MICHEL MARTIN, HOST:
We're joined now by Robert Malley, who was a lead negotiator for the U.S. in the Iran nuclear deal from which President Trump withdrew during his first term. And he's with us now. Mr. Malley, good morning.
ROBERT MALLEY: Good morning.
MARTIN: Let me just go back 11 years ago. That deal was actually signed 11 years ago this week. It was - was the Strait of Hormuz even an issue? Did it even come up?
MALLEY: No, not once. And I think it really - I mean, in some ways, this is a microcosm of the senseless war that we're now at war over an issue, the status of the Strait of Hormuz, that wasn't even in dispute before the previous war, you know, a few weeks ago. In other words, we're at war today for a reason that would never have occurred had we not been at war yesterday. And again, I just think it's a symbol of how absurd this whole enterprise has been from Day 1.
MARTIN: So let me revisit Secretary of State Marco Rubio's remarks to the press in Abu Dhabi last month when a reporter asked him if the U.S. and its allies could guarantee free transit through the strait. Let's listen.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
MARCO RUBIO: No country is allowed to charge tolls or fees on an international waterway. That's existing international law. That's the way it is in international waterways all over the world, and that's the way we expect it'll be here.
MARTIN: So now the president says the U.S. will charge a toll of 20% on cargo. Is this consistent with international law? Is this a violation of the law?
MALLEY: No, of course, it is in violation of international law. And this is one case where what Secretary Rubio said was accurate. This is an international waterway. You cannot impose a fee. You cannot impose a toll. And, you know, let's not forget, again, that one of the main issues that the U.S. was fighting over was the Strait of Hormuz, which as I said, was not an issue that Iran had claimed control over previously. And the reason - the argument that the U.S. was making was that Iran cannot control it, that it is an international waterway, that you can't impose a toll.
And now to resolve that issue, President Trump is proposing to do exactly what he was saying - or they were saying that Iran was not allowed to do. But I would file this along with the many other claims that President Trump has made that are never going to see the light of day. There is no way that countries are going to be prepared to pay a toll to the U.S. for protecting the Strait of Hormuz. So it's a - you know, by saying it, he's showing that they have no regard for international law, no regard for consistency. But it's never going to happen.
MARTIN: Well, let's just say that this is a negotiating tactic. The administration, I think, may argue that the blockade or threat of a blockade brought Iran to the table last time. So let's reinstate the blockade to bring them back to the table. Is that a reasonable argument?
MALLEY: I mean, let's look at where we are now. I'm not sure that it brought it to the table. But if it brought it to the table, it didn't lead to a deal, which is presumably what the U.S. is looking for. So, you know, I think we are now in this kind of game of chicken in which each side believes that it could sustain the pain of this dual blockade, again, longer than the other side could.
Iran is convinced that rising price of oil is going to make President Trump do what he did last time, which is to say, OK, let's make a deal and open the Strait of Hormuz on terms that Iran would find acceptable. And President Trump seems convinced that by striking Iran and by closing the Strait of Hormuz, the economic pain, in this case on Iran, will force them to come to the negotiating table in a weaker position. In this case, both sides may be overplaying their hands. And this may lead to an escalation that neither side seems to want.
MARTIN: I am wondering, though - I understand that sort of military strategy is not exactly your strong suit, but I am still wondering how this would actually work. How could the U.S. actually impose a blockade when control of the strait is disputed? I mean, is this sort of de facto going to lead to some further military escalation?
MALLEY: Well, we've seen the escalation. In some ways, the escalation has occurred much faster than I think most people predicted, where you have the U.S. now striking deep inside Iran, including some economic infrastructure, including, perhaps, they're now saying maybe more nuclear sites. And Iran is striking across the region as it did before. Things could still get much worse, but we're already at a stage that is about a tempo that we had seen only, you know, a few weeks ago when we thought that we had turned that corner.
You know, yes, the Strait of Hormuz will be closed. But as I said, that's a gun pointed to both sides' head. Iran will lose revenue, and the U.S. is going to face a spike in the price of oil. That's not a good outcome for either side. And the question is, can they get back to the negotiating table? And can they go back to where they were just a few weeks ago?
MARTIN: That's Robert Malley. He's a former U.S. special envoy for Iran. Mr. Malley, thank you so much.
MALLEY: Thank you. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
