ConflictClarifier

2026 Iran-Gulf Crisis Tracker
CC
Main
Live Data
Analytics
Tools
Reference
Events Archive
diplomacyApr 14, 2026

Strait of Hormuz: Why the US and Iran are sailing in very different legal waters

Summary

The Strait of Hormuz exists in the eye of the beholder. While everyone agrees that, geographically speaking, it is a strait – a narrow sea passage connecting two places that ships want to go – its political and legal status is rather more complicated. The United States and Iran both eye the strait – a choke point through which 20% of the world’s oil passes – very differently. Washington sees the Strait of Hormuz as exclusively an international waterway, whereas Tehran sees it as part of it territorial waters. It follows that Iran’s toll-charging of ships is seen by the U.S. as illegal. Similarly, U.S. President Donald Trump’s blockade of the passage is a “grave violation” of sovereignty to Iran. As an expert in the law of the sea, I know part of the problem is that the U.S. and Iran are living in two different worlds when it comes to the international laws governing the strait. Further complicating matters, both are in a different legal universe than most of the rest of the world. The law of the sea The “law of the sea” is a network of international laws, customs and agreements that set out the foundation for rights of access and control in the ocean. The framework sits apart from the laws of warfare, which are also relevant to the Persian Gulf situation. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, or UNCLOS, is a major plank of the law of the sea. Completed in 1982 and in force since 1994, it aims to create a stable set of zones and places – like international straits – where everyone agrees on who can do what. It has been ratified by 171 countries and the European Union, but not Iran or the United States. Iran has signed it but has yet to ratify; the U.S. has done neither. This means that the rules which almost every country in the world has consented to can’t serve as a basis of agreement over how the U.S. and Iran should govern their actions in the strait during the current war. The view from Iran Both Iran and the U.S. agree that under the law of the sea, the Strait of Hormuz is an international strait, but not on what kind of international strait it is. Moreover, they disagree on the relevant laws that exist, and how they apply. For Iran, the Strait of Hormuz is an international strait as set out under international law predating UNCLOS – notably the International Court of Justice’s ruling in the 1949 Corfu Channel case and the 1958 Territorial Seas Convention. These older standards state that foreign ships have a right of “innocent passage” through international straits. Put in other terms, this means that if a ship is simply passing through, without doing anything else and without harming the security of the coastal countries, it must be allowed passage. This gives Iran – and Oman, the strait’s other bordering country – power to make and enforce some rules over passage, such as rules for safety and the environment. They also have wide discretion to decide if passage is “non-innocent” and therefore not allowed. But it does not give them the right to impede innocent passage. Contrary to the older standard, however, Tehran claims the right to “suspend” passage through its half of the strait, citing the waters as its territorial sea. This is a violation of the 1958 Territorial Seas Convention that Iran relies on for legal support, which says that when a territorial sea is also an international strait, innocent passage cannot be suspended. The US interpretation For the U.S., the Strait of Hormuz is an international strait requiring “transit passage,” as per UNCLOS. Although the United States is not a member of UNCLOS, it argues that the agreement’s updated concept of an “international strait” should apply. Understanding a waterway as the newer type of “international strait,” which requires transit passage, shifts the balance against a coastal country’s control and toward free navigation. Under this standard, countries bordering straits – like Iran and Oman in the case of Hormuz – must also allow overflight and submarines below the surface. Passage must be allowed so long as it is “continuous and expeditious.” The U.S. has forcefully asserted this position at sea through regular “Freedom of Navigation” patrols through the Strait of Hormuz and other straits around the world. The patrols are a visible rejection of claims over the ocean that the U.S. deems illegal or excessive. The basic U.S. argument is supported by some leading legal scholars, such as James Kraska, a professor of international maritime law at the U.S. Naval War College, who decries the Iranian position as “lawfare” and argues that Iran must abide by the compromises made in UNCLOS. A ‘persistent objector’ But the U.S. is a global outlier here, and one of only a handful of countries – alongside the United Kingdom, France, Australia, Thailand and Papua New Guinea – which argue that “transit passage” is required by custom. Custom, in this sense, is established if a practice at sea is seen as consistent and is backed by wide agreement over its legality. If something is seen as customary law, it applies to everyone. The only way to prevent a custom from applying to you is through the “persistent objection rule,” which gives a country an exemption to newly emerging standards if it has shown itself to be consistently against it. Legal scholars are split on whether transit passage is customary law – although law of the sea specialists tend to say it is not. Tehran argues that even if transit passage were customary international law, Iran is a “persistent objector,” and therefore, the rule doesn’t apply to them. And it is true that Iran’s objection has been consistent. Both Iran and Oman argued in favor of innocent passage, and against transit passage, at the UNCLOS negotiations. Iran reaffirmed its perspective upon signing UNCLOS in 1982. Tehran argues that because transit passage is tied up in the compromises made by UNCLOS, only countries that ratify the treaty can claim the right to transit passage – and neither the U.S. nor Iran has ratified it. Navigating troubled waters The complex military situation and economic disruption are only part of the story of the Strait of Hormuz. What lies beneath is a complicated legal situation. Not only do the U.S. and Iran disagree about the legal status of the strait, but the countries that flag oil tankers – and which are therefore responsible for them – must also navigate their own commitments and perspectives under the law of the sea. Every nation wants to avoid a legal precedent that is contrary to its long-term interests. But for international law to function – to reduce conflict and enable trade – what is needed is an agreement about what rules exist, and a shared commitment to abide by them. Only that would achieve a stable post-war status for the Strait of Hormuz. How we get there, however, requires navigating some very tricky waters.

