[thisislife2]

> since they just need to threaten to destroy ships.

Here, you are assuming that those threatened will do nothing. Why? Even when India, for example, had some issues with piracy, they started sending their warships to patrol the route. That's the point the author makes - it will be difficult because if Iran is challenged, it needs to have the political will and military power to fight those who challenge it. You can't fight the whole world.

[uberman]

So even the maritime super power of the USA is reluctant to enter the Strait given that the southern coast of Iran is heavily fortified and features Qeshm Island AKA "The Unsinkable Aircraft Carrier" with it's underground "Missile City".

The USA has not risked an Aircraft Carrier transit through the Strait in like 6 years. They will risk a Destroyer every now and then such as during Project Freedom but that effort was not really a success. The Destroyers being more of a "I dare you to do something deterrent" than an overwhelming military presence.

India lacks the ability to force their way through the Strait to escort tankers laden with oil. India has sent warships to the area but they (like the American Aircraft Carriers) remain safely outside the Strait.

You assert: "if Iran is challenged, it needs to have the political will and military power to fight those who challenge it. You can't fight the whole world."

I would have thought by any objective read of the situation that Iran has clearly demonstrated both the will and the means to control the Strait. The war has taught Iran that they hold veto power over global trade through the Strait.

The recent 60 day framework essentially affirms this as if Iran returns to pre-war status quo the USA has agreed to $300 Billion aid and the release of frozen assets (though mostly not at the expense of the US tax payer). The individual Gulf States now want to negotiate directly with Iran rather than in concert with the USA and Israel. These are all tacit admissions that Iran holds veto power over transit through the Strait. At least until the USA gets through the mid-term elections after which they might be more inclined to return to attempts to break Iran's hold on the Straight.

[thisislife2]

The US is a rich, developed country that is not fully dependent on the middle-east for oil. India is one the top importers of oil in the world and it is a developing country. Like for Iran, the stakes are very different for India vis the west or even China.

And note that the point the author was making was that India (for example) won't be alone in challenging Iran. It would soon become -a coalition of countries against Iran. Poor and developing countries, whose economy may be impacted would just be as much against the toll as the richer nations (as they have more to lose). And while some countries may be loathe to invoke a military challenge, they can retaliate economically - if everything Iran imports faces a Tariff, because of the toll, the revenue from the toll becomes meaningless for Iran's economy while costing it diplomatic goodwill of others too.

Iran's plan is ambitious. But it will be very challenging to pull it off without upsetting a lot of countries. Ideally, I think Iran should only impose a toll on countries that don't have good ties with Iran or don't trade with it. It should also exempt poorer nations, keeping in tune with its Islamic ethos.