Uncategorized
How the Holocaust is remembered in the land of Anne Frank
(JTA) — You’d think that in a country so closely identified with Anne Frank — perhaps the Holocaust’s best-known victim — cultivating memory of the genocide wouldn’t be a steep challenge.
That’s why a recent survey, suggesting what the authors called a “disturbing” lack of knowledge in the Netherlands about the Holocaust, set off alarm bells. “Survey shows lack of Holocaust awareness in the Netherlands,” wrote the Associated Press. “In the Netherlands, a majority do not know the Holocaust affected their country,” was the JTA headline. “The Holocaust is a myth, a quarter of Dutch younger generation agree,” per the Jerusalem Post.
“Survey after survey, we continue to witness a decline in Holocaust knowledge and awareness. Equally disturbing is the trend towards Holocaust denial and distortion,” Gideon Taylor, the president of the Conference of Jewish Material Claims Against Germany, which conducted the study, said in a statement.
Like other recent studies by Claims Conference, the latest survey has been challenged by some scholars, who say the sample size is small, or the survey is too blunt a tool for examining what a country’s residents do or don’t know about their history. Even one of the experts who conducted the survey chose to focus on the positive findings: “I am encouraged by the number of respondents to this survey that believe Holocaust education is important,” Emile Schrijver, the general director of Amsterdam’s Jewish Cultural Quarter, told JTA.
One of the scholars who says the survey doesn’t capture the subtleties of Holocaust education and commemoration in the Netherlands is Jazmine Contreras, an assistant professor of history at Goucher College in Maryland. Contreras studies the historical memory of the Holocaust and Second World War in Holland. In a Twitter thread earlier this week, she agreed with those who say that “the headline that’s being plastered everywhere exaggerates the idea that young people in NL know nothing about the Holocaust.”
At the same time, she notes that while the Netherlands takes Holocaust education and commemoration seriously, it has a long way to go in reckoning with a past that includes collaboration with the Nazis, postwar antisemitism, a small but vocal far right and a sense of national victimhood that often downplays the experience of Jews during the Shoah.
“It’s such a complex issue,” Contreras told me. “There’s no one answer to how the Holocaust is remembered in the Netherlands.”
Today is International Holocaust Remembrance Day, and I took the opportunity to speak with Contreras not only about Dutch memory, but how the Netherlands may serve as an example of how countries deal with Holocaust memory and the national stories they tell.
Our interview was edited for length and clarity.
Jewish Telegraphic Agency: Tell me a little bit about when you saw the survey, and perhaps how it didn’t mesh with what you know about the Netherlands?
Jazmine Contreras: My major problem is that every single outlet is picking up this story and running a headline like, “Youth in the Netherlands don’t even know the Holocaust happened there. They cannot tell you how many people were killed, how many were deported.” And I think that’s really problematic because it paints a really simplistic picture of Holocaust memory and Holocaust education in that country.
There are multiple programs, in Amsterdam, in other cities, in Westerbork, the former transit camp. They have an ongoing program that brings survivors and the second generation to colleges, to middle schools and primary schools all across the country. And they also have in Amsterdam a program called Oorlog in Mijn Buurt, “War in My Neighborhood,” and basically young people become the “memory bearers” — that’s the kind of language they use — and interview people who grew up and experience the war in their neighborhood, and then speak as if they were the person who experienced it, in the first person.
You also have events around the May 4 commemoration remembering the Dutch who died in war and in peacekeeping operations, and a program called Open Jewish Houses [when owners of formerly Jewish property open their homes to strangers to talk about the Jews who used to live there]. It’s really amazing: I’ve actually been able to visit these formerly Jewish homes and hear the stories. And, of course, the Anne Frank House has its own slew of programming, and teachers talk a lot about the Holocaust and take students to synagogues in places like Groningen, where they have a brand new exhibit at the synagogue. They are taking thousands at this point. The new National Holocaust Names Memorial is in the center of Amsterdam.
I think, again, this idea that children are growing up without having exposure to Holocaust memory, or knowledge of what happened in the Netherlands, is a bit skewed. I think we get into a dangerous area if we’re painting the country with a broad brush and saying nobody knows anything about the Holocaust.
Have you anecdotal evidence or seen studies of Dutch kids about whether they’re getting the education they need?