Actors involved

USIranUNEU

Sources

  • Elizabeth MendenhallBy Elizabeth Mendenhall

    The Strait of Hormuz exists in the eye of the beholder. While everyone agrees that, geographically speaking, it is a strait – a narrow sea passage connecting two places that ships want to go – its political and legal status is rather more complicated. The United States and Iran b…

See this event through different lenses

Compare how Western, Iranian, Israeli, Global South, and Pro-Peace perspectives frame this event.

Compare Perspectives

Community Notes

Community Notes

Loading notes...

Related events

diplomacyUnverifiedUSIran

Metaplanet expands Bitcoin treasury strategy to US with 2,100-BTC Nasdaq play

○ 1 source

Key points: Bitcoin diverges from US stocks as Trump says Strait of Hormuz “open” Data from TradingView showed BTC/USD building on the week’s gains as the S&P 500 bounced from 7,696, its lowest level since Aug. 4. BTC/USD four-hour chart. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingView This came after US president Donald Trump posted a map of the closed Strait of Hormuz oil route to Truth Social where it was labeled “new US territory.

” Both the US and Iran lay claim to control of Hormuz, with Trump threatening US ally Oman with military action over its plans to work with Iran on charging tolls to shipping traffic. In a subsequent post, Trump confirmed that further diplomacy with Iran was not on the agenda.

“There are no talks or conversations going on, or scheduled, with the Islamic Republic of Iran. The Naval Blockade remains in full force and effect. The Hormuz Strait is open and operating. All water mines have been removed or detonated,” he wrote. S&P 500 one-day chart.

Source: Cointelegraph/TradingView As on Monday, oil avoided major volatility, with WTI crude down 1% at the time of writing at $84 per barrel. US government bonds continued to show strain, with the 30-year yield hitting 5.34%, its highest since January 2007.

“Bond prices are sending warnings,” BNY Mellon analyst Geoff Yu wrote in a research note quoted by the New York Times. Yu said that the surge came as “investors demand more compensation for inflation risk,” while also attributing the upside to government borrowing.

US 30-year bond yields one-month chart. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingView BTC price faces crunch rebound test Updating X followers on BTC/USD, trader and analyst Aksel Kibar eyed the culmination of a potential reverse head-and-shoulders pattern at $62,300.

Related: Bitcoin price spike to $64.5K was ‘low-volume liquidity trap’: Analysis “If $BTCUSD is going to rebound, it has to come from here,” he argued on Monday. Kibar offered a $53,000 target in the event of the head-and-shoulders structure failing, with $76,000 a potential upside target should the rebound sustain.

BTC/USD one-day chart. Source: Aksel Kibar on X.com Previously, Cointelegraph reported that underwater investors were contributing to Bitcoin’s inability to break higher. Its rebound to $64,500 also stopped short of an overhead trend line, the 50-month exponential moving average (EMA).

This moving average is now in place as resistance at $65,827.

Location: Strait of Hormuz
CurrentsAPI
diplomacyUnverifiedUSIran

Trump says no talks underway with Iran, Hormuz blockade remains in place

○ 1 source

Trump says no talks underway with Iran, Hormuz blockade remains in place US president says no discussions are taking place or planned with Tehran and reiterates that the naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz remains fully operational Washington: US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that no talks are taking place with Iran and that no discussions are currently scheduled between the two countries.

