Image credit: Teo Romera
By Wardah Malik
A tanker (‘Grace I’) believed to be transporting oil to war-stricken Syria was detained by British officials on July 4, 2019 off the coast of Gibraltar. Gibraltar’s chief minister, Fabian Picardo, defended the move, arguing: “That refinery (referring to Baniyas Refinery) is the property of an entity that is subject to European Union sanctions against Syria.”
As of 2019, the EU has enforced sanctions against 270 persons and 72 entities part of Assad’s government. The EU as well as the U.S. remains committed in finding a credible political solution to ongoing Syrian conflict. As such, oil embargos and seizure of assets have been useful in stalling the growth of Assad’s regime. U.S. national security adviser, John Bolton, referred to the seizure of Grace I as “excellent news.” For Bolton, America and its allies are dedicated in “[preventing] regimes in Tehran & Damascus from profiting off illicit trade.”
Iranian officials, however, have denounced British actions as an “illegal interception” or “act of piracy.” Mainly because Iran, a non-EU member, cannot be subjected to EU regulations. In a televised speech, Iranian defence minster Amir Hatami claimed that the seizure “will not be tolerated by us and will not go without a response.” Similarly, Mohsen Rezaee, a former senior military official, argued that if the situation is not remedied, Iranian authorities will be “duty-bound to take reciprocal action and seize a British oil tanker.”
Josep Borrel, Spain’s acting foreign minster clarified that the tanker was seized by British authorities after a request from the U.S. Borrel states that this seizure compromises Spain’s sovereignty despite British insistence that Gibraltar is part of the United Kingdom. This sovereignty dispute could potentially lead to conflicting interest and escalating tensions in the EU. Furthermore, the detention of Grace I has complicated ongoing tense relations between Europe and Iran over the 2015 nuclear deal which has considerably weakened with U.S. actions. President Donald Trump not only withdrew from the 2015 accord but also imposed sanctions on Iran, and most recently permitted the passage of a carrier group to the Persian Gulf.
In response to backlash received, Trump warned Iran to be “very, very careful” about further actions in the region. Trump warnings to Iran stand in direct contrast to his former promise to “open talks” with Iranian officials.
Shortly after Trump’s statement, it was reported that three Iranian gunboats attempted to seize a British oil tanker (‘British Heritage’) sailing though the Strait of Hormuz but were ultimately unsuccessful after a British warship threatened to open fire. Speaking on behalf of the U.S. Central Command, Navy Captain Bill Urban argued that “threats to international freedom of navigation require an international solution.” In response, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)refutes foreign aggression. IRGC also asserts that no involvement between Iranian and British vessels took place in the Persian Gulf. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani maintains that consistent British aggression will lead to “consequences in the future.”
The tensions are expected to rise with the U.S plan to put together a coalition to ensure freedom of navigation through the Persian Gulf. However, Washington will have a difficult time to form this coalition, given the legitimate hesitation of some countries (members of Combined Maritime Force based in Bahrain), to unwantedly get dragged into US-Iran standoff.
