Skip to content
You can now search across every topic, entity and event.What's new
Iran Conflict 2026
20APR

Paris and London convene forty nations

4 min read
10:10UTC

Lowdown Newsroom

ConflictDeveloping
Key takeaway

Europe is drafting the Hormuz framework Washington never put on paper.

Emmanuel Macron and Keir Starmer will chair a leaders' video conference on Friday of nations willing to contribute to 'a purely defensive multilateral mission' to restore freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz once security conditions permit. The Elysée announcement, published on Tuesday, confirmed senior diplomats would hold a preparatory call on Thursday and that over forty nations were expected to participate. The conference is the operational successor to the earlier UK-convened Hormuz coordination meeting .

The difference is what is being drafted. At the earlier meeting the coalition agreed to coordinate. On Friday it plans to design a physical mission, command structure, and rules of engagement for a post-war passage framework. In international maritime law, the first credible multilateral framework tends to hold. Subsequent proposals negotiate against it rather than replacing it. Europe's advantage is written documents where the United States has only posts.

The US blockade has been running for several days on a social-media post and a self-generated CENTCOM operational order. The instrument-free record The White House's own presidential-actions page confirmed this week is what gives Paris and London space to hold the pen. With no American presidential text on record, any framework published on Friday becomes the document any post-war passage arrangement must reference. The Anglo-French summit is not framed as a challenge to Washington; it does not need to be. Roughly eighty per cent of the named nations host US bases, which complicates formal opposition to the blockade, but does not prevent them signing a post-war framework the United States has not written.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

France and the UK have invited more than 40 countries to a video conference on Friday to plan what happens at the Strait of Hormuz after the war ends. The Strait is a 33-kilometre-wide waterway between Iran and the Arabian peninsula, and about 20 per cent of the world's oil normally passes through it. Right now the US is running a blockade there; but it has never written down the formal rules on paper. The idea is: if no one writes the rules, whoever writes them first gets to set the terms. Europe is trying to be that writer. The conference would design a security mission; which countries contribute ships, what those ships are allowed to do, and under what legal authority. If it succeeds, the post-war Hormuz rules will have been written in Paris and London, not Washington.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

The summit's genesis is the US instrument gap. Europe cannot negotiate a post-war passage regime against a text that does not exist. The blockade, the ceasefire, and the toll list are all Truth Social posts; no signed American instrument describes what a post-war Hormuz looks like from Washington's perspective.

The 2 April UK-led coordination meeting established that Europe had the political will but not the framework. The 17 April summit converts political will into a draft mission document; command structure, rules of engagement, force contributions; before the ceasefire window closes on 22 April. Europe is not challenging Washington; it is filling a governance vacuum Washington has not moved to fill.

What could happen next?
  • Consequence

    If the summit produces operational rules of engagement, Europe holds the pen on post-war Hormuz governance regardless of US diplomatic position

    Short term · 0.7
  • Risk

    Italy's parallel bilateral Gulf trip and France's simultaneous flag-state protest erode the claim that Europe speaks with a unified voice, weakening the framework's negotiating weight

    Immediate · 0.8
  • Opportunity

    A UNCLOS-compatible multilateral mandate gives Tehran a non-US framework to negotiate passage terms against, potentially breaking the Islamabad deadlock by providing an alternative interlocutor

    Medium term · 0.65
First Reported In

Update #69 · Cooper joins the instrument gap

Al-Monitor (Elysée)· 15 Apr 2026
Read original
Different Perspectives
China's foreign ministry
China's foreign ministry
Spokesman Lin Jian rejected Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's 25 August warning that Iranian oil buyers face an "economic D-Day", saying sanctions do not help and that Beijing would safeguard its own rights and interests. China's Iranian crude imports had already halved for unrelated reasons.
Iraq's government and Erbil authorities
Iraq's government and Erbil authorities
Erbil authorities said 10 explosive-laden drones were shot down over the city on 1-2 September with no casualties. Iraq's government condemned the attacks without naming Iran as their source, and neither Washington nor Baghdad confirmed the IRGC's claim to have hit US bases there.
Bahrain Defence Force
Bahrain Defence Force
The General Command said air defences intercepted several Iranian missiles and drones on 1-2 September and called the use of such weapons against civilians and private property a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law.
Kuwait's Fire Force and foreign ministry
Kuwait's Fire Force and foreign ministry
KUNA reported a hostile Iranian drone struck a residential complex in Kuwait City on 2 September; Fire Force spokesman Brigadier General Mohammad Al-Gharib said losses were confined to property. Kuwait's foreign ministry called the attack a clear breach of its sovereignty.
Jordan's Armed Forces
Jordan's Armed Forces
Petra carried a statement that air defences intercepted eight missiles violating Jordanian airspace early on 31 August and 10 of 13 fired on 1 September. The statement named no target and did not address the IRGC's claim to have struck Camp Titin and killed US personnel.
CENTCOM
CENTCOM
CENTCOM's 1 September target list named IRGC air defence, radar, maritime and mine-laying sites in Iran but no tanker, after Axios reported anonymous officials describing a Trump-approved "tanker for tanker" drone policy. A CENTCOM spokesman declined to confirm the policy and referred questions to policymakers.