Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz after US-Israeli strikes killed Khamenei, then codified a toll system — $2 million per ship, free passage for China and Russia. The April 7 ceasefire promised to reopen traffic, but only about 11 ships have passed so far. Trump told ABC he's considering a joint venture with Iran to charge tolls permanently.
1. The Toll Is Illegal — Period (Mark Nevitt, Bahrain, 40-Nation Coalition)
Iran's selective toll violates international maritime law. You don't fix that by monetizing it with a joint venture — you enforce the law.
UNCLOS is clear. Article 26 prohibits states from charging ships for passage alone, and any fees must be nondiscriminatory. Iran's toll fails both tests — it charges $2 million per transit with no service rendered, and exempts China, Russia, and others while taxing the rest. Mark Nevitt, a retired Navy JAG officer and Emory law professor, argues the toll is flatly illegal and identifies a gap in international law where neutral economies suffer as collateral damage in someone else's war.
The international response has been muscular but toothless. Over 40 nations convened a coalition on April 2, hosted by UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper. The Royal Navy took command of a multinational flotilla. Bahrain pushed a UN Security Council resolution demanding Iran stop — Russia and China vetoed it on April 7, with 11 in favor and 2 abstentions. China's ambassador said the resolution "failed to capture the root causes." Without enforcement, the coalition is a statement of principle, not a solution.
2. Make the Deal (Trump)
A joint venture turns an illegal toll into a revenue stream. Iran gets reconstruction money, the US gets oversight, and the strait reopens.
Trump sees a deal where everyone else sees a crisis. He told ABC's Jonathan Karl he's considering a joint venture with Iran to charge tolls on strait traffic, calling it a beautiful thing and a way of securing the waterway. The logic is transactional: Iran already built the toll infrastructure, ships are already paying, and a joint venture formalizes the arrangement while putting the US in a supervisory role. Revenue funds Iranian reconstruction — part of any peace deal — while Washington monitors traffic.
3. Let the Region Handle It (Sina Emami, GCC States)
The Strait of Hormuz is the only critical maritime artery without its own treaty. The people who live there should write one before someone else does.
The legal vacuum is the real problem. The Bosporus has the Montreux Convention. The Panama Canal has its own treaty. The Strait of Hormuz has nothing — no dedicated international agreement governing passage, tolls, or military access. Sina Emami proposed in Al Jazeera a "Congress for Hormuz" — a regional summit where GCC states negotiate a binding treaty that formalizes passage rights while keeping management local.
The GCC has the most to lose and the least voice. Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait, Qatar, and Bahrain all depend on the strait for their oil exports. They co-authored the UN resolution that Russia and China vetoed. But they weren't consulted on Trump's joint venture, and Iran's toll system treats their ships no differently from anyone else's. Emami's argument is that regional states need to take initiative before a deal is imposed on them — by Washington, Tehran, or both.
Where This Lands
The Strait of Hormuz carries 20% of the world's traded oil, and right now it's barely open. Trump's joint venture proposal has the virtue of acknowledging reality — Iran built a toll system, ships are paying it, and pretending otherwise won't reopen the strait. On the other hand, legitimizing a selective toll on an international waterway sets a precedent that could make every chokepoint on earth a revenue opportunity for whoever has enough coastal artillery. The legal purists are right that UNCLOS prohibits this. The regionalists are right that the strait needs its own treaty. Trump is right that someone needs to make a deal. Where this lands depends on whether the ceasefire holds long enough for anyone to negotiate one — and whether the deal that emerges looks more like international law or a protection racket.