A vessel anchored off the coast of the United Arab Emirates was seized and taken toward Iran on Thursday, while a separate cargo ship sank off Oman after an attack, as the strategic Strait of Hormuz saw a fresh spike in instability. The incidents, both unattributed, came as Iranian leaders reiterated their claim of sovereignty over the waterway and as the United States and Iran hold sensitive negotiations to end their war.
The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations reported that the vessel was boarded by unauthorized persons while anchored 38 nautical miles (70 kilometers, 44 miles) northeast of the Emirati port of Fujairah, a major oil-export terminal that has been repeatedly targeted during the Iran conflict. The military-run agency said the ship was later observed heading toward Iranian waters but did not identify the perpetrators.
Indian authorities said Thursday that the cargo ship Haji Ali sank off the coast of Oman after an attack caused a fire on board while it was sailing from Somalia to Sharjah, another Emirati port. Mukesh Mangal, a senior official in India’s shipping ministry, said all 14 Indian crew members were rescued by the Omani coast guard and were safe. India’s ministry of external affairs called the incident “unacceptable” and condemned attacks on commercial shipping and civilian mariners, though it did not assign blame.
The turmoil in the Strait of Hormuz — through which a fifth of the world’s oil passed before the war — has been a point of friction for weeks in U.S.-Iran talks to end the conflict. Iran’s control of the strait has shaken the global economy and driven fuel prices far higher. On Thursday, the White House said President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping, meeting in Beijing, agreed that the strait must remain open.
Iranian officials openly asserted their claim to the waterway. Vice President Mohammadreza Aref said the strait belongs to Iran and will not be ceded “at any price,” state television reported. “It has always been our property,” Aref said. Judiciary spokesman Asghar Jahangir told the semi-official Iran Daily that Iran has the legal and judicial right to seize tankers linked to the United States because, he claimed, the U.S. had violated international maritime law and committed piracy. He did not explicitly address Thursday’s seizure.
Semi-official Iranian news agencies reported that Chinese ships began transiting the strait under new Iranian protocols on Wednesday night, and that Tehran had agreed to facilitate the passage of several vessels after requests from China’s foreign minister and ambassador. The first ships moved through as Trump arrived in China.
The seizure also came hours after Israel said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had made a secret visit to the UAE during the war, a claim the UAE quickly denied. Yoel Guzansky, a senior researcher at Tel Aviv’s Institute for National Security Studies, said Netanyahu’s decision to publicize the sensitive meeting was likely an effort to shore up support for his declining party ahead of Israeli elections. “It is astonishing, it is the deepest cooperation we have ever had … that during a war, Israel is defending an Arab state against Iran. It shows how complicated the Middle East is,” Guzansky said.
The incidents add to an already tense shipping environment. Last week, U.S. forces fired on and disabled Iranian tankers that, according to the U.S., were trying to violate its blockade of Iran’s ports. Iran has seized several vessels in recent weeks, including the Ocean Koi, a tanker the U.S. sanctioned in February as part of what it calls a “ghost fleet” carrying Iranian oil.
Testifying before Congress, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East, Admiral Brad Cooper, said Iran’s military capabilities had been “dramatically degraded” but that the rhetoric of its leaders was still affecting shipping. “Their voice is very loud, and the threats are clearly heard by the shipping industry and the insurance industry,” Cooper said. He said the U.S. military has the power to permanently reopen the strait and escort ships but is deferring the decision to policy makers during what he described as “a sensitive moment of negotiations.”