Anecdotally, yes. I was invited to attend a children’s commemoration that they do at the Hollandsche Schouwburg theater in Amsterdam, which is the former Dutch theater that was used as a major deportation site. And it’s children who put on a commemoration themselves. Again, not every child is participating in this, but if they’re not participating in the children’s commemoration, then they’re doing the “War in My Neighborhood” program, or they’re doing Open Jewish Houses, or they’re taking field trips. That’s pretty impressive to me, and it’s pretty meaningful. They want to help participate in it in the future. They want to come back because it leaves a lasting impression for them.
Let’s back up a bit. Anne Frank dominates everyone’s thinking about Holland and the Holocaust. And I guess the story that’s told is that she was protected by her neighbors until, of course, the Nazis proved too powerful, found her and sent her away. What’s right and what’s wrong about that narrative?
Don’t forget that Anne Frank was a German Jewish refugee who came to the Netherlands. And I think that part of the story is also really interesting and left out. She’s this Dutch icon, but she was a German Jewish refugee who came to the Netherlands, and the Dutch Jewish community was single-handedly responsible for funding, at Westerbork, what was first a refugee center. I think that’s really complicated because now we also have a discourse about present-day refugees and the Holocaust.
Jazmine Contreras, an assistant professor of history at Goucher College, specializes in Dutch Holocaust memory. (Courtesy)
I’ve also never quite understood the insistence on making her an icon when the end of the story is that she’s informed on and dies in a concentration camp. The idea that the Franks were hidden here fits really well into this idea of Dutch resistance and tolerance, and her diary often gets misquoted to kind of represent her as someone who had hope despite the fact that she was being persecuted. In the 1950s, her narrative gets adopted into the U.S., and we treat it as this globalizing human rights discourse.
We don’t talk about the fact that she’s found because she’s informed upon, and we don’t talk about the fact that you had non-Jewish civilians who were informers for a multitude of reasons, including ideological collaboration and their own financial gain.
And when it was talked about most recently, it was about a discredited book that named her betrayer as a Jew.
That was a huge controversy.
I get the sense from your writing that the story the Dutch tell about World War II is very incomplete, and that they haven’t fully reckoned with their collaboration under Nazi occupation even as they emphasize their own victimhood.
On the national state level, they have officially acknowledged not only the extensive collaboration, but the failure of both the government and the Crown to speak out on behalf of Dutch Jews. [In 2020, Prime Minister Mark Rutte formally apologized for how his kingdom’s wartime government failed its Jews, a first by a sitting prime minister.] Now, the question is, what’s happening in broader Dutch society?
Unfortunately, there was an increase in voting for the Dutch far right, although they’ve never managed to get a majority or even come close to it.
Something else that’s happening is that many ask, “Why should Dutch Jews get separate consideration after the Second World War, a separate victimhood, when we were all victimized?” The Netherlands is unique because it’s occupied for the entirety of the Second World War — 1940 to 1945. There is the civil service collaborating, right, but there’s no occupation government. So it’s not like Belgium. It’s not like France, not like Denmark. And there was the Hunger Winter of 1944-45 when 20,000 civilians perished due to famine. You have real victimhood, so people ask, “Why are the Jews so special? We all suffered.”
And at the same time, scholarship keeps emerging about the particular ways non-Jewish Dutch companies and individuals cooperated with the Nazis.
The NIOD Institute for War, Holocaust and Genocide Studies in Amsterdam, which has done so much of this research, found that Jews who were deported had to pay utility bills for when they weren’t living there. You have a huge controversy around the the Dutch railway [which said it would compensate hundreds of Holocaust victims for its role in shipping Jews to death camps]. The Dutch Red Cross apologized [in 2017 for failing to act to protect Jews during World War II], following the publication of a research paper on its inaction. A couple of decades ago, the government basically auctioned off paintings, jewelry and other Jewish possessions, and in 2020 they started the effort to give back pieces of art that were in Dutch museums. Dienke Hondius wrote a book on the cold reception given to survivors upon their return. Remco Ensel and Evelien Gans also wrote a book on postwar Jewish antisemitism.
So a lot has been happening, a lot of controversies, and, thanks to all of this research, a lot happening in order to rectify the situation.
It sounds like a mixed story, of resistance and collaboration, and of rewriting the past but also coming to terms with it.
There’s a really complex history here of both wanting to present it as “everybody’s a victim” and that the resistance was huge. In fact, the data shows 5% of the people were involved in resistance and 5% were collaborators. So it’s not like this wholesale collaboration or resistance was happening. It was only in 1943, when non-Jewish men were called up for labor service in Germany, that they got really good at hiding people and by then it was too late.
