U.S., China Align On Strait Of Hormuz: No Tolls, No Militarization Under International Law
By Lt. Col. Richard J. Connaroe II/U.S. Army 8th Theater Sustainment Command
At their May 2026 summit in Beijing, United States President Donald Trump and Chinese Communist Party General Secretary Xi Jinping jointly affirmed that the Strait of Hormuz must remain open to ensure the free flow of energy. Xi made explicitly clear China’s opposition to the militarization of the vital strait and any attempt to charge a toll for its use. Imposing such a toll violates international maritime law.
In late March 2026, Iran demanded that the U.S. recognize its sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz. The Iranian parliament then approved a plan to impose tolls on ships passing through the waterway to enforce “Iran’s sovereign role” over the strait, through which one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas passes. Iran’s demand represents a fundamental misunderstanding — or deliberate misrepresentation — of international maritime law with potentially catastrophic implications for the Indo-Pacific and the world.
The Strait of Hormuz is an international choke point and the right of transit passage applies, which permits unimpeded surface, overflight and submerged transit. Imposing tolls violates rules governing international straits under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). More critically, if Iran successfully transforms an international waterway into territorial waters through coercion, it establishes a precedent for other nations to assert illegitimate control over the Indo-Pacific’s critical maritime choke points, including the Malacca and Taiwan straits.
Such unlawful and aggressive behavior must be publicly opposed as it risks undermining regional stability at the expense of global prosperity and security.
UNCLOS Part III establishes the legal framework for straits used for international navigation. It applies to straits “used for international navigation between one part of the high seas or an exclusive economic zone and another part of the high seas or an exclusive economic zone.” UNCLOS Part III unquestionably applies to the Strait of Hormuz, which connects the Arabian Gulf, also known as the Persian Gulf, to the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea beyond.
UNCLOS also establishes the right of transit passage, which applies to “all ships and aircraft” and permits “continuous and expeditious” transit through international straits. This includes underwater transit by submarines and overflight by aircraft — rights that do not exist in ordinary territorial seas.
UNCLOS explicitly addresses the duties of states bordering international straits. Although coastal states may adopt regulations concerning safety of navigation and pollution prevention, they “shall not hamper transit passage.” UNCLOS does not authorize coastal states to claim sovereignty over a strait used for international navigation or to impose fees or tolls on vessels exercising the right of passage.
The Strait of Hormuz is about 24 nautical miles wide at its narrowest point between Iran and Oman. Both nations claim a 12-nautical-mile territorial sea, which means their territorial waters overlap throughout the strait’s narrowest section. Normally, this overlap would create a corridor of territorial sea subject to the more restrictive right of innocent passage. However, because the strait is used for international navigation between exclusive economic zones (EEZ), the transit passage protocol under UNCLOS Part III supersedes the innocent passage procedures.
In this case, Iran and Oman possess EEZs extending up to 200 nautical miles from their coasts, as permitted under UNCLOS. The strait connects these EEZs to the high seas and other EEZs, triggering the application of transit passage rights. This legal framework exists precisely to prevent coastal states from exploiting choke points to extract fees or impose unilateral restrictions on international navigation.
Iran’s proposed tolling system has no support in international law. Although Egypt charges fees for passage through the Suez Canal, that waterway is an artificial, government-constructed and government-maintained canal, not a natural strait. Denmark imposed transit fees through the Danish Straits but abolished those fees in 1857 following international protests.
Tehran’s demand also mirrors gray-zone tactics employed in the Indo-Pacific to assert illegitimate control through incremental steps. By framing tolls as “security arrangements” and “navigation safety” measures, Iran attempts to disguise coercion as lawful regulation.
The transit passage protocol reflects customary international law binding on all states. The International Court of Justice recognized in 1949 that international straits are subject to special rules ensuring freedom of navigation. The international community — particularly Indo-Pacific Allies and Partners — must recognize Iran’s demand not as an isolated Middle East issue but as a direct threat to the maritime order upon which regional prosperity and security depend. Each payment or acquiescence to Iranian demands strengthens the precedent of unilateral assertion backed by force.
Iran’s demand for sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz is legally baseless. Recognition, acquiescence to tolling or silence would undermine the freedom of navigation that underpins global commerce and security and invite replication. As U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated ahead of Iran’s push for tolls, such a system is “not only illegal, it’s unacceptable, it’s dangerous to the world.”
Upholding the transit passage protocol is essential to preserving a free, secure and prosperous Indo-Pacific and ensuring the free flow of commerce through the world’s critical maritime passages.
The U.S. Army 8th Theater Sustainment Command, National Security Law Team, is based in Hawaii.
- This article was published by Indo-Pacific Defense FORUM
Like what you read?
Please consider supporting Eurasia Review. Thank you for your consideration!
