Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

The Grenfell Tower Fire Prosecution Delays Relief at this week’s news that police are sending files to the Crown Prosecution Service, recommending charges against 77 individuals and organisations for their roles in the Grenfell Tower fire, is mixed with grief and anger. On 14 June the disaster’s survivors and their supporters will gather for the ninth annual silent walk around the west London neighbourhood in which the ruined tower stands. Next year marks a decade since the fire. Investigation Findings and Criticisms The public inquiry into the disaster pointed the finger at multiple public and private bodies, decisions and individuals. Three construction firms, Arconic, Kingspan and Celotex, were found to have been deliberately dishonest about their products. Poor regulation of building safety was the fault of central government. Kensington and Chelsea council, and its tenant management organisation, were strongly criticised for poor fire safety and other lapses. So were the architects and contractors commissioned to oversee the block’s refurbishment. The London fire brigade was culpable for its dangerous “stay put” policy, which should have been changed following previous cladding fires, including the one that killed six people in Lakanal House, south London, in 2009. Prosecution Delays and Concerns These conclusions, and the inquiry’s 58 recommendations, were delivered in September 2024. Yet even now, the prospect of criminal trials remains painfully remote. With prosecutors expected to decide on which charges to bring by next June, cases are unlikely to come to court until 2028 at the earliest. One survivors’ group, Grenfell Next of Kin, responded to Tuesday’s announcement with a statement that its confidence in the system has been “shattered”. Another group, Grenfell United, said that survivors “cannot be expected to endure years more of delay”. Calls for Accountability and Change Criminal convictions have never been the only outcome sought. Campaigners welcomed the public inquiry’s findings and recommendations. Multimillion pound settlements of civil suits have been agreed. Earlier this year the government pledged dedicated funding for a long-planned memorial. Building regulation is in the process of being overhauled. A programme of cladding removal continues. Future Actions and Expectations But there is frustration about the pace of change, and concern that the laws on corporate manslaughter and negligence are too weak. Last year the Common Wealth thinktank warned of the “very high threshold for liability” and called for tougher penalties to ensure “meaningful deterrence”. Some of the firms who bear responsibility for the Grenfell fire continue to win public contracts – causing further distress.

Lead: U.S. Treasury Announces Sanctions on Hezbollah‑Linked Politicians and Security FiguresThe United States has designated nine people for allegedly enabling Hezbollah to undermine Lebanon’s sovereignty, marking the latest effort to cripple the group’s financial networks.U.S. Treasury Targets Hezbollah‑Linked Politicians and Security OfficialsIn a Thursday statement, the Treasury said the individuals were sanctioned “for obstructing the peace process in Lebanon and impeding the disarmament” of Hezbollah. The State Department added that the list includes members of Lebanon’s parliament, an Iranian diplomat, and security officials who “abused” their roles.Mohamed Abdel‑Mottaleb Fanich – executive council leaderNizammeddine Fadlallah – elected Hezbollah MPIbrahim al‑Moussawi – longtime officialHussein Al‑Hajj Hassan – longtime officialMohammad Reza Sheibani – Iranian ambassador‑designate to LebanonAhmad Asaad Baalbaki – Amal Movement security officialAli Ahmad Safawi – Amal Movement security officialSamir Hamadi – Lebanese Armed Forces branch chiefKhattar Nasser Eldin – top official at the General Directorate for General SecuritySanctions List and Reward Offer: Numbers and StakesThe Treasury also announced a reward of up to $10 million for information leading to the disruption of Hezbollah’s financial mechanisms.Lebanon’s Ministry of Public Health reports that Israeli attacks since March 2 have killed at least 3,089 people and wounded 9,397.Implications for Lebanon’s Sovereignty and Ongoing ConflictState Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott warned that politicians, business leaders, or security personnel aiding Hezbollah will face “real consequences.” Hezbollah dismissed the sanctions as an “intimidation attempt” with “no practical effect” on its strategic choices.The sanctions arrive amid intensified Israeli air raids and shelling across southern Lebanon, including recent strikes in Tyre district towns that killed civilians and destroyed families.Potential Effects on Peace Talks and Regional DynamicsU.S. officials are simultaneously brokering peace talks between Israel and Lebanon, with political negotiations slated for June 2‑3 and security talks scheduled for May 29 at the Pentagon.Pigott said the sanctions aim to “create space for good‑faith conversations” and counter Hezbollah’s efforts to derail the negotiations.Analysts suggest the sanctions could pressure Lebanese officials to curb Hezbollah’s influence, but the group’s rhetoric frames the measures as a badge of honor, potentially hardening its stance ahead of the upcoming talks.

