Strait of Hormuz: Who Will Set the Rules of the Game Between the US and Iran?

## Introduction

## Diplomatic Shifts Between Washington and Tehran

The latest round of talks marks a significant diplomatic pivot after years of hostile sanctions and military posturing. While the memorandum signed in Geneva opens the door for direct technical talks, its contents remain classified, leaving ambiguity over whether Iran will secure a joint "Omani‑Iranian sovereignty" over the strait or remain under an international supervisory regime. U.S. Deputy Secretary of State J.D. Vance has publicly stated that Washington expects a fee‑free, long‑term opening, whereas Iran‑aligned news agency Fars hints at a possible “transit fee” for container ships. These divergent positions set the stage for technical negotiations that could shape toll collection mechanisms, revenue distribution, and future shipping policies.

## Asymmetric Military Capabilities and Their Impact on Navigation

Despite the United States’ overwhelming military presence in the Gulf, the recent conflict revealed Iran’s ability to disrupt navigation with asymmetric tools. Fast attack boats, swarms of unmanned surface vessels, and strategically placed sea mines have created a non‑balanced deterrent that complicates any attempt by the U.S. to impose absolute control. Analysts at the Council on Foreign Relations note that these tactics gave Tehran a strategic lever, forcing Washington into a weaker bargaining position when its naval assets faced persistent low‑intensity threats. Iran’s capacity to target Gulf energy infrastructure further underscores that control of the strait is not merely a matter of conventional naval superiority but also of political leverage.

## Global Economic Stakes and the Importance of the Strait

The Strait of Hormuz is a vital artery for global energy markets; before the 2022 closure, it conveyed about 20 % of the world’s oil. Any disruption instantly reverberates through oil and gas prices, affecting economies from China to Europe. Consequently, major powers monitor any shift in toll policies or sovereignty claims closely. Should a fee structure be adopted, Iran could generate a new revenue stream that bolsters its war‑time economy. Conversely, maintaining a fee‑free passage stabilizes global prices, a priority for financial markets and energy‑dependent nations. This economic tug‑of‑war will heavily influence the final terms of any agreement.

## Future Scenarios for Fees and Hegemony

Three primary scenarios emerge from the ongoing technical talks. Scenario 1: A fee‑free regime under international supervision, preserving U.S. dominance over maritime security. Scenario 2: A fee‑based system administered by Iran in coordination with Oman, granting Tehran a direct financial stake and reducing Washington’s leverage. Scenario 3: A joint regional authority that blends U.S. security expertise with Iranian sovereignty claims, creating a shared governance model. Each pathway carries distinct implications for energy strategy, regional alliances, and the broader balance of power between global superpowers in the Gulf.

## Regional Reactions and Their Influence on Negotiations

Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar are watching the developments closely, as their economies rely heavily on uninterrupted oil shipments through Hormuz. Any alteration in navigation rules could compel them to diversify logistics, investing in alternative routes such as the Suez Canal or overland pipelines. Meanwhile, Yemen and other conflict‑prone zones could exploit any security vacuum to intensify maritime attacks. Regional feedback will pressure both Washington and Tehran to make concessions—whether security guarantees or economic commitments—making the negotiation process highly intricate.