As the US-Iran deal appears to unravel over sharp differences regarding the Strait of Hormuz, The New York Times cited experts Sunday focusing on the vagueness of the text of the memorandum of understanding that caused the wildly differing interpretations.

While the June 17 MOU explicitly compelled the US to “fully end the naval blockade within 30 days” and end “any disturbances or impediments against the Islamic Republic of Iran,” the deal was far less explicit when detailing Tehran’s obligations regarding the strait.

It said Iran would “make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels with no charge for 60 days only.” It added: “The Islamic Republic of Iran will conduct dialogue with the Sultanate of Oman to define the future administration and maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz, in discussion with other Persian Gulf littoral states, in line with the applicable international law and the sovereign rights of coastal states of the Strait of Hormuz.”

The New York Times quoted veteran US diplomat Michael Ratney as saying that “no one should be surprised that Iran views that as explicitly giving them an enduring role controlling passage through Hormuz.”

“Iran’s control obviously gives them powerful leverage, and they appear to be........

© The Times of Israel