The Concept of Aid Flotillas Aid flotillas are organized efforts to deliver humanitarian assistance to areas under blockade or in crisis. In the case of Palestinians under Israeli blockade, these flotillas aim to bring in essential supplies such as food, medicine, and construction materials. The Israeli Blockade on Gaza The Israeli blockade on Gaza, which began in 2007, restricts the movement of goods and people in and out of the territory. This has led to significant economic hardship and shortages of basic necessities. The Role of International Aid International aid has been crucial in supporting the Palestinian population in Gaza. Organizations and countries around the world have contributed to these efforts, often through the coordination of flotillas. Challenges and Controversies Despite the intentions behind aid flotillas, there have been challenges and controversies. These include confrontations with Israeli forces, accusations of smuggling, and debates over the effectiveness and impact of such aid. The Future of Aid Efforts The future of aid flotillas and their role in supporting Palestinians under Israeli blockade remains a topic of discussion. The international community continues to seek ways to alleviate the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

The Lead: Football's Global IconsFootball is a great leveller. Not everyone goes to a school with a rugby pitch and not everyone can afford a pony. However, from the favelas of Rio de Janeiro and the slums of Nairobi to the playgrounds of Monaco and Beverly Hills, you will see children kicking a football about.Arguments over the greatest 10 World Cup heroes have kept friends debating into the small hours for decades. Such arguments will continue for as long as football is played. But here, before the FIFA World Cup 2026, are the 10 we think have been the best:The Legends: Ranking World Cup Greats10. Zinedine ZidaneOne of the greatest and most controversial players of the game, Zidane won the 1998 World Cup for France at home, scoring twice in the final. Injuries kept him largely out of France's short-lived 2002 World Cup campaign, but he went on to be named player of the tournament at the 2006 edition – despite the infamous head butt that sent him off in the final against Italy. Thousands of fans lined the streets of Paris chanting Zidane's name when the team returned home.Having scored 31 goals in 108 matches for France, his talismanic leadership shaped the national team into something much greater than the sum of its parts. As a coach, he went on to win three Champions League titles and La Liga twice with Real Madrid.9. Jimmy GreavesNot even the great Bobby Moore, whose statue greets supporters arriving at Wembley Stadium, was as loved by English fans as Jimmy Greaves. Already a star at home, Greaves gained international recognition after rescuing a pitch-invading dog that had evaded the Brazilian greats during England's 1962 World Cup quarterfinal. Brazil's Garrincha took the dog home, and Greaves became known in Brazil as "Garrincha's dog-catcher".Greaves was part of the 1966 World Cup-winning squad, but a savage injury inflicted by France's Joseph Bonnel that required 14 stitches kept Greaves out of the final. Greaves scored six hat-tricks in an England shirt, a record that still stands. The 1966 campaign continues to be a focal point of English identity, the squad universally adored, and Greaves became a broadcaster, welcomed into the nation's living rooms for decades.8. Ferenc PuskasPuskas was captain of the Mighty Magyars, Hungary's golden team, which flourished under the influence of Jimmy Hogan's Total Football. He scored 84 goals in 85 matches for Hungary and made four appearances for Spain. Hungary were so dominant under Puskas that the 1954 World Cup final was the only game they lost in the entire decade.He scored 702 goals from 705 career games. The giant of European football was a vocal supporter of the 1956 Hungarian Revolution and defected to Spain while on tour after the Soviet army killed 2,500 of his countrymen while crushing the uprising. He returned to Hungary after the collapse of communism and remains worshipped by Hungarians.7. Lothar MatthausGermany's most-capped player, Matthaus scored 23 goals in 150 international matches. A box-to-box midfielder, he featured in five World Cups, helping West Germany win the 1990 edition. The only German to be named FIFA World Player of the Year, Matthaus holds the record for most World Cup games (25). His natural leadership gave him a commanding presence on the field, and his technical ability combined with his tactical awareness gave him an unstoppable dominance on the pitch.The bullish Diego Maradona called him the toughest opponent he ever faced.6. Miroslav KloseIt's rare that you get prizes just for being a good guy, but Germany's record goal scorer, the somersaulting Miroslav Klose, has a handful of them. With a career hallmarked by fair play and decency – he famously refused to accept a penalty awarded to him during a club match because he knew the referee was mistaken – Klose scored in four World Cups, finally lifting the trophy in 2014.A physical powerhouse of a forward, his stature belied his speed. He scored 71 goals in 137 matches in a German jersey. He also scored 16 World Cup goals. No one has ever scored more. He