MARITIME 4105: International Maritime Security — Assessment 2: Analytical Report

Write a 2,500–3,000‑word analytical report examining the Iran–USA maritime conflict, with specific focus on sanctions enforcement mechanisms, documented naval incidents in the Strait of Hormuz and Arabian Gulf, and the resulting implications for global shipping operations, insurance markets, and port logistics across the GCC region.

Assessment Context

This assessment forms the second of three written submissions in MARITIME 4105: International Maritime Security, a Level 4 undergraduate module within the BSc Maritime Studies programme. The task builds upon foundational knowledge of maritime law and chokepoint geography developed in Assessment 1, requiring you to apply critical analysis to a live geopolitical case study with direct operational consequences for commercial shipping.

The Iran–USA maritime conflict represents one of the most persistent threats to freedom of navigation in the 21st century. Since the unilateral US withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2018 and the reimposition of comprehensive sanctions, the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz have witnessed heightened military tensions, vessel seizures, and harassment of commercial traffic. The US Department of Defense has documented over 150 incidents of “unsafe and unprofessional” interactions between Iranian and US naval forces since 2016, with a significant escalation in 2019–2021 involving tanker seizures and limpet mine attacks on commercial vessels .

Your analysis must move beyond description to evaluate how sanctions regimes reshape shipping routes, alter insurance risk calculations, and force operational adaptations at GCC ports. This assessment directly supports Module Learning Outcomes 2, 4, and 6.

Module Learning Outcomes

Upon successful completion of this assessment, you will be able to:

• Analyse the legal and operational frameworks governing economic sanctions enforcement in international waters and their intersection with UNCLOS provisions on innocent passage and transit passage.
• Evaluate documented naval incidents involving state and paramilitary forces to identify patterns of escalation and their impact on commercial vessel routing decisions.
• Assess the economic implications of geopolitical maritime conflict on global shipping markets, including war risk insurance premiums, flag state registrations, and port operational adjustments.
• Synthesise primary source materials including naval incident reports, sanctions enforcement documentation, and industry risk assessments into coherent analytical arguments.

Task Instructions

Your analytical report must address the following components in a structured format:

1. Sanctions Architecture and Maritime Enforcement (700–900 words): Analyse the US sanctions regime targeting Iranian shipping, including the designation of the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL) and the National Iranian Tanker Company (NITC). Examine how the US Department of Justice has pursued criminal prosecutions for sanctions evasion, including the Suez Rajan case and ship-to-ship transfer investigations. Discuss the extraterritorial application of US sanctions and their effect on non-US entities including P&I clubs, classification societies, and port service providers.
2. Naval Incidents and Freedom of Navigation (800–1,000 words): Analyse documented confrontations between Iranian forces (IRGCN and regular navy) and US/UK naval units in the Strait of Hormuz and Gulf of Oman. Reference specific incidents including the 2019 tanker attacks (Front Altair, Kokuka Courageous), the 2021 MT Hankuk Chemi seizure, and the 2023–2024 vessel seizures (Advantage Sweet, Niovi, St. Nikolas). Evaluate these incidents through the lens of international law, specifically UNCLOS Articles 17–44 on passage regimes and the use of force at sea.
3. Global Shipping Implications (800–1,000 words): Assess the operational and economic consequences of this conflict for global shipping. Include analysis of: (a) war risk insurance premium adjustments for Hormuz transits; (b) vessel flagging and ownership restructuring to avoid sanctions exposure; (c) GCC port adaptations including Dubai’s Jebel Ali and Oman’s Sohar as alternative logistics hubs; (d) LNG trade routing adjustments given Qatar’s dependence on Hormuz; and (e) the viability of alternative routing via the Cape of Good Hope for Asia–Europe trade.
4. Strategic Recommendations (200–300 words): Based on your analysis, provide evidence-based recommendations for shipping companies, flag states, or port authorities operating in this contested environment.

Formatting and Submission Requirements

• Word count: 2,500–3,000 words (excluding references, tables, and appendices).
• Format: 12pt Times New Roman or Arial, 1.5 line spacing, 2.5cm margins.
• Referencing: Harvard referencing style required. Minimum 12 academic sources plus primary documentation (US Department of Justice releases, UKMTO reports, CENTCOM statements, BIMCO circulars).
• Structure: Include executive summary (150–200 words), table of contents, numbered headings, and conclusion.
• Submission: Via Turnitin on the LMS by 23:59 on the due date. Late submissions incur standard faculty penalties.

