46:13
understanding signed last month at risk. Now, this is how events unfolded. It began on Monday when the revolutionary guards struck three commercial vessels off the coast of Oman. The following day, the United States said it carried out retaliatory strikes on Iranian military targets. Thean responded with missile and drone attacks on US bases across the Gulf. On Wednesday, President Trump told reporters the ceasefire was over. This announcement rattled markets and oil prices went up. Overnight, Iran's revolutionary guard announced the closure of the Straight of Hormuz until further notice that after attacking a vessel using what it called an unapproved route. I'm joined now by Ian Ralby. He's a senior fellow at the
Center for Maritime Strategy and president of Auxilium Worldwide and he joins us live from Miami. Thank you, Ian, for joining us as well. What are you making of this? And really ultimately we've got the UK Maritime Authority saying that this Cyprus flagged vessel container vessel was hit something like 9 nautical miles north of Oman which would clearly put it in Omani waters. What does that really what are the takeaways from that? Yeah. So as of the last few weeks we've had three different routes uh that have been used by ships to come out. One is the Iranian route approved by the Persian Gulf Straight Authority that has become the favored route uh on the
southern highway as the president of the United States has described it. There were two routes for a little while. One approved by the International Maritime Organization and Oman, but that only lasted a few days until it had to be suspended following attacks and the other being a USG guided route using what is called the US Navy's Enc program. that seems to be where this vessel was coming through which indicates that the guidance that the US is providing is specifically being targeted by the Iranians and pushed back against and that is a problem for a lot of vessels to now have the choice uh get attacked or go through Iran. If that's uh the only options on the table uh it is a pretty bleak picture for many
of them going forward. And doesn't this really precage if you will uh the whole notion of having a toll system which will be put in place by them? Yeah. So this is a real indication that their strategic leverage that they've seen for many years as being the straight of Hormuz is not going anywhere. They are going to try everything they can to not only maintain a degree of physical presence uh but real operational control of the straight. They are trying to do something no one has ever done in a straight before. and in implement not only a permission scheme but some kind of payment and oversight scheme that they will enforce by force. That is
unusual. That is not good news for freedom of navigation. That's not good news for the global economy because if they manage to do it, others could too. But right now, the concern is that there is a der of traffic because after the attacks this week, we've seen the flow drop down to very little. And the only noticeable flow has really been through the Iranian side, which means they're not only trying to do this, they're starting to succeed. So, I mean, it does become quite apparent that militarily this could go on for ages unless there were boots on the ground, which certainly is something which Donald Trump is not in favor with, and neither is the US military establishment.
Yeah. I mean, I don't think that this is going to ever get solved militarily. Um, there's a will to keep fighting on one side. there's a will to keep trying to break and uh diminish the capacity on the other that just is a formula for ongoing conflict. Um and that unfortunately uh could mean a long-term problem for the straight of Hormuz as a navigable waterway. What we are likely to see though is that uh other parties particularly those that have experienced some of the strikes in the region recently are going to try it further to renew efforts on diplomatic uh channels to change the will. Um and that unfortunately is very hard to do when you have two mercurial parties, both of
whom have pretty entrenched interests in succeeding and winning. And unfortunately, the US has had a very flexible sense of what winning would look like. And on the Iranian side, there's now a very clear desire and express uh notion that there needs to be some kind of revenge for what has happened. And that's uh a historic formula uh that leads to long-term bloodshed. That is not going to be uh easy to manage. And amid all of that, the key uh strategic point of interaction looks like it's going to be the straight of horm, which means our energy supplies, our global costs for shipping and the cost of all our goods are likely to stay on the increase rather than to stabilize at a lower level.
Well, unfortunately, we're in this sort of um negative spiral, aren't we? Where revenge begets revenge. Exactly. This has been a cycle and unfortunately, you know, this is not brand new. The US and Iran have had a back and forth at a much lower level in the maritime space since at least 2019 in terms of just traceable back and forth, what were called tit fortat attacks. We saw it play out with drone strikes, with limpit mines, and with seizures of vessels. This is obviously a much greater um degree of violence being used, but it is a very similar dynamic. It just shows that Iran has actually crossed the Rubicon into the point of where they are going to try to maintain the control of the Sri Hormuz. It
benefits them economically. It benefits them strategically. It benefits them militarily and ultimately that seems to be where they see their ability to influence the situation in a way that could lead them to some kind of success or victory. Uh but at the same time, the US needs to also succeed uh because it's made some pretty bold statements that it has not yet been able to achieve when it comes to opening up that waterway and allowing for freedom of navigation to resume. The other thing is that many of the Gulf states are now getting into a critical point. We were close to running out of strategic reserves when theou was signed and now we're back to oil not flowing. That is not good news.