Right. My colleagues at JTA often note that the Nazis killed or deported more Dutch Jews per capita than anywhere in occupied Western Europe — of about 110,000 Jews deported, only a few thousand survived.
Yes, the highest percentage of deportation in Western Europe.
A room at the Anne Frank House museum where she and her family hid for two years during the Holocaust in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. (Photo Collection Anne Frank House)
Since this week is International Holocaust Remembrance Day, let me ask what Holland gets right and wrong compared to maybe some other European countries with either similar experiences or comparable experiences.
The framing of that question is difficult because there’s so many unique points about the Holocaust and the occupation in the Netherlands. Again, it was occupied for the entirety of 1940-45. You have a civil service that was willing to sign Aryan declarations. The queen, as head of a government in exile in London, is basically saying, “Do what you need to just to survive.”
One of the big problems is there are people like Geert Wilders [a contemporary right-wing Dutch lawmaker] who practice this kind of philo-Semitism and support of Israel, but it’s really about blaming the Muslim population for antisemitism and saying none of it is homegrown. They don’t have to talk about the fact that there was widespread antisemitism in the aftermath of the Holocaust.
In the Netherlands they’re not instituting laws around what you can and can’t say about the Holocaust like in Poland [where criticizing Polish collaboration has been criminalized]. There are so many amazing educational initiatives and nonprofit organizations that are doing the work. And even these public controversies ended up being outlets for the production of Holocaust memory when survivors, but mostly now the second and third generations, use that space to talk about their own family Holocaust history.
Tell me about your personal stake in this: How did the Holocaust become a subject of study for you?
I specialize in Dutch Holocaust memory. I’m not Jewish, but my grandparents on my mother’s side are Dutch. For my first project I looked at relationships between German soldiers and Dutch women during the war during the occupation, and I eventually kind of made my way into the post war, when these children of former collaborators were still very marginalized in Dutch society. It ties into this. I do interviews with members of the Jewish community, children of resistance members and children of collaborators and how these memory politics play out.
What is the utility of events like International Holocaust Remembrance Day and the major Holocaust memorials in educating the public about the Holocaust and World War II?
International Holocaust Remembrance Day and May 4 result in the production of new memories about the Holocaust and the Second World War. I was at the 2020 International Holocaust Remembrance Day commemoration when the prime minister formally apologized. It was a really big moment, and it allowed the Jewish community, and the Roma and Sinti community, a space to remember and to share in that and to speak to it as survivors and the second and third generation.
Unlike the United States, the Netherlands is a small, insular country, so the relationship between the public and the media and academics is so close. So in the weeks before and the weeks after these memorials, academics, politicians and experts are publishing pieces about memory. That’s useful to the production of new memories and information about the Holocaust.
But what about the other days of the year? Will putting a monument in the center of Amsterdam actually change how people understand the Holocaust? That is a question that I think is harder to answer. The new monument features individual names of 102,000 Jews and Roma and Sinti and visually gives you the scope of what the Holocaust looked like in the Netherlands. But does that matter if somebody lives outside of Amsterdam and they’re never going to see this monument?
—
The post How the Holocaust is remembered in the land of Anne Frank appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Netanyahu is facing electoral catastrophe — and could place Israel in existential peril
For much of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s current term, Israelis have been told that they are on the verge of a historic military triumph. Netanyahu has been promising “total victory” since early 2024.
Yet the public mood inside Israel has darkened rather than lifted. After nearly three years of war, none of our enemies have actually been vanquished.
The war with Iran may resume at any moment, and the Iranian regime shows no sign of collapse, or of acquiescence to Israeli-American terms. Iran’s proxies — Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, the Houthis in Yemen — all soldier on, certainly bruised but strangely unbowed.
And in Israel, reservists continue to be called up, and soldiers continue to die. Israel has absorbed devastating reputational damage, and the sense that the country has no positive political horizon has hardened into exhaustion.
As that exhaustion translates into polling that should terrify the prime minister, Israel faces an unprecedented internal danger: that Netanyahu will use a state of permanent emergency he has worked to enshrine to cancel upcoming elections altogether.
Over the weekend, the combined party of former prime ministers Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid passed Netanyahu in many of the polls. Per one poll, the opposition together is now leading him by 71 to 49 seats — a 19-seat swing relative to the current Knesset. And because several small opposition-aligned parties are currently polling below the electoral threshold, the actual anti-government majority in a real election could be larger still.
The direction of travel is clear, the deficit in the polls for the right-religious bloc is huge, and the danger for Netanyahu is real. He faces a plausible future in which he not only loses power in the election that by law must be held by the end of October, but loses decisively.