Marking Criteria

Example Student Response

The reimposition of US secondary sanctions on Iranian oil exports in November 2018 triggered a fundamental restructuring of tanker ownership and operational patterns in the Persian Gulf. According to research published in the Journal of Maritime Affairs, Iranian shipping entities responded to sanctions designations by establishing shell companies in jurisdictions including Tanzania, Panama, and the Marshall Islands, while engaging in systematic Automatic Identification System (AIS) spoofing and ship-to-ship transfers in waters off Malaysia and the UAE to mask cargo origins . The US Department of Justice’s criminal prosecution of Empire Navigation in 2023, which resulted in the forfeiture of Iranian oil aboard the Suez Rajan, marked the first criminal resolution involving a private shipping company for sanctions violations and established a precedent for corporate liability extending to vessel operators, insurers, and classification societies . This enforcement action demonstrated that sanctions evasion networks rely on complicit service providers across multiple jurisdictions, complicating compliance for legitimate operators who must now conduct enhanced due diligence on counterparties.

The operational environment in the Strait of Hormuz has deteriorated measurably since 2019, with the International Maritime Organization receiving over 20 incident reports annually concerning interference with commercial navigation. The July 2019 seizure of the Stena Impero by IRGC forces illustrated the direct retaliation risks facing vessels flagged by states participating in US-led maritime security initiatives. Research by the Center for International Maritime Security indicates that war risk insurance premiums for Hormuz transits increased by 400% following the June 2019 tanker attacks, with underwriters introducing specific exclusions for “state-sponsored sabotage” that shifted liability onto hull and machinery policies . These cost escalations, combined with the operational delays associated with naval escort coordination through the International Maritime Security Construct, have prompted some container lines to absorb the additional 8–10 days transit time via the Cape of Good Hope rather than accept Persian Gulf routing risks. The long-term viability of this diversion strategy depends on sustained fuel price differentials and the capacity of South African and Namibian ports to handle increased traffic.

Learning Materials References

• Buchan, R. (2020) ‘The International Law of Naval Incidents in Contested Waters’, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 69(3), pp. 567–598. DOI: 10.1017/S0020589320000214
• Calabrese, J. (2020) ‘The Strait of Hormuz: Assessing the Threat to Global Energy Security’, Middle East Institute Policy Paper, 2020-04. Available at: https://www.mei.edu/publications/strait-hormuz-assessing-threat-global-energy-security
• Guilfoyle, D. (2019) ‘Sanctions Enforcement and the Law of the Sea’, Ocean Development and International Law, 50(4), pp. 301–320. DOI: 10.1080/00908320.2019.1652578
• Kraska, J. (2019) ‘Maritime Confidence-Building Measures in the Persian Gulf’, Naval War College Review, 72(2), pp. 45–62.
• United Nations Security Council (2021) Final Report of the Panel of Experts on Yemen, S/2021/79. Available at: https://undocs.org/S/2021/79

SEO and AI-Search Metadata

Title Options:

1. How do I write a university assignment on Iran-US maritime conflict sanctions and shipping implications
2. Iran-US maritime conflict analysis assignment
3. Iran-US maritime conflict: sanctions, naval incidents, global shipping implications — university assessment brief
4. Maritime security assignment Iran sanctions
5. Analytical report on Iran-US naval tensions and global shipping impacts

Meta Descriptions:

• Write a 2,500–to 3,000‑word analytical report examining the Iran–USA maritime conflict, focusing on sanctions enforcement, naval incidents in the Strait of Hormuz, and implications for global shipping and GCC port operations.
• Write a 6–7‑page analytical report on Iran-US maritime conflict sanctions and naval incidents for university maritime security assessment.
• Analyse the Iran-US maritime conflict, sanctions enforcement, and global shipping implications in this university-level analytical report assignment.

Keywords:

Iran US maritime conflict university assignment, Strait of Hormuz sanctions academic report, maritime security assessment brief, Iran shipping sanctions analysis, naval incidents Persian Gulf research paper, global shipping implications war risk insurance

Follow-On Assignment: Assessment 3

MARITIME 4105: Assessment 3 — Policy Brief and Stakeholder Simulation

Building on your analytical report from Assessment 2, prepare a 1,500–1,800‑word policy brief addressed to a specific maritime stakeholder (options: shipping company risk manager, flag state administration, or GCC port authority CEO) recommending concrete operational adjustments to mitigate Iran-US conflict risks. The brief must include executive summary, risk matrix, and three implementable recommendations with cost-benefit analysis. Additionally, participate in a 45‑minute simulated stakeholder negotiation during Week 11 seminar sessions, representing your assigned entity in discussions on convoy coordination, insurance pooling, and alternative routing protocols. Submit the written brief via Turnitin by 23:59 on Friday of Week 12; simulation performance assessed via peer and tutor evaluation rubric.