was prolific, and a good guy.5. Ronaldo"The Phenomenon" reinvented the role of striker while playing for Brazil in 98 matches and scoring 62 goals. He lifted the 1994 World Cup trophy at the age of just 17. Four years later, he was named Player of the Tournament after steering Brazil into the final, only to suffer a convulsive fit just hours before the game. He scored twice in the 2002 World Cup final to add to his six in the competition earlier, once more lifting the trophy.A fourth World Cup appearance saw Ronaldo score a then-record-breaking 15th World Cup goal. But it was the way in which he did it that set the world on fire: speed, control, vision, total mastery of the ball, explosive runs, juggling the ball past defenders with acrobatic flicks and tricks, and the goals.4. Franz BeckenbauerNo compilation of World Cup heroes could omit Franz Beckenbauer, one of only three men – along with Didier Deschamps and Mario Zagallo – to lift the World Cup trophy both as a player and a manager. Despite playing as a defender, Beckenbauer scored 14 goals in his 103 appearances for West Germany, captaining the 1974 winning side.After playing in the 1966 World Cup final loss to England, he got revenge four years later, scoring a searing goal to knock the English out and send West Germany to the semifinal. But three World Cup appearances weren't enough for him, and as Germany marched towards unification and a new era, Beckenbauer guided the national team as manager to win the 1990 World Cup.3. Johan CruyffThe three-time Ballon d'Or winner, one of the most influential figures in the sporting philosophy of Total Football, brought a new level of sophistication to the game. Football for Cruyff wasn't just an athletic sport but a blending of mind, body and artistry – an exercise in simplicity and beauty.A creative playmaker with a unique understanding of the geometry of players' pitch positions, he led his team like the conductor of an orchestra. The Netherlands never lost a game in which he scored. And he scored a lot – 33 goals in 48 international matches. Cruyff led the Netherlands to the final of the 1974 World Cup, scoring twice against Argentina and knocking out then-champions Brazil. It was only the defensive heroics of Franz Beckenbauer that frustrated Cruyff's efforts on goal and kept the Dutchman from lifting the trophy.2. Diego MaradonaThe drug-addled "Golden Boy" is widely regarded as one of the greatest players in the history of football. His 60-metre (66-yard) dribble past five England players in the 1986 World Cup quarterfinal led to the "goal of the century", yet its mastery followed the sport's most famous unpenalised handball – the goal that became known as "the hand of God".That game epitomised the two sides of Maradona: the raw, prodigious talent of the Argentinian captain mixed with an absolute disregard for rules, the shameless arrogance of a genius and the belief that one's innate talent sets you apart from – and above – the mere mortals around you. Argentina went on to win the 1986 World Cup, 10 years after Maradona had made his first appearance for the national side aged just 16.1. PeleHas there ever been a more successful football icon than Brazil's Pele? In 1958, when he scored his first World Cup goal – the result of a scuffed mishit that ended Wales's World Cup dreams for the following seven decades – could anyone have known the giant he was to become?With either foot, Pele could produce the sort of magic that inspired generations. Off the pitch, as one of the first truly global Black sports superstars, his outspoken support for improving the lives of the poor made him a national hero. Pele lifted the World Cup three times: 1958, 1962 and 1970. He remains Brazil's leading goal scorer with 77 goals in 92 games. He was so famous, so beloved all around the world that in 1969, both sides in Nigeria's civil war agreed to a ceasefire so they could watch Pele play in an exhibition match in Lagos.The Legacy: World Cup Impact on National IdentityPerhaps the way in which football stars have often escaped humble origins to shine in the sport allows the very best to become icons on and off the pitch and truly become heroes of nations. For many countries, World Cup success has become intertwined with national identity, with players elevated to almost mythical status for their contributions to the sport and their country's prestige on the world stage.The Evolution: Changing Standards of GreatnessAs the World Cup has evolved over decades, so too have the standards by which we measure greatness. Early World Cup heroes were often celebrated for their technical skill and leadership, while modern players are increasingly judged by their statistics, consistency across tournaments, and ability to perform under pressure. The rise of data analytics in football has added new dimensions to the debate about what constitutes greatness in the World Cup context.The Future: Who Will Join the Pantheon?As we approach the 2026 World Cup, the question remains: who will join this pantheon of greats? With players like Lionel Messi already having cemented their legacy, and emerging talents like Kylian Mbappé showing signs of greatness, the debate will continue to evolve. The World Cup has always been a stage where legends are made, and the 2026 tournament promises to be no exception.

