A possible Hormuz reopening could reshape who directs ship traffic

Iran and Oman are moving toward a possible arrangement to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, but the emerging plan would not automatically mean that normal international navigation has returned—or that Iran has gained permanent control of the waterway.

Two regional officials cited by The Associated Press said the proposal could allow ships to enter the Persian Gulf through a northern route coordinated by Iran and leave through a southern route coordinated by Oman. The officials also said the arrangement could include service fees for security and maritime-environment measures. The negotiations remained unfinished on August 5, 2026, and AP reported that the final agreement could take a different form.

That distinction matters because a temporary system for moving ships through a dangerous maritime environment is different from a permanent legal or political change in who controls access to an international strait. A vessel using an Iranian-coordinated route would not, by itself, establish permanent Iranian authority over the Strait of Hormuz.

What is being negotiated

The reported framework would divide operational responsibility between the two coastal states. Iran would coordinate the northern route through Iranian waters, while Oman would coordinate the southern route through Omani waters.

The International Maritime Organization’s operational guidance describes those northern and southern options within a provisional safety framework. After being contacted through the coordinated mechanism, vessels may choose a route after conducting their own independent risk assessment. They must then coordinate with the relevant coastal-state authority.

The same guidance says Iran is responsible for operational routing on the northern route and Oman for the southern route. The coastal states manage traffic flow and collision avoidance. The IMO provides the broader framework and coordination for a phased approach to departures; it does not direct each vessel through the strait.

AP reported that the proposed service fees could support security and preservation of the maritime environment. Those fees are a reported negotiating position, not an established toll system or a settled legal right. AP also reported that U.S. officials have opposed any arrangement that would give Iran control over the strait, while Iranian officials described the talks as focused on safe inbound and outbound shipping lanes that would address the interests of both countries.

Why the current system is temporary

The present operational framework was created because navigation conditions are considered unsafe. Oman’s notice to mariners, issued in coordination with the IMO, establishes a temporary maritime corridor and calls for gradual, controlled movement because of an elevated collision risk.

The notice says vessels in designated groups will be contacted individually and that two temporary routes may be used: one north and one south of the existing traffic-separation scheme. It also says current reports indicate that the normal scheme is not safe to use at this time.

The IMO’s FAQ instructs vessels to remain in position until contacted, proceed to a waiting area only when directed, and await confirmation from the relevant coastal state before moving on their chosen route. The IMO’s Middle East and Strait of Hormuz status page says its evacuation plan is currently paused. A possible diplomatic reopening therefore should not be described as a full restoration of ordinary shipping.

The legal line over control and fees

In a July 13 statement, the IMO Council said any arrangement between the coastal states should guarantee the non-discriminatory and unimpeded right of transit passage through the internationally recognized traffic-separation scheme adopted by the IMO in 1968. The Council also said passage through the strait should remain free of tolls and charges.

That position does not prevent Iran or Oman from coordinating safety measures during an emergency. It does mean that temporary routing assistance is not the same as permanent authority to control the waterway, exclude foreign-flagged ships or impose charges as a condition of passage.

The reported service-fee proposal could therefore become a major legal and commercial dispute if it is included in a final agreement. The key questions would be what service is being provided, who collects the money, whether payment is voluntary or required for passage, how foreign-flagged ships are treated and how the system fits with the IMO Council’s no-tolls position.

The clearest signs of a lasting shift would be a published agreement with an extended duration, formal authority to approve or deny transits, a system for collecting fees, enforcement procedures and a decision not to restore the recognized traffic-separation scheme after immediate safety risks have eased. None of those features has been established publicly by a final agreement.

Why shipping companies are watching

Even a partial reopening could reduce delays for tankers and improve access to energy cargoes. But ships would still face route restrictions, waiting periods, security assessments and potentially higher insurance costs if movement remained conditional.

The consequences would extend beyond oil and gas. Disrupted Gulf shipping can affect fertilizer, food, manufactured goods and other supply chains that depend on predictable maritime access. Importers and consumers would not necessarily see an immediate return to normal prices if vessels continue to move in controlled groups or if insurers and carriers maintain crisis-related surcharges.

For seafarers, the immediate issue is safety. The IMO says its evacuation plan was designed to assist about 6,000 seafarers, that 136 vessels had been evacuated through June 26 and that an estimated 2,900 seafarers had been evacuated at that point. The agency also says around 20,000 seafarers, port workers and offshore crews are affected in the region.

The next test is not simply whether officials announce a reopening. It is whether Iran and Oman publish a final agreement, whether official maritime notices are updated, whether the IMO changes the status of its provisional framework, whether foreign-flagged ships begin confirmed transits and whether any temporary route system survives after the immediate crisis. Until then, a possible reopening remains a negotiated safety arrangement—not proof that Iran has permanently acquired control of the Strait of Hormuz.

Sources

Look for updates to this story

Discover more from Interactive News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.