Hormuz Showdown: Rules on the Chopping Block

Iran and Oman’s new talks over the Strait of Hormuz could decide who controls one of the world’s most important oil lifelines—and how far hostile regimes can squeeze the global economy.

Story Snapshot

Iran and Oman have begun formal “legal-technical” talks on joint management of the Strait of Hormuz, stressing their sovereign rights over the waterway.^[4]^[6]
Iran is pushing a hard-line claim that the Strait lies fully in Iranian and Omani territorial waters, trying to sidestep global rules that protect freedom of navigation.^[3]^[9]
International law experts say the Strait is an international strait with non‑suspendable transit passage, sharply limiting Iran’s right to close it or charge tolls.^[1]^[13]^[17]
Any deal that lets Iran tax or block traffic would hit American families through higher energy prices and threaten U.S. military freedom of movement.

Iran and Oman Launch First Formal Talks Over Hormuz Control

Iranian and Omani delegations recently met in Muscat for what both sides called a “legal‑technical” meeting on the Strait of Hormuz.^[4]^[6]^[9] Officials said the talks focused on rules for the safe passage of ships and on the “sovereign rights” of both countries over the narrow waterway.^[4]^[6] Iran’s team, led by deputy foreign minister‑level officials, stressed that the Strait forms part of the territorial waters of Iran and Oman, not a neutral high‑seas corridor.^[4]^[6]^[9] That framing matters because it lays the legal groundwork for tighter coastal‑state control over one of the world’s key shipping chokepoints.

Reports from regional media say the two governments are working toward a joint protocol on traffic management, services, and possible costs tied to navigation.^[2]^[4] People familiar with the talks describe plans for a formal instrument covering routing, dispute resolution, and coordination with outside partners, including the International Maritime Organization.^[2]^[9] At the same time, Tehran has promoted a new “Persian Gulf Strait Authority,” demanding prior registration and payment from vessels seeking to transit.^[3] For conservative readers, this looks less like neutral safety planning and more like an attempt to turn a global artery into a leverage tool against the United States and its allies.

Iran’s Expansive Sovereignty Claims Clash With International Law

Iran has used the talks to double down on its claim that the Strait of Hormuz is entirely within the overlapping twelve‑nautical‑mile territorial seas of Iran and Oman, leaving “no international waters in between.”^[3]^[9] Tehran argues that this makes the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea’s (UNCLOS) special “transit passage” regime invalid here, and instead insists on the more restrictive “innocent passage” rules.^[3]^[1] Iranian forces have acted on that view by blocking ships they label “aggressors” and demanding fees based on cargo volume.^[3]^[7] From a legal perspective, that is a direct challenge to the widely accepted rule that coastal states cannot close or tax transit through international straits simply because their territorial waters overlap.^[1]^[13]^[17]

Maritime law scholars note that Article 38 of UNCLOS clearly guarantees unimpeded and non‑suspendable transit for all global shipping through straits used for international navigation.^[1]^[17] A key earlier treaty, the 1958 Geneva Convention on the Territorial Sea, also states there “shall be no suspension” of innocent passage through such straits.^[1]^[15] Studies on Asian straits explain that transit passage was created precisely because many strategic channels, including Hormuz, became fully overlapped by coastal territorial seas after the twelve‑mile rule was adopted.^[14] In plain English, even when a strait lies inside the maritime borders of one or more states, those states cannot legally shut it down or turn it into a toll booth for normal, peaceful shipping.^[13]^[17]

Oman’s Tightrope: Asserting Rights While Rejecting Tolls

Oman, America’s quiet Gulf partner, has to walk a fine line in these talks. On paper, Muscat stands with Iran in asserting sovereign rights over its own territorial waters in the Strait.^[2]^[4]^[6] Omani officials joined Tehran in saying the strait is part of both countries’ territorial seas and in highlighting their “exclusive role” as coastal states.^[6]^[7] Yet reporting on Omani foreign minister Badr al‑Busaidi suggests Oman backs “toll‑free safe passage” and wants any joint framework to follow international standards that protect free navigation.^[2]^[9] That puts Oman closer to UNCLOS and American interests, even as it remains locked in sensitive talks with Tehran.

Geography gives Oman real leverage but also real risk. The narrowest point of the Strait lies between Iran and Oman’s Musandam Peninsula, and modern shipping lanes run primarily in waters off Oman’s coast.^[2]^[10] Oman thus has a direct stake in keeping traffic flowing without Iranian interference or surprise “fees” that spook shipowners and drive up costs.^[2]^[10] At the same time, Gulf states depend on U.S. military backing to deter Iran, yet some worry about long‑term American reliability.^[13] That mix of fear and dependence makes it harder for Oman to openly confront Tehran’s overreach, even when Iran’s claims stretch into Omani and United Arab Emirates waters on updated maps.^[8]

What Is at Stake for the United States and Global Energy Markets

The Strait of Hormuz carries roughly one‑fifth of the world’s traded oil, so any new control system that favors Iran’s agenda would hit American families fast through higher fuel and goods prices.^[3]^[10] When Iranian forces or drones harass tankers, global shipping costs spike and insurers raise premiums, which then show up at the gas pump and in the price of everything moved by truck.^[3] International commentaries already describe Iran’s behavior as turning Hormuz into a “maritime hostage situation,” with global trade held at risk to gain sanctions relief and political concessions.^[1] That is exactly the kind of foreign pressure conservative Americans are tired of funding through higher energy bills.

For the Trump administration and constitutional conservatives, the legal fight matters as much as the economic one. United Nations texts and major legal studies state that straits like Hormuz are “non‑suspendable transit zones,” where all ships—civilian and military—enjoy a right of passage that coastal states must not hamper.^[13]^[17] The International Court of Justice’s Corfu Channel case upheld that warships can transit international straits through territorial waters as long as their passage is peaceful.^[13] If Iran can rewrite these rules in practice, it would weaken freedom of navigation everywhere, from the Persian Gulf to the South China Sea, eroding the very order that keeps American commerce and security moving.