THE GREATER CHALLENGE
The challenge for the US is that if it allows Iran to impede shipping through attacks, Tehran’s control could become permanent, with broad implications for freedom of navigation.
Understood in this context, it is easy to see why the US responded to Iran’s attacks on three ships transiting in and around the strait by striking Iran.
The US calculates that freedom of navigation is critical, and if economic incentives didn’t work, deterrence by punishment may. But the conflict has demonstrated that bombing alone is unlikely to restore safe passage through the Strait.
As the conflict becomes a battle over freedom of navigation, it exposes a gap in the US strategy and shows how earlier missteps are coming back to undermine it.
When Mr Trump said on Monday (Jul 13) that he would impose a charge on cargo vessels transiting the Strait, it was at odds with the principle the US is seeking to defend. Despite a quick U-turn, a US president suggesting that the principle of freedom of navigation is easily abandoned weakens the broader argument.
The greater challenge is that the US approach to the war has left allies and partners unwilling to send assets to help protect navigation in the region, as a number did during the Tanker War. To secure that support, Washington must frame the next phase around protecting commercial shipping, rather than the broader conduct of the war.
The US cannot defend freedom of navigation alone, or only when convenient. It must rebuild international support and make clear that no state can use force to control a global waterway.
What happens in Hormuz will shape not only this conflict, but the future security of maritime trade.
Jennifer Parker is an Adjunct Professor with the University of Western Australia Defence and Security Institute and a Non-Resident Fellow at the Lowy Institute. She served for more than 20 years as a warfare officer in the Royal Australian Navy.