Britain begins escorting all UK vessels through Hormuz Strait

[webfact]

Britain begins escorting all UK vessels through Hormuz Strait

By Andrew MacAskill and Jonathan Saul

 

FILE PHOTO: Oil tankers pass through the Strait of Hormuz, December 21, 2018. REUTERS/Hamad I Mohammed/File Photo

 

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain has started sending a warship to accompany all British-flagged vessels through the Strait of Hormuz, a change in policy announced on Thursday after the government previously said it did not have resources to do so.

 

Tensions have spiked between Iran and Britain since last Friday when Iranian commandos seized a British-flagged tanker in the world's most important waterway for oil shipments. That came two weeks after British forces captured an Iranian oil tanker near Gibraltar, accused of violating sanctions on Syria.

 

HMS Montrose, a British frigate now in the area, carried out the first mission under the new policy on Wednesday evening.

 

"The Royal Navy has been tasked to accompany British-flagged ships through the Strait of Hormuz, either individually or in groups, should sufficient notice be given of their passage," a government spokesman said.

 

"Freedom of navigation is crucial for the global trading system and world economy, and we will do all we can to defend it," he added in a statement.

 

The British government had previously advised British-flagged vessels to avoid the Strait of Hormuz where possible and to notify the navy if they must cross it, but had said it would not be able to escort every ship.

 

Britain has been seeking to put together a European-led maritime protection mission to ensure safe shipping through the Strait of Hormuz after Iran's seizure of the tanker in what London said was an act of "state piracy".

 

The change of policy was not the result of a change made by new Prime Minister Boris Johnson, as the government had been working on the plan for a few days, according to a official, who asked not to be named.

 

UNCERTAIN TIME

The UK Chamber of Shipping trade association, which previously called for more protection of merchant vessels in the area, welcomed the change.

 

"This move will provide some much needed safety and reassurance to our shipping community in this uncertain time," said the chief executive, Bob Sanguinetti. "However, we will continue to push for a de-escalation of tensions in the region."

 

On any given day, about 15 to 30 large British-flagged ships travel in the Gulf, with up to three passing through the Strait of Hormuz between Iran and Oman, where a pair of two-mile-wide shipping lanes provide the only routes in and out of the Gulf.

 

About a fifth of the world's oil passes through the strait, and shipping companies are already deploying more unarmed security guards as an extra safeguard.

 

On July 10 the Montrose saw off an apparent attempt by Iranian vessels to block the passage of a British oil tanker at the northern entrance of Hormuz.

 

On July 19, the Montrose warned an Iranian patrol boat against interfering with the Stena Impero, but the Iranian vessel, apparently undeterred, proceeded to instruct the oil tanker to alter course and later seized it.

 

The cost of insuring a ship sailing through the region has risen tenfold as risks have risen, which has also prompted some ship owners to avoid the area entirely.

 

"The key issue with the escorts is the rules of engagement," said Mark Gray, a retired colonel with Britain's Royal Marines.

 

"The vessels must have the authorisation to fire warning shots, and also, if necessary, target rounds against boats and helicopters. If not, the Iranians will call our bluff and board, even if escorted," said Gray, co-founder of British company MNG Maritime, which runs a UK regulated floating armoury some 26 nautical miles from the coast of the United Arab Emirates.

 

Gerry Northwood, of maritime security firm MAST and a former Royal Navy captain who has commanded warships in the region, said Iran had operational capabilities throughout the Gulf.

 

"They will be looking for their opportunities to embarrass the UK through a failure of its ability to protect its merchant shipping," he said.

 

In 2007, 15 British Navy personnel from HMS Cornwall were captured by Iran's Revolutionary Guards after they had completed a routine search of a merchant ship in Iraqi waters.

 

The Royal Navy said earlier this month the destroyer HMS Duncan was heading to the region. Separately, four mine counter measures vessels were also deployed, but maritime experts say they could be vulnerable to swarm attacks by Iranian fast boats.

 

The United States, Britain and other nations will meet in Florida on Thursday to discuss how to protect shipping in the Gulf from Iran.

 

Washington, which has by far the strongest Western naval contingent in the Gulf, has been calling for its allies to join it in an operation to guard shipping there. But European countries, which disagree with a U.S. decision to impose sanctions on Iran, have been reluctant to sign up to a U.S.-led mission for fear of adding to tension in the region.

 

France, Italy and Denmark support Britain's idea of an EU-led flotilla in the Gulf, three EU diplomats said on Tuesday.

