last year, when President Trump abandoned the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran and restored sanctions that had been suspended under the deal. The latest showdown came less than a month after the downing of an American surveillance drone by the Iranian military brought the United States to the brink of a retaliatory missile strike, aborted by President Trump only moments before launch.
Many analysts and diplomats have warned that each small collision like the encounter with the tanker on Thursday may now increase the risk of a larger conflagration. Against a backdrop of building tension, many analysts and diplomats warn, each small confrontation, like the encounter with the tanker on Thursday, increases the risk of a more violent and deadly conflict.
Last week, British forces seized an Iranian tanker off the coast of Gibraltar bound for Syria, on suspicion that it was violating European Union sanctions, which Iran called an act of piracy. Some Iranian officials spoke of retribution, and an officer in Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, Mohsen Rezaei, wrote on Twitter that if the tanker were not released, Iran “will be duty-bound to take reciprocal action and seize a British oil tanker.” Iran denied having attempted to stop the tanker, official news agencies reported. But as recently as last Friday, a senior Iranian military officer had warned that its forces might try to seize a ship in retaliation for the British impounding of an Iranian tanker last week off the coast of Gibraltar. The tanker was suspected of violating a European Union embargo of oil sales to Syria.
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani derided Britain as recently as Wednesday for its decision to send its warships to escort commercial vessels through the Gulf. Calling Britain “scared” and “hopeless,” Mr. Rouhani warned that, “You, Britain, are the initiator of insecurity and you will realize the consequences later.” In a statement about the latest incident, BP, the oil giant that operated the ship, thanked the British Royal Navy “for its support.”
Britain and other European powers have sought to tamp down rising tensions between the United States and Iran, and salvage the nuclear pact. But Britain’s clashes with Iran could increase its own willingness to join the Trump administration in confronting Tehran, adding momentum to the conflict. At the core of the broader confrontation with Iran is the Trump administration’s decision last year to repudiate a 2015 accord Iran reached with the United States and other international powers. The agreement called for Iran to suspend and dismantle most of its nuclear program — which the United States and its allies suspected, despite Iranian denials, might someday produce a nuclear weapon — in exchange for relief from international economic sanctions.
The most recent escalation began in May, after the Trump administration implemented comprehensive new sanctions intended to cut off all Iranian oil exports, as part of an effort to pressure Tehran into accepting sweeping new restrictions on its military activities and its nuclear program. Demanding that Iran submit to far more sweeping restrictions on its nuclear, military and other activities, the Trump administration last year began a new campaign of “maximum pressure.” It culminated in May with the imposition of penalties designed to choke off Iranian oil exports anywhere in the world.
In May and June, six tankers were attacked near the Strait of Hormuz, and Washington said Iranian forces planted naval mines to target some of the ships. The British government has said publicly Iran was “almost certainly” responsible for an attack last month on two tankers in the Gulf of Oman. Iran has denied responsibility. For Iran, the result has been devastating, and its officials have accused Washington of “economic warfare.” Now, the Iranians appear intent on putting their own pressure on the United States and its allies by pushing back on at least two different fronts.
The United States was on the verge of launching a missile strike against Iran last month in retaliation for the shooting down of an American surveillance drone, but President Trump said he called off the military action at the last minute. In its most public response, Iran has taken carefully calibrated steps to revive its nuclear program. President Hassan Rouhani has come close to taunting Western officials with threats that Tehran could soon restart precisely the nuclear programs the West had deemed a menace.
In the tanker seizure near Gibraltar, Britain has said the ship was stopped because of European Union sanctions against Syria, not because of American sanctions against Iran. But Spanish and Iranian officials have said the British acted at Washington’s request. And by briefly detaining the British tanker on Thursday, Iran has issued a reminder of its potential to threaten the crucial Persian Gulf oil shipping routes, a main artery of the global economy.
In its statement on Thursday, the British government said three Iranian boats had attempted to stop the British Heritage in the early morning as it headed toward the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow passage out of the Persian Gulf that is a vital channel for international oil supplies. Over the last two months, the United States had already accused Iran of using mines to damage six petroleum tankers in two separate attacks in the waters of the Persian Gulf.
A British warship, the Montrose, had been escorting the tanker in an effort to guard against any Iranian interference. After a short standoff, the British warned the three Iranian boats to back away and they did, the British government said in its statement. Iran denied responsibility for those attacks. But the resulting sense of insecurity has pushed up oil prices and driven up the costs of insuring oil shipments through the Persian Gulf more than tenfold, according to industry executives.
“H.M.S. Montrose was forced to position herself between the Iranian vessels and British Heritage and issue verbal warnings to the Iranian vessels, which then turned away,” the Defense Ministry said in a statement. “Since the attacks in early May, insurance costs have soared and some owners turned wary of sending their carriers to the region,” The Insurance Journal, a trade publication, recently reported.
“Obviously very concerning developments,” Jeremy Hunt, Britain’s foreign secretary, told Sky News, “but also I’m very proud of the Royal Navy and the role they played in keeping British assets, British shipping safe. We are continuing to monitor the situation very, very carefully.” Mr. Trump, in remarks to journalists on Sunday, warned that Iran had “better be careful” about its revival of the nuclear program.
Sanam Vakil, a researcher at Chatham House, in London, said, “It is hard to see an end game right now because it appears that the Trump administration is doubling down” but “the cost of that is going to be an increase in Iran’s escalatory reaction.”
