The Strait of Hormuz is reigniting conflict, with each side offering its own account—seeming to suggest that righteousness lies in louder voices.
Condensing the complexity: there is no legitimate justification for the U.S. pushing ships along the Omani coastline (the blue channel at the bottom of the diagram) through the Strait of Hormuz.
On the surface, it appears to be a passionate call for "freedom of navigation," positioning the U.S. as a righteous enforcer—like a self-appointed police force.
In essence, the Memorandum of Understanding explicitly stipulates that during the initial 60-day window, traffic flow through the Strait of Hormuz remains under Iranian control.
The U.S. has repeatedly violated this agreement, attempting to unilaterally alter provisions they dislike from the very beginning. The Americans have reneged on their commitments—they're overturning the table and forcibly dismantling:
Oil sanctions exemption (Article 10): No, let's start over!
Removal of sanctions (Article 9): No, let's start over!
Iranian management of traffic flow (Article 5): No, let's start over!
Iran’s targeting of vessels not complying with regulations may seem superficially wrong—but by common sense, attacking passing ships would indeed be "wrong."
Yet this is merely Iran’s response to the selective war initiated by the United States.
To judge without examining root causes, without assessing facts or moral clarity, is driven by hidden motives.
Before the war began, the Strait of Hormuz was already open.
The reason the U.S. attempts to implement “Freedom of Navigation Operation 2.0” along the Omani route is precisely because they aim to dismantle Iran’s control over the strait.
The strategy? To forcibly push a sufficient number of ships through within a short timeframe, breaking Iran’s hold and thereby altering the strategic landscape of the conflict.
How many commercial vessels or oil tankers would dare risk their lives through gunfire, without security guarantees, without insurance coverage—or facing exorbitant premiums?
Are the ships now taking the Omani route merely tools of the U.S., or brave souls lured by heavy rewards?
Does anyone truly believe that simply forcing passage can break Iran’s blockade?
Trump treats the memorandum like trash, or continues using maximum pressure to overturn any clause unfavorable to him.
The agreement’s window spans 60 days—since nothing is yet final—therefore, he seeks to reshape the situation during this period, including toppling Iran’s new regime or securing benefits the U.S. failed to obtain initially in the memorandum.
This is not the U.S. doing good deeds or rallying others to open the strait. It is an attempt to unilaterally rewrite terms of a memorandum personally signed by Trump.
Iran’s retaliation simply sends a clear message to the U.S.: if you want to overturn everything, you cannot bypass Iran.
Original: toutiao.com/article/1869752003384332/
Disclaimer: This article represents the personal views of the author