Italian
Europe is seeking a diplomatic way to ensure security in the Strait of Hormuz without compromising the principle of freedom of navigation. In Brussels, some proposals are being considered that would allow for the introduction of voluntary fees aimed at financing navigation assistance services, provided they do not turn into mandatory tolls and are compatible with international law and the rules of the International Maritime Organization (IMO)
BRUSSELS. The hypothesis takes shape as tensions rise between the United States and Iran over the management of one of the planet’s most strategic maritime corridors, through which a significant portion of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas trade passes.
The British Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy reiterated that any mandatory imposition would be “disastrous,” emphasizing that the right of passage in international straits cannot be subject to the payment of a fee. Within the British government, however, it is acknowledged that there are already international models where voluntary contributions fund navigation safety services without compromising the freedom of transit.
The reference is to the Strait of Malacca, where an international cooperation system has been operating for years, supported by contributions from countries using the route, such as Japan. By adapting that model, Oman, with the support of British legal experts, has developed a proposal that could serve as the basis for a future agreement for Hormuz as well. Muscat has expressed its willingness to send its legal experts to Tehran to explain the details to the Iranian authorities.
Meanwhile, Washington continues to increase diplomatic pressure on Iran. The American administration is demanding a public statement from Tehran guaranteeing that the Strait of Hormuz is fully open to commercial navigation and that no ship will be subject to attacks anymore. According to U.S. officials, the difficulties in reaching a stable agreement also stem from the deep internal divisions within the Iranian leadership, where more pragmatic positions coexist with the intransigence of some components of the Revolutionary Guards.
President Donald Trump has meanwhile declared the end of the temporary ceasefire phase, while assuring that negotiations for a permanent solution will continue. In the same hours, he issued new threats to Tehran, stating that the United States would respond forcefully to any attempt on his life.
Oman’s diplomacy continues to play a central role. According to the Iranian news agency IRNA, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi is expected in Muscat for a new round of talks focused on the security of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz and the establishment of a stable framework for managing maritime traffic.
While rejecting any form of mandatory tolls, Oman believes it is possible to develop a system of voluntary contributions aimed exclusively at improving navigation safety, environmental protection, and maritime emergency management. This position was reiterated before the Council of the International Maritime Organization, where Muscat reminded that the right of transit through straits used for international navigation is guaranteed by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Qatar’s position is different. Doha fears that granting Iran greater control over the Strait would expose international trade to continuous political blackmail. The spokesperson for the Qatari Foreign Ministry warned that such a solution could turn the international community into a hostage of the more radical elements of the Iranian system.
Differences have also emerged within the IMO. In recent weeks, the organization’s Secretary-General had sought to gain Tehran’s consent for the use of the southern route of the strait, a solution that would have allowed for the clearance of accumulated traffic and facilitated the passage of thousands of seafarers. Iran had initially given its approval, only to later withdraw it, forcing the United Nations agency to suspend the plan.
At the center of the discussion remains the memorandum signed last month between Washington and Tehran. The agreement stipulated that Iran would guarantee the free passage of commercial vessels for sixty days without imposing any transit fees, while simultaneously initiating negotiations with Oman to define a long-term solution. The United States argues that the agreement does not grant Tehran the power to pre-authorize the passage of vessels, while the Revolutionary Guards claim to have fully honored their commitments and continue to assert that foreign military presence in the strait has no legitimacy.
The debate remains open and concerns not only regional security but also the stability of global energy markets. For Europe, the model of voluntary contributions inspired by the Strait of Malacca could represent a compromise capable of reconciling freedom of navigation, maritime security, and international cooperation. However, much will depend on Iran’s willingness to accept a shared management of one of the world’s most important maritime passages.
