European officials are evaluating proposals to allow non-compulsory navigational fees in the Strait of Hormuz, provided the tolls have the support of the UN agency regulating maritime transport. This move aims to stabilize one of the world’s most critical oil corridors amid escalating tensions between the U.S. and Iran, according to reports on the diplomatic efforts.
The Malacca Model: A Blueprint for Hormuz Navigational Fees
Oman, which controls most of the navigable waters in the strait, has developed a proposal based on the principles used in the Strait of Malacca. According to Oman delegate Khamis bin Mohammed Al Shamakhi at a recent International Maritime Organization (IMO) council meeting in London, the right of transit passage is guaranteed under international law and does not support compulsory transit fees.
However, Al Shamakhi stated that Oman sees value in voluntary arrangements for “navigational support services.” These services would focus on enhancing maritime safety, protecting the marine environment, and strengthening preparedness for emergencies like collisions or fires on tankers.
The Energy Policy Research Group has also prepared independent proposals, which the Iranian embassy in London expressed interest in. The group argues that a transparent service fee embedded in a regional order would incentivize cooperation rather than acting as a crude toll for passage.
Diplomatic Friction and the IRGC Division
Tehran is currently split on how to handle the waterway. One diplomat reported a division within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), noting that some members view U.S. attacks in February as unlawful and see no reason to adhere to the international law of the sea, while others are open to cooperation.
This internal struggle complicates the ceasefire roadmap signed by Washington and Tehran last month. Clause 5 of that memorandum of understanding (MoU) committed Iran to ensure safe commercial passage without charges for 60 days. The U.S. contends that this agreement did not grant Iran the power to dictate specific routes or require permission for ships to pass.
The stakes are high for regional neighbors. Majed al-Ansari, a spokesperson for Qatar’s foreign ministry, warned that granting Iran sovereignty over the strait in a way that contradicts international law would be “agreeing to be hostages” to radical elements.
Military Escalation and Route Disputes
The debate over fees is happening alongside active military conflict. The U.S. recently struck over 150 targets in southern Iran to disable drone and missile capabilities used to harass shipping. Iran responded by hitting U.S. bases in Kuwait and Bahrain.
A critical point of contention is the “southern route.” IMO Secretary General Arsenio Dominquez believed he had an agreement with Iran to use this route to evacuate thousands of stranded sailors, but Tehran reportedly rescinded its approval. Despite this, U.S. Central Command claims that since early May, U.S. forces have helped facilitate the transit of more than 800 commercial vessels and 380 million barrels of crude oil.
Competing Global Perspectives on Maritime Control
At the IMO meeting in London, a coalition of European and Gulf states pushed for a resolution condemning Iran for attacking ships to gain control of the strait. This motion failed to gain global consensus:
- Russia: Stated the motion ignored the root causes of the crisis.
- China: Described the text as one-sided and beyond the IMO’s mandate.
- UK: Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy described compulsory tolls as “disastrous,” though some cabinet colleagues noted that payment systems for services are permissible in the Channel.
The volatility is further amplified by rhetoric from the U.S. presidency. Donald Trump stated on social media that the interim ceasefire is “over,” while simultaneously threatening Iran with “1000 missiles” if he were targeted for assassination.
Quick Comparison: Hormuz vs. Malacca Models
| Feature | Strait of Malacca | Proposed Hormuz Plan |
|---|---|---|
| Payment Type | Voluntary Contributions | Voluntary Service Fees |
| Primary Goal | Environmental/Safety Risk Mgmt | Security & Political Stability |
| Legal Status | Established IMO Framework | Under Negotiation/Study |
Frequently Asked Questions
Is it legal for Iran to charge ships in the Strait of Hormuz?
Under international maritime law, the right of transit passage is guaranteed. According to Oman’s representative to the IMO, international law does not support the imposition of compulsory transit fees.
What is the “southern route” in the Strait of Hormuz?
It is a transit path that avoids the waters closest to the Iranian coast. The U.S. encourages its use for safety, while the IRGC navy maintains that foreigners have no role in the strait.
Why is Oman involved in these negotiations?
Oman controls a significant portion of the navigable waters in the strait and is acting as a mediator, offering legal experts to Tehran to explain the Malacca-based service fee model.
Stay informed on global trade corridors. Do you believe voluntary fees are a viable way to prevent conflict in the Strait of Hormuz, or does it grant too much leverage to Tehran? Share your analysis in the comments below or subscribe to our maritime security newsletter for deeper insights.
Worth a look