Ian, hold that thought. Um, if you are just joining us, it's just gone past midnight GMT Greenwich. Meantime, uh, the US Central Command says it's launched a new round of strikes on the south of Iran. Iranian state television saying explosions have been reported in two cities along the coast. In fact, now four cities. Uh, Iranian media saying a number of locations including Band Rabbas, Sir Kessim Island, Busher, and Aulea have been hit. It's unclear what was targeted and if there have been any casualties. Sentcom, that's the US Central Command, says its forces have launched strikes against Iran in response to an attack on a Cypress flagged container ship in the straight.
Now, in a statement, Sentcom saying this, a civilian crew member is missing and the vessel is unable to continue the journey due to an onboard fire and significant engine room damage. Iran was provided yet another opportunity to demonstrate adherence to the memorandum of understanding after being held accountable for earlier attacks on commercial vessels, but has again failed. that is SenCom. In response, they go on to say the US is imposing a heavy cost by continuing to degrade Iran's ability to attack civilian mariners and commercial ships freely transiting the straight. The strikes have been carried out at the direction of the commander in chief.
Now, the attacks do come after Iran's revolutionary guard said the straight of Hormuz has been temporarily closed until further notice. The IGC said a commercial vessel was struck for trying to transit the shipping lane along what Tehran says is an unapproved route. Getting us back to Tohed Assadi who is in Tehran to more. What have you been able to glean since we last talked? Well, the message from the Iranian side in that regard as you mentioned is quite clear. They're trying to say that the control and authority over the Australia foremost is for the Iranians and that is in line with the se several different
statements that we have been hearing and receiving from the Iranian side. the latest of which I can refer to the statement by the naval forces of the revolutionary guards in an announcement coming out to say that due to the insecurity caused by foreign intervention the country has decided to close the strait of hormones as you mentioned until further notice and until the end of US intervention in the region. Also they came out to say that if the enemy commits a mistake to respond there are going to be tough repercussions and uh of course they are saying that the acts of aggression by the enemy will be responded strongly and also they are talking about the consequences not just for the Americans not just for the Israelis but also for
the third countries which are providing their territories to be used for conducting attacks against the Iranian territories and they are warning about the potentiality of further US military bases across the region to be targeted in case the situation turns out to be escalating and also they've got another uh important message and that is reg that is related to the incident that took place tonight. They said that several ships, several vessels tried to approach the straight of foremost within an within a trajectory that was not approved by the Iranian side. They disregarded the Iranian warning messages and one of these vessels according to the naval forces of IRGC was shot was
stopped by the naval forces of IRGC. Meanwhile, uh we've got a ministry of foreign affairs official to commenting on this uh to our colleague Ali Hashem and he mentioned that the bowl is in the court of the United States. Again, in line with the statements that we are hearing from the Iranian side, they're saying that the United States is responsible for the breach of the agreement, breach of the memorandum of understanding that was signed between Tehran and Washington about 20 more than 20 days ago, I can say now. And they are not only referring to uh this uh recent developments, this recent attacks that we have been witnessing on the Iranian southern coast in different cities, but also they are referring to other
instances of the breach of agreement. Again, according to them, they are referring to the continued nature of the Israeli strikes on the Lebanese territories, part and parcel of Iran's conditions when it comes to any negotiated settlement. in that regard. And also uh there is another important development that took place the other day and that was the reimposition of oil export sanctions on Iran and Iranians in that regard were hopeful that in case diplomacy is successful that could pave the way for the removal of these sanctions. Another key point of concern why Iranians started to go through the trajectory of diplomacy. All in all, we know that we are dealing with a very intricate, brittle, complicated and fragile situation. Not only at a
straight foremost, but in a broader context. As Iran previously talked about the potentiality of another round of escalation, this time being expanded beyond the region and that comes again with another expansion and that is related to the expansion of the areas targeted by the Americans not only in the southern parts but also in southeastern parts of the country and southwest part of the country. That's exactly what I talked to you about because we've had reports now of explosions taking place near Iran's Chabha port. Now, this is one of the deep water ports that Iran has, and it's a very important economic lifeline, is it not?