That’s why many Israelis suspect the election may not occur.
In a recent Hebrew-language column, Haaretz writer Ravit Hecht wrote that when Netanyahu “ is vulnerable and lagging behind, he is at his most dangerous.”.
“Netanyahu will try to ignite an external front — preferably with Iran — in order to manufacture a state of emergency.,” Hecht added. “If he fails to maneuver Donald Trump into renewing the war with Iran, and if that leaves his hands tied in Lebanon or constrains his moves in Gaza, he will inflame the domestic front instead.”
Victory, or emergency
Netanyahu may see two possible lifelines.
The first: political redemption through the kind of overwhelming victory he’s been promising for years. If the Iranian regime were somehow destabilized or collapsed, Netanyahu could argue that history had vindicated him. Enough Israelis who currently view the wars as endless and inconclusive might reinterpret the sacrifices as the painful prelude to a transformative strategic success.
The trouble: years of promising such a victory, with no clear returns, make its likelihood at this late hour very dubious.
The second possibility is darker and more dangerous: capitalizing on a state of permanent emergency.
Israel adopted a siege mentality during the six weeks of war with Iran, weathering mass missile barrages, civilian deaths and profoundly disrupted routines. If those conditions re-emerged under a resumption of war, the government could attempt to argue that national elections are impossible during wartime.
Ministers in Netanyahu’s coalition have spent years preparing the ideological ground for precisely such a claim — and the confrontation it would spark with Israel’s democratic institutions.
Netanyahu’s allies have portrayed the Supreme Court as governed by an illegitimate elite conspiracy. They describe judges not as guardians of the constitutional order but as enemies of the popular will. The current chief justice, Yitzhak Amit, has faced relentless delegitimization campaigns. Senior ministers have openly suggested that court rulings need not be obeyed.
Any attempt to delay or suspend elections would almost certainly trigger intervention by the court. Israel lacks a formal written constitution, but it possesses a dense web of so-called Basic Laws, precedents, and institutional norms that collectively form its constitutional structure. If the government attempted to legislate an indefinite postponement of elections under emergency conditions, the Supreme Court would likely strike the move down.
At that point, Israel could face a constitutional crisis unprecedented in its history: a government claiming emergency authority against a judiciary insisting on democratic continuity.
The government’s position would be strong, because Israel’s institutions are deeply dependent on executive cooperation. If a determined government sought to sabotage the electoral process indirectly while claiming national necessity, the Central Electoral Commission would face immense practical obstacles. At the same time, the Supreme Court lacks any practical enforcement mechanisms
An uncomfortable bargain
None of this means Israeli democracy is doomed. Israeli institutions remain resilient, civil society remains energetic, and public resistance to authoritarian overreach would likely be massive. But it does mean that scenarios once dismissed as hysterical are now being discussed openly by serious observers.
There is, however, another path still faintly visible.
Increasingly, Israeli political circles are discussing the possibility of a negotiated Netanyahu exit from public life. Netanyahu has already sought ways to terminate or freeze his ongoing corruption trial. Under Israeli practice, a presidential pardon generally requires acknowledgment of wrongdoing and some expression of remorse.
If Netanyahu were willing to plead to a reduced offense such as breach of trust rather than the more severe bribery charges, President Isaac Herzog could potentially justify a pardon framed as an act of national reconciliation. Such an arrangement would go against Netanyahu’s pugnacious grain. But he may fear the humiliation of resounding defeat — and the end of any plausible excuses for delaying his trial — even more. It is even conceivable, although far from likely, that he would not choose to cause debilitating harm to Israel.
A bargain — Netanyahu steps back from politics in exchange for a pardon — would outrage many Israelis. Others would see it as a necessary escape hatch from national trauma. And Netanyahu himself would preserve a version of the story he has always wanted to tell: that of a historic statesman stepping aside after defending Israel through existential wars, not a defeated leader dragged from office in disgrace.
His supporters would accept the narrative. His opponents would accept the outcome. Israeli democracy, bruised and deeply damaged, would survive without crossing into outright institutional rupture.
It may be the least destructive option available. Democracies can survive flawed leaders. And Netanyahu, in his obsession with clinging to power, has made the need for this radical option existential.
