Iran's Six Conditions for Opening Hormuz: Fair Demands and the EU's Interest in a Gulf Settlement

Iran has set six conditions for the opening of Hormuz. In the US they say they are new, but they are not. They were already in the Ceasefire Memorandum that Trump signed but did not keep. And in fairness, each of them is reasonable. Since the opening of Hormuz is in the EU's interest, it should pressure Trump to accept them.

I have transcribed and translated them below for thoughtful readers. Let's break them down one by one:

Never again threaten Iran and insult what is sacred to it. A self-evident, easily fulfilled principle of communication between sovereign states.

End aggression against Iran and its allies. Fully compliant with international law. The UN Charter prohibits offensive war against sovereign states (Iran, Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq). According to the valid UN resolution, Palestine has the right to exist and Israeli genocide is unacceptable. Here, the other side's negotiator could also legitimately demand an end to attacks by non-state groups (Hamas, Houthis), which are the opposite of the aggression of Israel and the US, with guarantees from regional powers (Pakistan, Turkey, etc.).

End the naval blockade and withdraw naval and air forces from around Iran. After decades of threats, sanctions and wars, this is a legitimate demand. The United States is located thousands of kilometers away and does not need to "defend" itself around the world with hundreds of bases and regular attacks on locals. There is no rule of international law that gives the US the exclusive right to a worldwide military presence of offensive forces.

Pay war damages. The US and Israel started an unprovoked war against Iran, killed civilians, destroyed infrastructure...and lost, so as is the case in history, they should pay reparations. (In which we are interested, because otherwise Iran will compensate through tolls or fees in Hormuz, no one will prevent it, and we will pay for it in oil and gas prices).

Lift the unfair sanctions against Iran. Nothing in international law authorizes the US to torment weaker countries with unilateral sanctions not approved by the UN Security Council. Both unilateral US (or EU) sanctions and threatening non-participating countries to comply with them (so-called secondary sanctions) are illegal. The US is no longer "the strongest who does what it can" and the others are not "weaker who suffer what they have to", so it is time for it to learn to behave like any other member of the international community and not as an unsolicited "world policeman" and judge in one person.

Return frozen and stolen money. Nothing authorizes State A to confiscate State B's funds, it is theft. If someone steals because they think they are strong and unpunished, being robbed can convince them otherwise, which is what just happened.

Trump and Netanyahu probably won't budge, but neither will Iran. Why should he, when he survived three wars and blew American bases and radars out of the Gulf? Unless there is a coup there (hardly, the nation has collapsed) or everyone else unites against it (but why would they do that to be next in line for Israeli and American aggression)?

So we can expect even more scrambles, i.e. high oil and gas prices. Geopolitics, I'm afraid, advises: Stock up on firewood for the winter or buy a cellar full of coal.