Who Really Controls the Strait of Hormuz?

The latest pronouncements from President Trump on the Strait of Hormuz have left many perplexed. In a series of social media posts, he claimed that the United States would become the “guardian” of the strait, blockading Iranian ports and ensuring safe passage for non-Iranian vessels. However, beneath the bombast lies a more complex reality: who actually controls the Strait of Hormuz, and what does this mean for regional security?

The history of the strait is marked by contention. Various empires and nations have vied for control over the centuries, from the Portuguese cartaz system in the 16th century to the current standoff between Iran and the United States. The Strait of Hormuz remains a powder keg of international tensions.

Iran’s influence over the strait dates back decades. During the Iran-Iraq War of the 1980s, Tehran periodically attacked foreign vessels in the area. In response, the United States launched Operation Earnest Will, escorting Kuwaiti tankers through the strait for over a year. However, despite this show of force, the Iranian regime never fully closed off the strait – recognizing that such an action would have devastating consequences for its own economy.

In recent years, Iran’s military has been weakened by months of war with the United States and Israel. Yet, despite these losses, Tehran remains capable of maintaining transit restrictions in the strait, thanks to a combination of mines and nimble boats that can harass or attack other vessels.

The implications are far-reaching. If American forces attempt to reassert power in the strait, they’ll face significant challenges. Iran’s influence over ship traffic is already evident, with recent violent clashes dramatically reducing the number of vessels entering and exiting the Persian Gulf. The United States’ ability to exert control may depend on its capacity to erode this system of dominance – a task that could prove cumbersome and perilous.

Trump’s gestures towards a strong American presence in the strait mark a significant shift for the president, who previously criticized the country’s role as “the policemen of the world.” However, he may soon come to realize that policing the strait does not always mean controlling it. The task of ensuring freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz might require a permanent U.S. effort – one that could prove costly and fraught with danger.

This raises important questions about the future of regional security. Will the United States be able to establish a lasting presence in the strait, or will Iran’s influence continue to hold sway? What does this mean for countries like Saudi Arabia and Oman, which are already showing signs of fatigue with the ongoing conflict?

As tensions in the Strait of Hormuz escalate, one thing is clear: the United States cannot simply impose its will on the situation. A more nuanced approach is needed – one that takes into account the complex history and geopolitics of the region. Only then can we hope to find a lasting solution to this enduring crisis.

The consequences of failure are dire. As the war in Ukraine has shown, even seemingly contained conflicts can quickly spiral out of control. The Strait of Hormuz remains a ticking time bomb – one that could have far-reaching implications for global trade and security.