The Shock Exclusion: Maguire’s Instagram RevealHarry Maguire used his Instagram story on Thursday, 21 May 2026 to announce that he is not part of Thomas Tuchel’s England roster for the upcoming World Cup in the United States, Canada and Mexico. The 33‑year‑old centre‑back called the decision “shocked and gutted” and wished his teammates the best. Statistical Snapshot of Maguire’s International Career66 caps for England since his debut in 20177 international goalsParticipated in the 2018 World Cup (semi‑finals) and Euro 2020 (final)Last appearance: 1‑0 loss to Japan in March 2026Missed Euro 2024 due to injury Implications for England’s Defensive Options Ahead of the 2026 World CupThe omission opens a pathway for younger defenders such as Marc Guehi and Ezri Konsa, who have been edging Maguire out of the pecking order. Tuchel’s final squad, due on Friday, 22 May 2026, is expected to feature a blend of experience and emerging talent, potentially shifting England’s tactical setup from a traditional back‑four to a more versatile defensive line. What This Means for Maguire’s Club Future and England’s CampaignHaving helped revive Manchester United’s season after the departure of former coach Ruben Amorim, Maguire’s international snub could affect his confidence and market value. At United, he remains a key figure, but a prolonged absence from the national team may prompt discussions about his role under new management. For England, the decision signals a clear move away from the Southgate‑era core, emphasizing form and fitness over legacy.

WiseTech has started notifying staff of redundancies linked to an AI transformation, but an internal email to its China team omitted the term “AI”, replacing it with “global transformation”. Employees have been waiting nearly three months for clarity as the company prepares to cut roughly 2,000 jobs.Redundancy Rollout Tied to AI TransformationThe logistics‑software firm announced in late February that it would eliminate almost 30% of its 7,000‑strong global workforce across 40 countries. The process began in South Korea and Mexico and is slated to start in Australia next week.Announcement: late February 2026Targeted cuts: ~2,000 jobs (30% of staff)Countries affected: 40Numbers Behind the CutsThe scale of the layoff represents the single largest workforce reduction in WiseTech’s history. With a headcount of 7,000, a 30% reduction translates to 2,000 positions being eliminated.Legal Nuances Prompting the China Email ChangeStaff in the internal WiseTech Global Teams chat noted that the Chinese version of the redundancy email swapped “AI transformation” for “global transformation” and omitted the explanatory line about AI. Employees asked CEO Zubin Appoo why the wording was altered, referencing a recent Chinese court ruling that awarded a dismissed worker A$53,000 after being replaced by AI.Appoo replied that ‘different jurisdictions have different legal and regulatory requirements’, suggesting the omission was a precautionary legal measure.Employee Morale and Union ResponseMonths of uncertainty have left staff “anxious” and “sad”, with morale described as low. The union Professionals Australia received a petition signed by nearly 600 employees demanding transparent consultation and fair redundancy packages. Union membership among technical staff has risen by over 30% in eight weeks.What Lies Ahead for WiseTech’s WorkforceWith the redundancy process expanding to additional regions, employees await clearer guidance on severance, future roles, and the company’s AI strategy. The legal sensitivity demonstrated in China may shape how WiseTech communicates future workforce changes globally.

