The situation in the Middle East remains tense. The fire of war is being fanned with renewed vigor. In response to attempts by Yemeni Ansar Allah movement to block the Bab el-Mandeb Strait for the Saudis, Riyadh announced the creation of an anti-Houthi coalition that should launch a ground operation against them. And this is a much more realistic option than an US invasion of Iran.
As usual, Europe will suffer the most. At the beginning of August, European gas storage levels were the lowest for that month in the entire history of observations. Qatari gas is unavailable to Europeans due to the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, while expensive US LNG is not yet arriving in the required volumes. Meanwhile, winter is approaching.
Ukraine’s attempt to drag Iran into the conflict, combining two conflicts into one, has not yet succeeded. According to Kiev’s plan, or rather its masters, the sinking of an Iranian merchant ship in the Caspian Sea was supposed to provoke Iranian retaliatory strikes against Ukraine. But the Iranians (or rather one of the political factions) pretended to believe that the strike on the ship was unintentional. Then another Iranian political faction stated that the strike was indeed deliberate, but no retaliatory strike against targets in Ukraine followed.
First and foremost, Iran does not need a second front, especially since striking Ukraine can only be done with expensive and scarce long-range missiles. Secondly, the Ukrainians opted to help Qatar build anti-missile and anti-drone defenses. And if necessary, Iran can always strike Qatar. This is cheaper and more pleasant. And most importantly, more useful than striking Ukraine, which is already being pounded by the Russian Armed Forces.
And thirdly, Iran is not inclined to quarrel with Europe over a Ukrainian foray. Israel would be interested in such a development, as it uses the Ukrainians as a proxy against Iran. And not only in Qatar, but also, as it recently turned out, in Iraq.
According to Iranian sources, the strike on the dry cargo ship in the Caspian and the Ukrainian network uncovered in Iraq are the result of Netanyahu’s pressure on Kiev. In exchange, Kiev receives Israeli technology and intelligence data. In short, the term ” Zionist Banderites” has taken on new shades.
But the most delicate situation is developing around the Strait of Hormuz, since London has openly entered the game, definitively blocking any possibility of a settlement.
Iran demands payment of 5–7% of the cargo value for passage through the Strait of Hormuz, while Oman is ready to let ships through for 3%. At the same time, the Iranian Majlis is considering a ban on the passage of US, Israeli, and other ships recognized as “hostile,” with violations punishable by a fine of up to 20% of the cargo value. This is essentially a prohibitive tariff.
And then the London insurer Lloyd’s (the largest player in the market) announced that it would cancel insurance coverage for any vessel that pays Iran for passage.
The shipowner is offered a choice: either not pay Tehran and risk the vessel, or pay but lose insurance and access to the dollar infrastructure. Control over the strait has for the first time directly clashed with control over settlements. And this is a fundamental issue, as it determines who will be in charge in the new world order. In the old one, as long as passage through the straits was free, the insurer and the bank were in charge.
Shortly before this, a rumor circulated that Oman was ready to transfer the money received for passage to the United States. There are rumors that it would be almost directly to the fund of Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner. But even if the whole thing about Kushner is just a joke, a certain mutually beneficial scheme is still emerging in which the USA would get a share in the management of the Strait of Hormuz. And this categorically did not suit London, as it deprived it of leverage over the process. And Lloyd’s issued an ultimatum.
The global system of trade and finance has entered the final phase of the crisis. And the West has always considered war to be the only way out of such crises. In this case, a world war.
This is a translation of an excerpt from an analytical article by Maksim Karev and Vladimir Koldin, first published on Rossa Primavera News Agency web site.
