The rhetoric has been flying fast and furious from Tehran in recent weeks, with some officials saying Iran will close the strait if it is just threatened by the West—which Iranian officials say the West does every day—or if oil exports are merely reduced—as they are right now.
On Saturday, Major General Hassan Firuzabadi, the senior officer in the Iranian military as chief of the Joint Staff of the armed forces, sought to play down that high-blown rhetoric.
“We have plans to close the Strait of Hormuz,” he said, “because military commanders must have plans for any situation. But Iran, acting rationally, will not close the corridor through which 40 percent of the world’s energy passes, unless its interests are in serious trouble.”
That phraseology served to push the Hormuz threat aside. It was, of course, a very vague formulation, but the Islamic Republic much prefers vagueness to precision; that gives it more room to maneuver and also avoids offending any particular group within the establishment.
Firuzabadi’s main purpose appeared to be to lower the rhetorical heat, something Firuz-abadi has not normally done. The fact that he spoke and did so in an unorthodox (for him) manner suggested he had been directed by the Supreme Leader to cool things.
Some of the hotheaded rhetoric has come from officers under Firuzabadi. The general acknowledged that. “What my colleagues say regarding [the strait] echoes missions assigned to them,” he said. “But the order to carry out the mission will only come from a decision by the Supreme National Security Council [chaired by the president] and approved by the Supreme Leader.”
Some analysts suspect that the red-hot rhetoric from Tehran is often plotted for the purpose of agitating the oil market and driving up crude prices, to Iran’s financial benefit. That may, indeed, be a factor, but many in Tehran have complained that the recent rhetoric has gotten out of hand, is infuriating many who have supported Iran over the years and might just drive Russia and China into supporting crushing sanctions against Iran.
Firuzabadi’s remarks were clearly intended to show Iran was “acting rationally”—his own words—and had a structured system of governance for making strategic decisions that are not left to hot-headed officers.
There are also hot-headed legislators. A third of the members of the Majlis have signed on to a draft bill that reportedly calls for blocking tankers seeking to traverse the strait with Arab oil destined for countries that won’t buy Iranian oil.
No text has been issued and descriptions of the bill vary—for example, some say the bill would require that the government stop such tankers while others say it would just authorize the government to take such action. But the Majlis is now on a two-week vacation so talk of that legislation is in abeyance.
In an interview with the reformist daily Mardom Salari, Jalal Sadatiyan, a Middle East analyst, summarized what was going on this way: “In reality, the world will increase its pressures—but it [the world] is trying not to create an atmosphere of war against our country. We should respectively not feed the conditions for war.”
