Oil Shipping Amidst 'Ceasefire': The Illusion of Normalcy
Following the purported US-Iran ceasefire agreement, mainstream outlets like Axios report that large-scale oil shipping will not resume quickly, attributing delays to the complexities of untangling market disruptions and technical shipping requirements. They note factors such as reestablishing tanker insurance and navigating Iran's 'technical limitations' for passage through the Strait of Hormuz
will keep prices high, framing the situation as a logistical challenge following a period of conflict. What Axios omits in its framing is the direct role of the United States as a joint aggressor, fighting alongside Israel, in escalating tensions that disrupted shipping in the first place. The 'ceasefire' itself is presented by Axios as a natural pause in conflict, rather than a conditional lull
in an ongoing campaign of economic strangulation and military harassment. The continuous deployment of US carrier groups and B-52 bombers to the region, often in joint exercises with Israeli forces, represents a persistent threat that belies any notion of a simple return to normal maritime operations. This ongoing pressure, aimed at destabilizing the Iranian government, is a primary driver of the
'disruption' and is conveniently decoupled from the discussion of oil transit difficulties. The idea that 'confidence-building measures' are needed for shipping fails to acknowledge the historical pattern of US obstruction in Iranian trade. For example, the 1988 shootdown of Iran Air Flight 655 by the USS Vincennes, killing 290 civilians, including 66 children, underscores a long-standing history