Not only this one, but also other areas that were targeted over the past three, four nights, I would say, are among the most significant ones. Right now we've got reports coming from Iran's press TV saying that Asalu and Bucher were targeted explosion sounds were heard. Also we've got reports unconfirmed about different cities from the southern coast of the country. But over the past three four nights I can say Bandarapos which is a very important port was targeted several times. Also the southoutheastern port of Chabahar again another important hop for Iran's commerce was targeted. Meanwhile, we know that geostrategically significant islands such as Gish, the largest one in the vicinity of the
Australia, the foremost witnessed air strikes by the Americans and two important cities, Jos and Zurich, uh which indeed are very much important because they are overseeing the trade foremost and they are one of the points geostrategically significant that Iran uses to uh place its authority and control over this red foremost. These cities were witnessing heavy bombardment and this is I would say the most unprecedented attack after the announcement of the memorandum of understanding putting the pathway for diplomacy under further risk. The message that we hear from the Iranian side at this point is that of resilience, that of defiance. And they're saying that in case the situation continues to escalate, there
are going to be more crushing, stronger answers ahead. And again, that runs the risk of further confrontation on the horizon. Do thank you very much. Do there joining us live from Tehran. Let's get from Tehran to Washington DC. Mike Hannah is at the White House. Uh Mike, we've had uh of course Pete Heg as the defense secretary or war secretary uh been also posting on X. What more can you tell us? Yes, indeed. Uh the secretary of defense has just posted a notice on X following that announcement by Sentcom of renewed US operations. And uh the secretary Hexath says at 7:15 Eastern time today,
that's about an hour ago, US Central Command forces began launching the third round of strikes this week against Iran after Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps forces blatantly attacked and carries on to name the ship that was attacked in the Strait of Hormuz. So now you have yet another US operation ongoing. Uh we've heard from Sentcom as I said earlier saying that the strike was underway in retaliation for that attack on the vessel in the straight of Homos. So this tit fortat conflict continues even while the US administration insists that negotiations should continue. Um Mike, I mean this is really now becoming a cycle of uh violence or should I say attacks be getting further
responses and it seems like we're just going down this negative uh I suppose sinkhole. Well, it hasn't really been anything different in the weeks or months since the conflict started. Uh once you had that ceasefire declared with the signing of the memorandum of understanding there was a lull in operations there appeared to be an agreement on a structure to allow negotiations to go forward to deal with more lasting issues. Uh but what has happened is that has not happened because of a lack of clarity about the strait of Hammuz. This is the absolute center of conflict that we are seeing at the moment. Iran is have one interpretation of who controls the straight of Hammuz. The US has another.
You now have Iran opening fire on vessels that do not use the approved routes. You have the US blockading vessels that use the routes that only Iran approves. So you have a scenario where the whole ceasefire which President Trump has declared is over but the whole negotiation process itself is under threat because of a single clause in that memorandum of understanding uh concerning the strait of Arus or Humuz and who or who does not control it. Well, absolutely. And certainly one country which has been runshad over has been Oman in all this with the latest vessel, this container ship some nine nautical miles north of its border which is firmly in its territorial waters.
