Iran’s parliament is reviewing a plan to ban ships linked to the U.S., Israel and other “hostile countries” from transiting the Strait of Hormuz until Tehran is compensated for war damage, according to Iranian state media.

The plan would impose fees of up to 7% of cargo value on commercial vessels that pass through the strait. It would also fine ships 20% of cargo if they violate Iran’s conditions.

Iran on Wednesday said it was finalizing an agreement on shipping routes with Oman, a U.S. ally that sits on the other side of the Strait of Hormuz. Iranian state media quoted the Foreign Ministry as saying that ships would enter through the strait’s northern corridor near the Iranian coast and exit through the southern corridor near the Omani coast.

  • Nobody@anarchist.nexus
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I was referring to an agreement that would reopen Hormuz to avert global catastrophe. If oil goes to 200+ a barrel, everyone’s economy burns.

    • pmk@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Ah, I see, I thought you meant that Europe could put pressure to help the US. A global recession is of course bad, but I will say that I’m personally willing to endure some economic hardship if it means that we move faster to renewable energy sources and that the US is not appeased in any way.

      • benjirenji@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Economic hardship has been the only effective emission reducer so far. It’s sad to see we did not upgrade the energy production when we had to, so now only a ruined economy gives us a lifeline.

        • Eril@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 minute ago

          I have to say, during this entire conflict I felt better when Iran closed the strait and we were not in a state of “finally they work on some agreement”, simply because there couldn’t be a better acceleration of renewable energies than oil being expensive as fuck. I know that is somehow a weird accelerationist take, since all western economy still very much runs on oil and even if I personally use electric cars and have a heat pump for heating at home, it still affects me indirectly through the economy at large.

          But: Living in Western Europe, this summer so far is brutal: One heat wave after the other, wildfires going crazy, the rivers drying out (impacting the economy as well btw), but somehow it feels out governments treat climate protection like some outdated topic from 2018.

          So, I am actually scared about the consequences of Iran closing the strait of Hormuz for sure, but I guess I’m more scared about climate change fucking us over big time.

        • bstix@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          47 minutes ago

          I wonder how long it would take to rebuild society without oil, if we were to cut it from one day to the next.

          I don’t think it would be long. Lots of solutions already exist but are infeasible only because oil is cheaper.

          • benjirenji@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            26 minutes ago

            For energy yes, for materials and particularly fertilizer we’d be running in a problem. Moving to more sustainable diets and agricultural methods will take time. Too much time to not have famine for a while if cut off from one day to another.

            Also for poorer countries with less infrastructure the impact (also for transportation) will be a lot more devastating.