Executive SummaryThe government has found no evidence that a formal security vetting or due‑diligence process was undertaken for Prince Andrew when he was appointed UK trade envoy in 2001. The revelation follows a Liberal Democrat parliamentary request for historic documents and revives scrutiny over royal participation in sensitive diplomatic posts.Absence of Formal Vetting in Prince Andrew’s Trade Envoy AppointmentHistoric paperwork released by the Department for International Trade shows that the appointment was driven by Queen Elizabeth II’s personal wish, conveyed in a memo from David Wright to then‑Foreign Secretary Robin Cook. The memo and subsequent documents contain no reference to any security clearance, background checks, or risk assessments, despite the role granting access to senior government and global business contacts.Document Timeline and Key Figures25 February 2000: Memo from David Wright to Robin Cook cites the Queen’s “wish” for the Duke of York to take the trade envoy role.2001: Prince Andrew formally appointed by Tony Blair as the UK’s special representative for international trade and investment.May 2026: Government publishes 11 documents after a Liberal Democrat humble address demanded disclosure of vetting records and related correspondence.Political and Institutional ImpactThe episode highlights a broader tension between the royal family’s informal diplomatic activities and modern expectations of transparency and security. Critics argue that bypassing standard vetting undermines confidence in the integrity of trade promotion, especially given later allegations linking the envoy to confidential information leaks involving Jeffrey Epstein. The Liberal Democrats’ successful push for document release may set a precedent for future parliamentary scrutiny of royal appointments.Outlook: Calls for Vetting Reform and Royal AccountabilityParliamentary committees are expected to examine whether existing protocols adequately cover unpaid, high‑profile roles occupied by members of the royal family. If reforms are enacted, future appointments could require formal security clearances comparable to those for senior civil servants, reducing the risk of reputational damage and potential breaches of confidential information.

Queen’s 2001 Push for Prince Andrew as a Trade EnvoyThe late Queen Elizabeth II expressed strong enthusiasm in 2001 for her second son, Prince Andrew, to assume a “prominent role in the promotion of national interests” as a trade envoy. The appointment was intended to give the “spare” heir structure, purpose, and a public‑service narrative after his naval career and early hero status following the Falklands conflict.Absence of Measurable Trade ImpactThe article provides no financial figures or trade statistics linked to Andrew’s brief envoy tenure, indicating that the role failed to generate quantifiable economic benefits. Without data on export growth, investment inflows, or diplomatic agreements, the appointment remains a symbolic gesture rather than a measurable policy success.Repercussions for Monarchical ReputationPublic perception shifted as Andrew’s later scandals, including the 2019 Newsnight interview and ties to Jeffrey Epstein, contrasted sharply with the queen’s early support.Royal commentators suggest the queen’s “blinkered” favoritism may have deepened the family’s vulnerability to criticism.Even after Andrew stepped down as a working royal, the queen continued to offer personal support, such as riding beside him at Windsor Castle.These actions reinforced the view that the monarchy was willing to protect a controversial figure, potentially eroding public trust.Future Outlook for Royal Patronage and Public RolesWith King Charles III now overseeing the family, the precedent set by the queen’s 2001 decision highlights the need for clearer criteria when assigning public duties to senior royals. Analysts anticipate a more cautious approach, limiting official roles to individuals with unblemished records to safeguard the institution’s relevance.

The LeadEleven weeks after the start of the Iran war, the Strait of Hormuz has remained closed to naval traffic, bleeding the global economy far beyond the Gulf. Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) maintains an iron grip over this narrow, strategic waterway, while a corresponding United States naval blockade on Iranian ports has failed to reopen it.Before the war began, between 120 and 140 ships travelled through the strait each day, about half of them oil tankers carrying some 20 million barrels of oil between them. Now, only a few vessels whose owners have negotiated with the IRGC are permitted to pass.The Strategic Control of HormuzOn Wednesday, Iran said it coordinated the transit of 26 vessels through the Strait of Hormuz in 24 hours, two days after announcing the formation of the Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA), a new body to provide "real-time updates" on operations in the strait.Since the announcement of a temporary ceasefire between the US and Iran in April, Iran has been working on formalising a mechanism to charge a transit fee from ships crossing the critical chokepoint, through which 20 percent of the world's oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) are shipped during peacetime.Tehran has reportedly already charged fees as high as $2m per ship for transit since the war started. Even though countries opposing Tehran say this is illegal, it may still be less expensive than the overall cost of the closure of the strait each day.The Economic