Well, that ship apparently was passing along the southern route through the straight of Hermuz, which theoretically the US says it protects. Iran has insists that all vessels pass on the northern route uh which is the one that it says it has control over. So you have the scenario where one side says it controls one part of the straight another side says it controls the other side and I must note as well is that the traditional route is right through the middle of the straight of Hammuz and vessels cannot use that because of the everpresent threat of mines. that particular sector of the strait has not been cleared by mines. The southern route which the US says it controls has
been cleared of mines. The northern route which Iran says it controls has been clear of cleared of mines. Uh but Iran continues to insist that any vehicle any vessel transiting the strait has to go along the approved routes otherwise it will be attacked and that is precisely what we have seen in the past few hours. Mike, thank you so much. Mike Hannah there joining us live from Washington. Let's get over now to back to Ian Ralby. He's a senior fellow at the Center for Maritime Strategy and President of Auxilian Worldwide joining us there from Miami. Also with us now this hour is Thomas Warrick. He's a former US deputy assistant secretary for counterterrorism policy and a senior
fellow at the Atlantic Council. Um Thomas, to you first. I mean, where does it all leave the memorandum of understanding as it were? Is there a memorandum of a misunderstanding is what it should be called. Uh that would be a very apt description. It's great to be on with you and my good friend Ian. Uh so uh it looks like this memorandum is going to have to be completely renegotiated because the language that was used did not come anywhere close to resolving the differences between the two parties with the United States and Iran having such totally different understandings of the same words on the printed page. And by the way, it's not an error in translation. The Persian and English
word arrangements mean exactly the same thing. So it's not a linguistic difference. Uh it's just a completely different idea of uh what the agreement meant. Uh so in English we say there was no meeting of the minds and therefore there really isn't a memorandum of understanding. Uh they don't really agree on the most fundamental aspect of what uh was on the piece of paper. And to you Ian the same question. Yeah. Yeah, I mean I think uh taking it one step further than Tom and Great to be with you, Tom. Um I think that the most uh problematic language was about probably the most immediate concern which was the story to Hormuse. And reading it as a both a
lawyer and a maritime expert, I was a little bit shocked because what the US agreed to was very confusing because it actually put the burden of responsibility on Iran to do the mine clearing and that has become one of the Iranian talking points because on the one hand the US has repeated the narrative countless times that the entire Iranian navy is gone. It's been destroyed. It doesn't exist. There's no air force. There's no navy. They have no army. They have no military. are done. That clearly isn't true if they can still attack. And even so, we've seen with Ukraine, we've seen with the Houthis, we've seen with the pirates that it doesn't take a whole lot to be
able to disrupt maritime commerce. So, it is a problematic starting point, but the naval mission of countermining is actually quite challenging and it requires a specific class of vessel and specific aptitude. And if that's been destroyed, there's no way they could do it. And so what that has led to is Iran talking about foreign countermining missions as being interventionist. And so with the French and the British talking about sending uh naval vessels into the straight hormuz to aid that countermining mission, they open the door to Iran pushing back against that foreign intervention and a retrenchment of this notion that Iran has both the legal right and the ability
to control the entirety of the straight of Hormuz all the way across to Oman, which is what we're looking at right now. Given that today's negotiations with Oman seem to have yielded again a misunderstanding as to how the Omani support to Iranian control of the strait would actually play out. Uh with the vessel being attacked in their waters, it also puts another burden on Oman, which is that this has been a repeat effort for them to conduct search and rescue not only on vessels attacked by Iran but also by the United States. and they've had to save countless sailors who were uh left vesselless [clears throat] or even uh stranded and in some cases killed uh by US attacks in
in what were called blockade enforcement measures. And so this has been a tough time for Oman as you said. Tom, does this really just highlight that a military solution is not the answer? Oh no, quite the contrary. Uh, President Trump is going to be getting advice from his adviserss that uh, Iran is simply not deterred by the level of military or economic pressure applied to date. And when President Trump angrily demands options that will uh, change Iran's mind, he's going to be told you actually have to go after regime targets in Tehran. Uh so the risk of significant escalation and I don't mean minor escalation I mean significant escalation uh is very much going to be in the
option slides that the president is going to be looking at uh probably tomorrow. Um so Ian does that mean a return to what we saw in the first few weeks of this conflict? Well, first of all, let's just take a moment and say let's pray for the innocent civilians who are having a rough night tonight. The ones who have been blown off their ship, the one that's missing off of that vessel. And remember [clears throat] that there is a fatigue there is a fatigue that is starting to set in. A lot of people have been through months now of strenuous conflict often on uh attacks, uncertainty uh and the mental and physical stress is going to push people uh in all kinds of directions. And I
think the human aspect of this is often lost. It's odd. We have much more visible uh imagery around what has been happening in Ukraine and Gaza than we do in Iran. But we have to remember uh it has been brutal. Um and so this is likely to push uh them more towards wanting to push back because they're just fed up. And I think that is a formula for as Tom says really intense escalation much more beyond what we saw even in the early days because Iran hasn't actually pulled all the levers it could and that spells trouble because they have they still have friends and allies and in fact they have more who have sympathized with them over these months with shifting goalposts with
unreasonable demands with threats of annihilation of their entire civilization uh that could now actually be turned in the other direction. And so this is really getting messy, especially as Gulf states are experiencing renewed strikes this week after months of uncertainty, hits to their economy, incredible uncertainty around even the security of their own uh territory. So let's not forget the civilians, but remember that this is mercurial leaders who are going to have increased desire for blood. And unfortunately, as much as the US continues to degrade the capacity of uh Iran, they aren't degrading their will. They aren't degrading their defiance, and that's a problem uh for any kind of attempt at a military solution.