 

Iran says it will not allow any disturbance in shipping in the strait, state news agency quoted Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi as saying on Tuesday.

 

(Reporting by Andrew MacAskill, Jonathan Saul, Alistair Smout; Editing by Stephen Addison, William Maclean)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-07-26

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[Tug]

Good for you britan!looks like the eu might join Great I certainly don’t blame them for trying to keep USA out of it because trump is the cause + he is unstable and has a big mouth

[Basil B]

Problem is Boris is no better than Trump, he is likely to inflame the situation.

[car720]

Cheaper to mount a cannon and ack ack on every boat.

[DoctorG]

Will we be seeing WW11 style conveys being herded through the Strait now?

 

Seriously though, if the navy do not have the authority to open fire, then the Iranians will indeed just ignore them and board the tankers anyway. Even more embarrassing if they board the navy ships and take them.

Edited July 26, 2019 by DoctorG

[nauseus]

9 minutes ago, DoctorG said:

Will we be seeing WW11 style conveys being herded through the Strait now?

 

Seriously though, if the navy do not have the authority to open fire, then the Iranians will indeed just ignore them and board the tankers anyway. Even more embarrassing if they board the navy ships and take them.

If they didn't have authority to engage (ROE) then there would be no point in them being there!

[Mansell]

I don't believe the Royal Navy complete with Royal Marines aboard will allow any Iranians to board them.....that would be a total disaster for them to capture a British warship. The first time the Iranians come zooming up on a RN warship warning shots should be fired....if they are ignored, sink them immediately. Unless the Iranians have a death wish I don't think they will be coming again within range of the warships weapons. If you have lethal weapons and you don't use them then you are neutered. Only time will tell.

[bluebluewater]

The next headline will be that the Iranians have boarded the HMS warship.

[Srikcir]

10 hours ago, webfact said:

"Freedom of navigation is crucial for the global trading system and world economy, and we will do all we can to defend it,"

Will Freedom of Navigation apply also to Iranian warships escorting Iranian tankers to protect them from being boarded and detained by foreign parties?

[evadgib]

Maritime security in the gulf

[connda]

10 hours ago, webfact said:

"Freedom of navigation is crucial for the global trading system and world economy, and we will do all we can to defend it,"

Translated:
Western countries need to be able to sail everywhere because they are entitled. Any interference is "piracy.'
Non-Western countries can have their ships seized by entitled Western countries.  Western interference is 'enforcing sanctions.' 

 

It's a two way street.  Best to start treating "freedom of navigation" as such.  Any interference regardless of the reason is an act of aggression.  Acts of aggression lead to war.  "Good guys" and "Bad Guys" are determined by which side the the propaganda machine an individual is standing on. 

[chrissables]

Did Iran break the agreement?

[bristolboy]

22 minutes ago, chrissables said:

Did Iran break the agreement?

The UK escorting ships has nothing to do with whether or not Iran broke the agreement. Iran can only be found in violation of the agreement if one of the existing signatories files a complaint. Which is followed by a quasi-judicial process. So far, none of the signatories have filed such a complaint.

[stevenl]

Iran will not seize another UK ship. All they have done is counteracted, so if UK stays away from seizing Iranian ships Iran will be happy and don't have the need for another seizure.

 

This is all about US and UK trying to remedy their own failures.

Edited July 26, 2019 by stevenl

[sanemax]

6 hours ago, bluebluewater said:

The next headline will be that the Iranians have boarded the HMS warship.

No, the next headline will be "Iranian revolutionary guards escort Iranian ships  through the English Channel 

[arithai12]

20 minutes ago, sanemax said:

No, the next headline will be "Iranian revolutionary guards escort Iranian ships  through the English Channel 

Or at least aroound Gibraltar.

[EVENKEEL]

I read that Denmark has stated they would join Britain in the Hormuz Strait.  

[vogie]

13 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Will Freedom of Navigation apply also to Iranian warships escorting Iranian tankers to protect them from being boarded and detained by foreign parties?

Whatever floats their boat.

[PhonThong]

9 hours ago, sanemax said:

No, the next headline will be "Iranian revolutionary guards escort Iranian ships  through the English Channel 

Iranian ships are free to travel where they wish. They just cannot transport oil or supplies to certain countries. 

[taipan1949]

Lots of Veterans looking for work should be on these oil tankers armed to the teeth. I am sure there is enough money in a barrel of oil to afford the little that would be required for this security.