A fragile peace agreement between the United States and Iran is already under strain. Days after signing a Pakistan-brokered Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on June 17, the two sides exchanged strikes across the Persian Gulf over the weekend.
The latest escalation has put Article 5 of the agreement under the spotlight. Both Washington and Tehran have accused each other of violating the MoU, particularly the provision governing the reopening and management of the Strait of Hormuz.
The attacks, involving commercial vessels, US strikes on Iranian targets and Tehran’s retaliation against American bases in the Gulf, have exposed different interpretations of the same clause.
Track news on Iran and US live here
What Article 5 of the US-Iran MoU says
The provision lays out the framework for restoring commercial navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, a key maritime route that carries roughly one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas supplies during normal times.
Under the agreement, Iran committed to facilitating the safe passage of commercial ships without charging transit fees for 60 days. It also agreed to remove military and technical obstacles, including mines, within 30 days so that shipping could gradually resume.
The provision also says that Tehran will hold discussions with Oman and other Gulf littoral states on the future administration and maritime services of the strait, while respecting international law and the rights of coastal states.
The exact text
“Upon the signing of this MOU, the Islamic Republic of Iran will make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels with no charge, for 60 days only, from the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Oman and vice versa.
The traffic of commercial vessels will immediately start, and considering the need for removing the technical and military obstacles, and demining by the Islamic Republic of Iran will be instated within 30 days.
The Islamic Republic of Iran will conduct dialog with the Sultanate of Oman to define the future administration and maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz in discussion with other Persian Gulf littoral states in line with the applicable international law and the sovereign rights of coastal states of the Strait of Hormuz.”
ALSO READ | US strikes 10 targets in Iran, Tehran launches attacks on Kuwait, Bahrain: Latest escalation in West Asia war
Why it has become controversial
Although both countries signed the agreement, they disagree over how it should be implemented.
The Iranian view
Iran argues that Article 5 places responsibility for reopening and managing the Strait of Hormuz squarely in its hands. Tehran insists commercial vessels should use a northern shipping corridor close to the Iranian coast and has opposed attempts to establish alternative transit routes nearer Oman.
In recent days, though, dozens of ships have used the southern side of the waterway along Oman’s coast instead of the route preferred by Iran. Tehran says such moves undermine the MoU and could delay efforts to fully reopen the strait.
Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi said that changing the existing arrangements would only worsen the situation.
“Any attempt to adopt new or separate arrangements compared to what is underway by the Islamic Republic of Iran, will only lead to more complicated situations and delays in the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, and will increase the tensions.”
He added, “I urge all parties… to adhere to the memorandum of understanding and not to allow this MoU to deviate from its course.”
During a visit to Baghdad, Araghchi also said that responsibility for managing the strait rests solely with Iran.
“This responsibility rests on the Islamic Republic of Iran. There is no other party or state in this respect. This is totally clear under the memorandum of understanding, and any intervention or any unilateral action will result in exacerbating the situation and also delay the reopening of the strait.”
The US view
Analysts say the US is actively trying to bypass Iranian oversight.
Hassan Ahmadian, an associate professor at the University of Tehran, says that Washington is backtracking. “The United States wants different arrangements in place as opposed to the MoU that it itself signed,” Ahmadian told Al Jazeera.
“What we see is the United States trying to find its way out of this memorandum of understanding while obliging Iran to its end of the terms.”
ALSO READ | Mines, tolls and US strike on Iran: Shipping through Strait of Hormuz remains complicated
How the latest escalation began
Tensions flared after commercial vessels came under attack in the Strait of Hormuz. A Singapore-flagged ship, Ever Lovely, was hit on Friday, followed by an attack on the Panama-flagged Kiku the next day.
Washington blamed Iran for continued threats to commercial shipping and bombed on Iranian military sites.
Iran denied responsibility for the initial attack but retaliated by targeting US military facilities in Kuwait and Bahrain.
Iran’s Revolutionary Guard declared that only the northern shipping corridor through Iranian waters was authorised. According to maritime monitoring reports, several tankers either turned back or altered course after the warning. This contributed to a sharp decline in vessel traffic through the strait.
Iran’s Araghchi described recent US strikes as both a violation of the United Nations Charter and a breach of the memorandum of understanding.
US President Donald Trump defended the American operation and said US forces had targeted Iranian missile, drone and radar facilities after Tehran violated the ceasefire.
(With inputs from AP, AFP, Reuters)