“It looks like we are going to be in simmering conflict for the near term,” she said.
Britain, like other European powers, has been caught in the middle of the escalating feud. Britain, France, Germany and the European Union all signed the 2015 accord. Breaking with the Trump administration, all continue to support the deal, urging both the United States and Iran to resume compliance with its provisions.
As a group, the European powers have largely placed the blame for the breaching of the agreement primarily on the Trump administration, especially while Iran continued until recently to remain within its commitments under the deal.
But among the European powers, Britain has been the most wary of Iran and dubious about its intentions, diplomats say, making it a pivotal player in the deliberations over the future of the deal. If Britain decided to respond to Tehran’s steps over the limits of the deal by joining the United States in the resumption of sanctions, that could extinguish hopes of reviving the agreement.
Britain’s own clash with Tehran began last week when British forces seized the Iranian tanker off the coast of Gibraltar. British officials said they suspected the tanker of violating European Union sanctions on Syria; Iranian officials called the seizure an act of “piracy.”
If Britain did not release the tanker, Iran would “be duty-bound to take reciprocal action and seize a British oil tanker, Mohsen Rezaei, a senior officer in Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps warned last Friday.
When Britain began sending warships to escort tankers past the Iranian coastline in the Persian Gulf, Mr. Rouhani derided the British government as “scared” and “hopeless.”
“You, Britain, are the initiator of insecurity and you will realize the consequences later,” he warned on Wednesday.
On Thursday, after the tanker standoff, Britain’s foreign secretary, Jeremy Hunt, spoke of “obviously very concerning developments.”
“We are continuing to monitor the situation very, very carefully,” Mr. Hunt told Sky News.
Iran has long maintained that it does not seek a nuclear weapon. But the United States and some of its allies have been skeptical, citing evidence that Tehran was leaving that option open, and had hidden secret nuclear research that could move it closer to building a weapon.Iran has long maintained that it does not seek a nuclear weapon. But the United States and some of its allies have been skeptical, citing evidence that Tehran was leaving that option open, and had hidden secret nuclear research that could move it closer to building a weapon.
Before the 2015 nuclear deal, the international powers had imposed economic sanctions intended to pressure Iran to accept restrictions on its nuclear program. Those sanctions were lifted when Iran agreed to dismantle much of its nuclear program under the deal. Over the last two weeks, Iran has exceeded the cap on its stockpile of low-enriched uranium and has also begun enriching uranium to slightly higher levels than had been allowed under the deal. Both moves could be easily reversed if Iran decides to return to full compliance with the agreement, but could be small steps toward building a nuclear weapon.
The Trump administration later declared those restrictions inadequate and vowed to force Iran to submit to more severe limits on a much broader range of activities, including its support for allied militias around the region. Iran argues that its steps are authorized under the agreement because European governments have failed to deliver the promised sanctions relief. It says it will take additional steps in 60-day intervals unless Western governments provide economic relief.
Britain and the European Union, which also signed the 2015 accord, still support the agreement and have urged Iran to comply with it, while pleading with the Trump administration to return to it. The European governments have also sought to set up an alternative trading system that would allow Iran to sidestep the latest American sanctions. The United States military has said it will begin working with partners to escort more tankers through the Persian Gulf. In testimony on Capitol Hill on Thursday, Gen. Mark Milley, who has been nominated to lead the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said, “That will be developing over the next couple of weeks.”
But the Trump administration has embarked on a campaign of “maximum pressure” that culminated in May with new sanctions seeking to cut off Iranian oil sales anywhere in the world, devastating the Iranian economy. Iranian officials called the penalties “economic warfare.” Calling freedom of navigation “a fundamental principle,” General Milley said the United States has “a crucial role to enforce that norm.”
After adhering to its obligations under the 2015 deal for more than a year after the United States withdrew, Tehran responded to the American actions with carefully calibrated steps to revive its nuclear program beyond the limits imposed by the accord.
Over the last two weeks, Iran has exceeded the cap on its stockpile of low-enriched uranium and also begun enriching uranium to slightly higher levels than had been allowed under the deal. Both moves could be easily reversed if Iran decides to return to full compliance with the agreement, but could be small steps toward building a nuclear weapon.
Iran argues that its steps are authorized under the agreement because European governments have failed to deliver the promised sanctions relief. It says it will take additional steps in sixty-day intervals unless the Western governments provide economic relief.
Under the terms of the accord, Britain or the other European nations could seek to trigger so-called “snapback sanctions,” restoring the former economic penalties against Iran to punish it for exceeding the limits of the agreement. That would effectively extinguish hopes of reviving the deal.
The United States and some of its allies have also accused Iran of retaliating against the sanctions by threatening the flow of oil through the vital Persian Gulf shipping lanes — a vulnerable passage with Iran on one side and its American-backed Arab rivals on the other.
The episode on Thursday will increase alarms in the West that Iran might seek to cut off the flow of oil through the Gulf.
The United States military has said it will begin working with partners to escort more tankers through the Gulf.
“It is hard to see an end game right now because it appears that the Trump administration is doubling down” but “the cost of that is going to be an increase in Iran’s escalatory reaction,” said Sanam Vakil, a researcher at Chatham House, in London. “It looks like we are going to be in simmering conflict for the near term.”