The Strait of Hormuz plans to implement an "access fee system," reigniting the US-Iran rivalry.

(Source: Shipping News)

The world’s most important energy transportation route—the Strait of Hormuz—is at a crossroads of rules. On March 30th, local time, Iran sent a major signal: considering implementing an access permit and fee system for ships passing through the strait, modeled after international waterways such as the Suez Canal and Panama Canal. This move, combined with current tensions in the Middle East, quickly drew high attention from shipping, energy, and financial markets.

Aladin Broujedi, a member of Iran’s Parliament National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, recently stated that amid the complex international security environment and external threats, Iran is carefully evaluating the establishment of a new strait management system, including stricter access controls for passing ships and charging transit and related service fees. He revealed that this system would reference international practices, such as Turkey’s management of the Bosporus Strait, Egypt’s management of the Suez Canal, and the Panama Canal. According to the plan, all ships passing through the Strait of Hormuz in the future would need prior permission from Iran and pay the corresponding fees.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Bagheri also confirmed that in recent days, some ships have successfully passed through the strait after coordination with Iran. He stated that Iran is managing the orderly passage of non-hostile ships under the premise of ensuring safety, emphasizing that the current restrictions are primarily due to regional conflict escalation, not Iran’s voluntary closure of the route.

However, this “fee + access” proposal has quickly provoked a strong reaction from the United States. Secretary of State Blinken explicitly stated that Iran will not be allowed to “permanently control the Strait of Hormuz and establish a fee system.” He said the U.S. goal is to complete military operations against Iran “within weeks, not months,” while also pushing for diplomatic negotiations through third parties, but with readiness for negotiations to fail.

President Trump issued an even more hardline signal. He stated on social media that negotiations between the U.S. and Iran “have made significant progress,” but if an agreement cannot be reached in the short term and the strait does not return to normal navigation, the U.S. may target Iran’s critical infrastructure, including power plants, oil wells, and key energy hubs like Hormuz Island.

In response to these threats, Iran also responded strongly. The head of Iran’s National Development Fund said that Iran’s power grid is widespread and not easily destroyed; if attacked, Iran has the capacity to plunge the entire region into widespread blackouts. Additionally, Iran warned that countries supporting U.S. and Israeli actions could pay a price in the future.

Beyond military standoffs, subtle changes are also occurring in maritime security. The latest report from the Joint Maritime Information Center indicates that although the overall risk in the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf remains high, electronic signal interference that previously severely disrupted ship positioning systems has significantly weakened. This change has helped ships that were stranded regain clearer positions, easing some concerns for shipowners and insurers. Data shows that since March 20th, Iran appears to have not launched new attacks on commercial ships, with a total of 21 maritime incidents and attacks reported and confirmed so far.

However, analysts believe that the weakening of interference may be related to Iran’s diminished capabilities or a temporary easing of regional tensions, but overall risks remain. Experts from the University of Western Australia’s Defense and Security Studies point out that navigation in the strait still involves high uncertainty, especially due to the safety hazards posed by distorted navigation data. In extreme cases, some ships are even advised to turn off automatic identification systems and rely on visual navigation, which further increases operational difficulty and risk costs.

It is worth noting that, despite the tense situation, passage through the strait has not been completely interrupted. Trump revealed that Iran has allowed some oil tankers flying the Pakistani flag to pass through the strait, increasing from an initial 10 to 20 vessels, demonstrating Iran’s “selective release” strategy.

On the market side, analysts believe the current situation exhibits a typical “pressure—de-escalation” cycle. On one hand, the U.S. continues to send strong signals, trying to exert pressure militarily and diplomatically; on the other hand, amid energy prices and financial markets under pressure, there is a practical need among all parties to de-escalate the situation.

Overall, Iran’s plan to implement a fee system for the Strait of Hormuz not only emphasizes its geopolitical strategic importance but could also reshape the global shipping cost structure. Once implemented, shipping companies will face new compliance, fee, and insurance pressures, and global energy transportation prices may further fluctuate. In the context of unresolved conflicts and rules still to be established, this vital global energy corridor remains highly sensitive and uncertain. The future development of the situation will directly impact global trade and shipping patterns.