The Strait of Hormuz reopens and oil celebrates it. Not just the crude oil market: the idea that Iran (or any other power) controlled a natural passage with taxes and tolls was unprecedented and could be disastrous for global trade. Several experts explained it to , who went so far as to wonder what prevented Spain or Morocco from doing the same with the Strait of Gibraltar.
According to the International Maritime Organization, Nearly 3,000 ships remained blocked in the Persian Gulf until now.. Its reopening is not definitive at the moment, but it is crucial. It is one of the most important energy routes on the planet, where around 20% of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas circulated before the conflict.
The alarm that Iran unleashed
Iran put on the table a measure that set off all the alarms: charge a toll for transit of ships in the strait. The proposal would include a system similar to that of artificial canals such as the one in Panama. The possibility of managing this control together with Oman was even raised, although this option was rejected by the sultanate itself.
The debate escalated after statements by Donald Trump, who even suggested that a toll system could generate “a lot of money” if traffic is organized safely.
But the reaction of experts and international organizations has been clear: this is a measure contrary to international law.
“A Pandora’s box” with global consequences
The military analyst Nicolas Mazzucchi already warned then of the implications of this idea. As he explains, imposing tolls in a natural strait would open a “Pandora’s box” with chain effects, according to statements published in the same medium:
- China could do the same in the Taiwan Strait.
- United Kingdom in Dover.
- And, in the European case, even Spain and Morocco in the Strait of Gibraltar.
The problem is not only economic. It’s legal. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea establishes the principle of freedom of navigation, including the right of unimpeded transit in international straits.
“The right of transit has priority. No regulation allows the establishment of tolls at these crossings,” Mazzucchi emphasizes. Apart from the concept of territorial waters (12 nautical miles from the coast) and exclusive economic zones (200 nautical miles from the coast), the “right of transit without obstacles” (Article 38 of the Treaty of Montego Bay) has priority: “no rule can justify the establishment of a maritime toll,” he points out.
A precedent that could affect Spain
The warning about Gibraltar is not minor. The Strait of Gibraltar is one of the busiest maritime passages in the world. If toll collection in Hormuz were normalized, other countries could try to replicate the model.
This would open a completely new scenario for global trade, with risks such as the fragmentation of maritime routes, increased logistics costs and geopolitical tensions.
Why straits are not like canals
The key to the debate is to distinguish between artificial channels (Suez, Panama), which do allow tolls, and natural straits (Hormuz, Gibraltar, Taiwan, Dover…), where they cannot be restricted.
They only exist very specific exceptions, such as the Bosphorus and Dardanelles straitsregulated by an international agreement since 1936 that allows Turkey to limit the passage of military ships in certain circumstances. But this model cannot be extrapolated to other straits.
Beyond laws and proposals, there is one factor that dominates maritime traffic: real securityl. Although there are agreements, the risks are high: insurance premiums rise, transits are reduced and global routes change. Now we will have to see if stability has returned to Hormuz to stay or is just a mirage.