The post Netanyahu is facing electoral catastrophe — and could place Israel in existential peril appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Texas Sex Therapist in Congressional Race Calls for Castrating, Incarcerating ‘American Zionists’
Maureen Galindo, a sex therapist running for US Congress in Texas as a Democrat. Photo: Screenshot
The Democratic Party has rushed to condemn one of their own — Maureen Galindo, a candidate for US Congress in Texas’s 35th district — following an Instagram post last weekend in which she threatened Americans who support Israel with castration and internment.
“When Maureen gets into Congress, she’ll write legislation so that all Zionism and support of Zionism is undoubtedly Anti-Semitic, since it’s Zionists harming the Semites,” a post appearing on Galindo’s campaign account read. “She’ll turn Karnes ICE [US Immigration and Customs Enforcement] Detention Center into a prison for American Zionists and former ICE officers for human trafficking. (It will also be a castration processing center for pedophiles which will probably be most of the Zionists).”
The post charged that Galindo’s Democratic primary opponent Johnny Garcia, the public information officer for Bexar County’s Sheriff Javier Salazar, “wants Jews and Mexicans in warehouses.” The campaign asserted that “the billionaire Zionists that control San Antonio and South Texas trafficking networks have coordinated a blitz campaign to propagate the conspiracy that anti-Zionist Maureen Galindo wants Jews in warehouses.”
The Instagram post added that “she would never blame ALL Jews for THE Jews (the Zionists) who have committed genocide on the indigenous Jews (the Semites) of the Middle East. Real Jews are VICTIMS of the Fake Jews (the Zionists).”
Galindo has also claimed that Jews control Hollywood and worship in a “synagogue of Satan,” perpetuating classic antisemitic ideas that have been promoted by both neo-Nazis and far-left extremists.
Democrats have started scrambling to ensure Galindo fails to advance to the general election. The Democratic primary runoff between Galindo, who finished first in the initial vote, and Garcia is scheduled for May 26.
US House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-WA) released a statement blaming Republicans for spotlighting Galindo in an effort to damage Democrats politically.
“House Republican leadership must immediately cease propping up this antisemitic candidacy, pull spending in the race, and forcefully condemn these comments,” they said. “This vile language by her is disqualifying and has no place in American politics, and certainly not in the Democratic Party.”
According to Democrats, Republicans are the true backers of Galindo’s campaign, with almost the entirety of her funding coming from a mysterious group called Lead Left which emerged earlier this month. Researchers found metadata on the website which suggested alleged links to WinRed, a Republican fundraising platform.
On Wednesday, Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) and Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) released a joint statement on X warning that “if for some reason, Maureen Galindo wins the congressional election in TX-35, as soon as she is sworn in, we will force a vote to expel her every single day we are here. Maureen’s insane, antisemitic views – including putting Americans in concentration camps – have no place in our party or country.”
Texas Democratic Senate nominee James Talarico has announced that he will refuse to campaign with Galindo.
“This antisemitic rhetoric has no place in our politics,” he told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. “We need leadership in both parties willing to stand up and call out hate wherever it rears its ugly head.”
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), called Galindo’s statements “absolutely disgusting.”
“This bigoted garbage and antisemitism should be nowhere near our politics,” she posted on X. “If you’re in TX-35, vote for @johnnygarciatx. And the donors behind the Republican super PAC funding her should be exposed.”
Galindo defended herself in a text exchange with the Texas Tribune, claiming that reports of her Instagram post were “miswording my proposal to sound anti-Jew,” adding, “All politicians who have taken Israeli money should be tried for treason for aiding a foreign national with materials to harm Americans.”
In response to a question about how she felt about Democrats opposing her, she the candidate said that she did not care “what any Zionist-owned politician thinks. They’re exposing themselves as Zionists which will backfire on them.”
Galindo operates a business she has christened Exulted Sex Therapy, which offers to “increase safety, increase pleasure” at rates of $200 hourly for individuals or $250 for couples. She states on her site that “with my judgement-free [sic] and systemic approach to sex and wellness, you’ll learn to navigate various facets of your sexuality: anatomy & physiology, thoughts & emotions, and heart & spirit. Through this integration, you’ll discover the keys that unlock your most authentic pleasures.”
Galindo also encourages her potential clients to “inquire about including an astrology report.” She previously operated Cosmic Kinks Tarot in Bexar County, where she offered “kinky birth chart readings” and “live Tarot therapy” with her goal of empowering individuals “through the exploration of their sexuality, spirituality, and the stars,” according to a report from the Daily Mail.
Uncategorized
Trump Says Negotiations With Iran in Final Stages, Warns of Attacks if Deal Fails
A man holds a flag with a picture of late leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, late Supreme Leader of Iran Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and Iran’s new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, during a rally in Tehran, Iran, April 29, 2026. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
US President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that negotiations with Iran were “in the final stages,” while warning of further attacks unless Tehran agrees to a peace deal.
