Trump retreat over Hormuz tolls suggests he is struggling to end Iran war

Donald Trump’s latest Iran War demand lasted all of 24 hours and suggests a president searching for unorthodox ways out of a difficult position.

On Monday morning, in a social media post announcing the resumption of an American naval blockade on Iranian shipping, he said that all vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz – including those of US allies – must pay a 20% fee to reimburse the US “for any and all costs necessary to do the job of providing safety and security to this very volatile section of the world”.

The following day, he abandoned that proposal completely, offering instead that he would strike “trade and investment deals” with America’s Gulf allies, implying the US would offer them safe passage through the Strait in return.

The abrupt about-face was the latest twist in a conflict that has now lasted more than four months and, despite a month old “memorandum of understanding” that secured a temporary ceasefire and set up a framework for negotiations, shows no sign of ending.

Trump may be reluctant to escalate the war given its continued unpopularity, the likelihood of rising energy prices and the risks associated with America forces and allies once again coming under Iranian attack. He might find the prospect of ending the conflict without reaching an agreement he can claim is better than the one Barack Obama’s administration negotiated in 2015 also distasteful, however.

“I think the most likely ending is a non-ending,” Rosemary Kelanic, Director of the Middle East program at Defense Priorities, said. “This has turned into a war of attrition, and wars of attrition tend to go on for a long, long period of time.”

The US-Iran memorandum of understanding (MOU) – and the hopes that came with it for an end to the war – died at 10:16 ET (16:16 BST) on Tuesday on Truth Social, when Trump announced a resumption of the US blockade of Iranian shipping, amidst a flurry of new US military strikes on targets across Iran.

The Iranians countered by stepping up attacks on US allies and commercial shipping in the region, grinding traffic through the Strait of Hormuz to a near standstill once more.

After nearly a month of on-again, off-again negotiations between the two nations, punctuated by occasional hostilities that tested the definition of a “ceasefire”, Trump and the Americans appear to be facing the same challenges that had been present through much of the Iran War.

While militarily, the Americans were achieving their objectives, as measured in Iranian ships, planes and targets destroyed and defence capabilities degraded, politically the conflict was far from resolved.

Iran, militarily weakened though it may be, could still deny access to the Strait of Hormuz. And unless the Americans are willing to dramatically escalate their military operations in the region, there was little they could do to stop them.

Trump’s new twist of a 20% fee – possibly a means of making that military commitment more palatable to the American public – wasn’t entirely new. He had suggested such an arrangement on several occasions over the course of the war.

But just last month, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio had condemned an Iranian plan to charge “fees” on shipping through Hormuz.

“No country is allowed to charge tolls or fees on an international waterway,” he said. “That’s existing international law. That’s the way it is in international waterways all over the world, and that’s the way we expect it here.”

Trump’s Hormuz U-turn is just the latest evidence of a president who does not appear to have a clear path forward. The memorandum of understanding, which both Americans and Iranians claimed as a victory for their side, was intentionally vague, leaving much up to later negotiation.

The document envisioned some role for Iran in overseeing shipping in Hormuz. It read: “The Islamic Republic of Iran will make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels with no charge.”

This is a role that Iran has been intent on asserting. The MOU also included billions of dollars in promised “investment” in Iran and an end to international sanctions.

Americans may have believed those sweeteners, accompanied by warnings of the consequences of noncompliance, would be enough to dissuade Iran from attempting to use its geographic advantages to more forcefully assert control over Hormuz. That calculation, at least for the moment, appears incorrect.

“The MOU is completely dead,” said Kelanic. “All of the things that it stipulated have now been undone.”