Mei or enter “tactical pause” but must address the ambiguity of the memorandum

CNN analyst Abbas Al Lawati (Abbas Al Lawati) stated that the crux of the renewed conflict between the United States and Iraq lies in the different interpretations of article 5 of the memorandum of understanding. This provision provides that Iran will “make arrangements... to ensure the safe passage of merchant ships” and cooperate with Oman to “determine the future management of the Strait”. This provision, however, does not expressly confer exclusive jurisdiction on Iran over shipping in that area. The Iranian podcast host, Negar Mortazavi, stated that “the message conveyed by Tehran is clear: the Strait is open, but not on United States terms”, and “Trump signed an agreement on paper, and now tries to distort it at sea at will. Iran's response was to bring the dispute back to the text of the memorandum of understanding itself, thereby demonstrating that military forces could not rewrite the agreed outcome of the negotiations.” The International Crisis Group (Crisis Group) noted that the ambiguities in the memorandum of understanding might have helped to end the fighting at first, but as the parties began to interpret the text in their respective interests, they quickly became a danger. The think tank stated that in order to prevent a complete breakdown of the ceasefire process, both parties must stop trying to impose their own interpretation of article 5 on each other, even if only to ease the situation while negotiations continued. This means that Iran will have to stop firing on ships and that the United States will have to stop promoting alternative routes, at least at this stage. The mediators indicated that they were working to bring the parties back to the negotiating table. Although there are no signs of compromise yet, the fighting seems to have subsided — at least today. Kim Xian