Six weeks since Trump paused Operation Epic Fury for a ceasefire, talks to end the war have shown little progress. Trump said this week he came close to ordering more attacks but held off to allow time for negotiations.
“We’re in the final stages of Iran. We’ll see what happens. Either have a deal or we’re going to do some things that are a little bit nasty, but hopefully that won’t happen,” he told reporters.
“Ideally I’d like to see few people killed, as opposed to a lot. We can do it either way.”
Speaking later at the US Coast Guard Academy, Trump reprised his either/or rhetoric – “We may have to hit them very hard … but maybe not” – and reiterated his determination not to allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon.
Tehran, for its part, accused Trump of plotting to restart the war, and threatened to retaliate for any strikes with attacks beyond the Middle East.
“If aggression against Iran is repeated, the promised regional war will extend beyond the region this time,” the Revolutionary Guards said in a statement.
Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, Iran‘s top peace negotiator, said in an audio message on social media that “obvious and hidden moves by the enemy” showed the Americans were preparing new attacks.
‘SUSPICION OVER AMERICA’S PERFORMANCE’
Foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei later said the US had to end its “piracy” against Iranian ships – a reference to the US blockade of Iranian ports.
“Despite the negative record of the other side over the past year and a half, Iran is pursuing the path of negotiations with seriousness and good faith, but it has strong and reasonable suspicion over America’s performance,” Baghaei said.
In the latest diplomatic push, the interior minister of Pakistan – which hosted the only round of peace talks so far and has since been the conduit for messages between the sides – was in Tehran on Wednesday.
Baghaei said Washington and Tehran continued to exchange messages through the Pakistani minister’s mediation.
Iran submitted a new offer to the United States this week. Tehran’s descriptions suggest it largely repeats terms previously rejected by Trump, including demands for control of the Strait of Hormuz, compensation for war damage, lifting of sanctions, release of frozen assets, and the withdrawal of US troops from the area.
Trump has said he called off attacks this week at the last minute in response to requests from several of Iran‘s Gulf neighbors. On Tuesday he said he had been an hour away from ordering strikes.
CHINESE TANKERS CROSS STRAIT
Iran has largely shut the Strait of Hormuz to all ships apart from its own since the US-Israeli campaign began in February, causing a massive disruption to global energy supplies. The US responded last month with its own blockade of Iran‘s ports.
Iran says it aims to reopen the strait to friendly countries that abide by its terms. That could potentially include fees for access, which Washington says would be unacceptable.
Baghaei said late on Wednesday that Iran was ready to establish with Oman a mechanism to ensure sustainable security in the Strait of Hormuz.
Two giant Chinese tankers laden with a total of around 4 million barrels of oil exited the strait on Wednesday. Iran had announced last week, while Trump was in Beijing for a summit, that it had agreed to ease rules for Chinese ships.
South Korea’s foreign minister said on Wednesday a Korean tanker was crossing the strait in cooperation with Iran.
Shipping monitor Lloyd’s List said at least 54 ships had transited the strait last week, about double the previous week. Iran said 26 ships had crossed in the past 24 hours, still only a fraction of the 140 per day before the war.
PRESSURE TO END WAR
Trump is under pressure to end the war, with soaring energy prices hurting his Republican Party ahead of congressional elections in November. Since the ceasefire, his public comments have veered from threats to restart bombing and claims that a deal is close.
The fluctuating US stance has sent oil prices swinging. Benchmark one-month Brent crude futures dropped to $105.76 per barrel late on Wednesday, down 4.95% on the day on revived hopes of a deal.
“Investors are keen to gauge whether Washington and Tehran can actually find common ground and reach a peace agreement, with the US stance shifting daily,” said Toshitaka Tazawa, an analyst at Fujitomi Securities.
The US-Israeli bombing devastated Iran’s military capabilities, including its defense industrial base, before it was suspended in a ceasefire in early April.
Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said when they launched the war that their aims were to curb Iran‘s support for regional militias, dismantle its nuclear program, destroy its missile capabilities, and make it easier for Iranians to topple their rulers.
But Iran has so far retained its stockpile of near-weapons-grade enriched uranium, and its ability to threaten neighbors with missiles, drones, and proxy militias, though toa lesser degree. Its clerical rulers, who put down a mass uprising at the start of the year, have faced no sign of organized opposition since the war began.