Iran-US agreement The ambiguous face of the agreement is reveale

After many dramas, despite the agreement between Iran and the United States, tensions are not decreasing in the Middle East. The interim agreement aimed at establishing peace has now become the cause of a new crisis. In particular, the different interpretations of the two sides on the ambiguous clause of the agreement on ensuring the passage of commercial ships through the Strait of Hormuz have made the real situation more complicated. In the meantime, the ongoing peace efforts have faced a new crisis in the event of an attack on a container ship in the strait.

These information came to light in a report by The New York Times on Saturday. The report said that the ambiguity in the language of the agreement has now become a major problem for Iran and the United States. Its impact has become clear even before the signing of the agreement has been completed two weeks ago. The situation has become even more heated as violence has increased in the last 72 hours.

On Thursday, Iran attacked a container ship passing through the Strait of Hormuz. The attack on one of the world's most important waterways for transporting oil and natural gas has raised concerns in the international arena again.

The interim memorandum signed between the United States and Iran states that Iran will take "necessary measures, using its best efforts," to ensure the safe passage of commercial ships through the Strait of Hormuz for 60 days. However, the agreement does not provide a clear explanation of what exactly is meant by "necessary measures" and "best efforts." Based on this vague clause, Iran has interpreted it as having the right to determine which route ships passing through the Strait of Hormuz will use.

Hours before the attack on the container ship, Iran warned ships that the only legitimate route through the strait was through its own waters. Through this, it wanted to prevent ships from using the US-backed alternative route. The alternative route is located in the southern part of the strait, near the coast of Oman.

Analysts say the language of the agreement is intentionally flexible, allowing both sides to reach an agreement. But that flexible language has now opened up opportunities for different interpretations.

He added that both sides are taking advantage of the ambiguity in the agreement to create a realistic situation that suits them, so that they can strengthen their positions before the uncertainty is resolved through a final agreement.