Tom, I think you'd go along with that, wouldn't you? But well, yeah, but let me point out one thing. There's a pattern to this conflict. Um things get worse on uh Friday, Saturday. Uh they get better on Sunday, Monday. uh in large part that's when President Trump announces peace at hand or diplomacy is now succeeding or Iran is now coming back to the table and you're seeing an effort and Ian knows because he and I have discussed this many times uh you know Trump tries to play the stock market and the oil market Iran tries to play the shipping market and the insurance market uh and so there's a clear psychological element uh not just to what's happening today but what will happen Sunday and Monday. Uh,
and so, you know, it'll look better in a few days. Um, and then it'll look worse again a few days after that. So, I think we're in a if you're following the money, what are you looking at? Well, we're in a period of cold war. This is going to go on uh for several more weeks, perhaps months, uh, and perhaps even up until the November election. Look, we have seen Iran overplay its hand time and again. They got a good deal in the memorandum of understanding that was signed in June, but some people were on the Iranian side were unhappy and started shooting at ships. Uh, and so here we are again. Um, what Iran fails to appreciate is the following very important point.
President Trump cares something about how his party does on the in the November 3rd elections, but between November 4th and January 3rd, 2027, when the new Congress comes in, there are no constraints on President Trump at all. He can do anything he wants and he knows it. Uh, and so we could limp along for a while, but on November 4th, I think all the bets are off, all the gloves come off of the US military, and President Trump gets to do anything he wants. Ian, I mean, as you mentioned before, this is a an administration in Tehran that is not casualty sensitive. So, that of course has a huge bearing, as you did allude to earlier, very much so. And I think um you know when you're you're looking at their
experience, it's likely to actually make them more um ambitious in trying to push back and come out with a what they can see as a victory. And so the straight moves is the key crown jewel of that uh formula. And unfortunately um they have managed to find a mechanism uh for not only pushing back against the United States but holding the entire world hostage. They've got everybody's attention and they're going to try and keep holding it. Uh Tom, how is your what's your gut feeling? You're suggesting this is going to be in place for the long haul, but how does it ultimately resolve? Um that depends on what President Trump wants to do uh for his part and what the Iranian leadership is prepared to accept. I mean Ian is correct. The
Iranians do not care about civilian casualt the Iranian government to be clear does not care about civilian casualties. Um uh they only care about staying in power. Uh but President Trump has not shown any seriousness about regime change. He was he's talked about it but nothing happened. He flirted with it in March and nothing happened. Uh his advisers rightly said the Israeli ideas of this were a farce or a joke or other uh even more profane things. Um uh but nevertheless, he's going to get more and more frustrated by his inability to impose his will on the leaders in Thran. Uh, and this is where things, I think, uh, get potentially very different from what we're seeing
right now. Uh, I think this is going to be something where President Trump has an eye on his reputation in history. And if he goes down as having lost a war against Iran, his reputation will be ruined and he knows it. And so this means he can't lose this war or his place in history will be tarnished forever. And this is why I think he's likely to do something that many people will consider a gamble. And I think Iran's leaders are underestimating the danger that their regime is in because they really fundamentally don't understand Trump just as he fundamentally does not understand the Iranian leadership. So dissonance on both sides. Tom, thank you so much. Uh Tom Thomas Warrick there, former US
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Counterterrorism Policy and Ian Ralby, president of Auxilium Worldwide joining us from Miami. Thank you very much.