Cost of BlockadeNearly one-fifth of global oil and LNG exports were shipped by Gulf producers through the Strait of Hormuz before the US and Israel bombed Iran on February 28, triggering the Iranian closure of the waterway. The strait is the only waterway linking Gulf producers to the open ocean – there is no other route through which they can ship exports.About 20.3 million barrels per day of oil passed through the Strait of Hormuz in peacetime – nearly 27 percent of global maritime oil trade. The lion's share of that crude went to Asian markets.Global LNG trade has been similarly hard hit. On the day before the war broke out, Brent crude – the global benchmark for oil prices – closed at $72.48 per barrel. After Iran closed the waterway on March 4 and began attacks on vessels attempting to sail through, traffic came to a standstill, stranding about 2,000 ships on either side of the strait.In terms of lost oil revenues, this amounts to $114.8bn of losses per day. About 10 billion cubic feet of LNG per day also used to pass through the strait, worth a further $7.8bn.The Cost-Benefit Analysis of Transit FeesFor hundreds of ships stranded in the Gulf with thousands of sailors on board, the cost of remaining anchored is steep, including crew wages, loan repayments, repair and management, coupled with inflated war risk premiums.In turn, Iran has reportedly been charging up to $2m for authorisation to pass. Experts say many will see this as worthwhile purely in terms of monetary cost."There is no doubt that paying Iran is cheaper than a continuous blockade because a sitting tanker bleeds money," said Nader Habibi, an Iranian American economist."It makes sense from an economic point of view, but it is not politically feasible," he added. "The companies are under pressure from the US sanctions and not to make arrangements with Iran. This is not just a purely economic cost-benefit analysis, but long-term considerations that are taken into account."International Legal PerspectivesInternational law protects free transit through strategic waters such as natural straits like Hormuz, barring countries from imposing passage tolls even where the waterways fall entirely into territorial waters, like in the case of Hormuz.However, services such as security controls, inspections and insurance regimes can be charged for. Chargeable fees also partly depend on whether a waterway is a man-made passageway or a natural one.These are three different precedents in maritime traffic flow:Panama Canal: An artificial waterway connecting the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Vessels pass through a unique system of locks that raise and lower vessels across elevated terrain. Since Panama built, maintains and operates the canal, it can charge transit fees based on vessel size, cargo capacity and booking priority. These range from several hundred thousand dollars per transit to some slots sold for millions of dollars.Suez Canal: Another artificial canal, linking the Mediterranean and Red seas. Egypt charges transit fees for the use of canal infrastructure, maintenance and traffic management services through the narrow waterway. Container ships and oil tankers pay from several hundred thousand dollars to more than one million dollars per voyage.Turkiye's Bosporus Strait and Dardanelles: These are different because they are natural straits, rather than man-made canals. Turkiye charges for navigation-related services such as lighthouse operations, rescue readiness, medical support and traffic management – and tightly controls ship scheduling and navigation.Regional Cooperation PossibilitiesIran's newly-formed PGSA published a new map of Hormuz, stretching from Kuh-e Mubarak in Iran to south of Fujairah, in the UAE, at the eastern entrance of the strait, and from the tip of Qeshm Island to Umm al-Quwain at the western entrance.Given how the Iran war has spilled over into the Gulf region – with the UAE taking the brunt of Iranian strikes – economist Mohammad Reza Farzanegan said "regional cooperation with Iran is the most realistic path to stable transit through the Strait of Hormuz."The UAE, Oman, Qatar and Iran will have to work together because their economies require it, he argued. A workable arrangement could include a joint maritime authority, shared monitoring, emergency coordination, environmental protection and service-based contributions for maintaining safe passage."This would give Iran a recognised role in the security of the waterway while giving Persian Gulf economies more predictability," Farzanegan added. "Such a framework is also more realistic than relying on external military enforcement, which has been more a source of trouble for these states."The Future OutlookWhile it may seem that the economics of the closure of the strait are currently skewed towards Iran, Aniseh Tabrizi, an associate fellow on the Middle East and North Africa Programme at think tank Chatham House, noted that "the economics by itself is not going to be the driver to change calculation or move from the current standpoint."She emphasized that Iran and the US need to reach a "diplomatic compromise, with other calculations linked in to the economic factor", before there can be an end to the energy supply crisis.Farzanegan added that if the world expects stable access to the Strait of Hormuz, then paying Iran could well be accepted as the price of keeping the vital waterway predictable. "From an economic perspective, a negotiated transit arrangement [with Iran] now makes more sense than continued closure," he concluded.