In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump also said the naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz remains "in full force and effect." The president did not provide further details regarding US policy towards Iran or any potential future diplomatic engagement.

Trump's comments come amid continued tensions between Washington and Tehran and renewed focus on security and navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world's most important oil shipping routes.

Location: Tehran
CurrentsAPI
diplomacyUnverifiedUSIran

Iran ‘won war and diplomacy,’ foreign minister says after Trump’s call for Tehran to surrender

○ 1 source

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Tuesday that Iran had “won both the war and diplomacy,” claiming those who initially sought Tehran’s “unconditional surrender” later sought negotiations. Speaking at an event, Araghchi said Iran resisted for days against what he described as “the world’s largest apparent military,” alongside another army claiming military power and with the support of nearly all Western countries and some other states inside and outside the region, according to the Tasnim news agency.

“Those who were seeking unconditional surrender, shortly after the war began, begged for negotiations,” Araghchi said. He claimed Tehran initially rejected a ceasefire and continued fighting until reaching a point where the other side accepted a ceasefire and negotiations “on Iran’s terms.

” “We fought with strength, and we negotiated with strength,” he said, adding that many foreign ministers had told him: “You won both the war and diplomacy.” Araghchi’s remarks came after US President Donald Trump called on Iran on Monday to give up and “raise the white flag.

Location: Tehran
Anadolu
diplomacyUnverifiedUSIran

Hormuz To Remain Closed Until US Releases Frozen Assets, Meets Interim Deal Conditions: Iran's Ghalibaf

○ 1 source

- Iran demands US lift sanctions and return frozen assets to reopen Strait of Hormuz - Iran's Parliament Speaker warns closure of Strait continues until US ends military threats - Around 20% of global oil supply passes through the Strait, impacting energy security Iran has warned that the Strait of Hormuz will remain closed until the US meets a set of conditions, including the release of frozen Iranian assets, an end to oil sanctions and what Tehran describes as a US blockade and military threats.

Al-Arabiya English reported that Iran's Parliament Speaker and top negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said the Trump administration must meet the conditions before Tehran considers reopening the strategic waterway. “Until the Trump regime removes the blockade, ends the wars across the region, returns Iran's stolen assets, lifts the oil sanctions, and ceases its military threats, the Strait of Hormuz will remain closed,” Ghalibaf said.

Until the Trump regime removes the blockade, ends the wars across the region, returns Iran's stolen assets, lifts the oil sanctions, and ceases its military threats, the Strait of Hormuz will remain closed. pic.twitter.com/fl2RrKnT1R— Seyed Mohammad Marandi (@s_m_marandi) August 18, 2026 Ghalibaf also warned that Iran was prepared to respond more forcefully depending on the actions of its adversaries.

ALSO READ: 'We Control Hormuz': Trump To Declare Strait As US Territory? Here's What President Says The comments add a new condition to an already fragile diplomatic environment, with the Strait of Hormuz at the centre of concerns over global energy supplies.

Around one-fifth of global oil supply typically passes through the waterway, making any prolonged disruption a major risk for crude markets, shipping and energy security. Earlier, Press TV reported that Ghalibaf is scheduled to travel to Baghdad on Wednesday at the head of a high-level Iranian delegation for discussions with Iraqi leaders.

The talks are expected to cover regional developments and bilateral cooperation, including border security, counterterrorism, economic ties and implementation of existing agreements. Iraqi media have also reported that the agenda could include a proposal concerning Iraqi oil exports through the Strait of Hormuz.

The visit comes as regional governments grapple with the implications of continued disruption in one of the world's most important energy corridors. ALSO READ: Hormuz Tensions: Another Ship Hit By Unknown Projectile, Says UKMTO Centre The security situation in the waterway has also remained tense.

The UK's Maritime Trade Operations agency, or UKMTO, said a vessel reported being struck by an unknown projectile while conducting an outbound transit of the Strait of Hormuz. “The Company Security Officer has reported that the vessel was struck by an unknown projectile while conducting an outbound transit of the Strait of Hormuz,” UKMTO said.

The impact damaged the vessel's engine room and resulted in a crew casualty, the agency said. The remaining crew was being assisted by the Omani coastguard. Essential Business Intelligence, Sharp Market Insights, Practical Personal Finance Advice, Daily Fuel, Gold and Silver Prices and Latest Stories — On NDTV Profit.

Location: Tehran
Noor Ul Haq