in recent months we've heard iran threaten to close the strait of hormus in response to u.s. and european sanctions. beyond our own ability to respond in the national interest and security of the united states, which the administration made very clear at that time when that threat took place, my understanding of the treaty, that such an action by iran would violate the treaty because of the treaty's guarantee of the right of innocent passage, even for u.s. vessels. is that a correct statement? >> that is a correct statement. >> the other thing that i focus a great deal on in our subcommittee role is proliferation of narcotics trafficking. certainly my concern about proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. what benefits would the u.s. derive p weapons of mass destruction to and from states such as iran and syria? for example, would joining the treaty advance efforts under the initiative such as providing a basis for taking action against vessels suspected of engaging in proliferation activities? >> right now, sir, as you know, we use customary international law to assert