The discussions surrounding the Strait of Hormuz do not concern only Iran, oil or the Middle East.
They concern something much broader: whether the world is entering a new era, in which strategic sea lanes are once again becoming tools of political, economic, and geopolitical pressure.
The information that came to light during the recent crisis, according to which transit fees through the Strait of Hormuz were considered or discussed, has sparked a debate that extends far beyond the Persian Gulf. Regardless of whether they are ultimately implemented or not, the discussion itself raises a critical question: What would happen if an international strategic passage were transformed from a free sea lane into a source of political and economic exploitation?
According to current international law of the sea (UNCLOS), international straits used for international navigation are governed by the regime of freedom of passage. The imposition of “tolls” by a coastal state would constitute a unilateral violation of international law, a fact that would directly call into question the principle of freedom of navigation and could trigger a serious geopolitical confrontation or even a military response from the major naval powers.
For if even the impression is created that a state can acquire special rights of control or economic exploitation over an international strait, then it opens up a dangerous debate for the entire planet.
The first area that comes to mind is the Strait of Malacca, between Malaysia and the island of Sumatra in Indonesia, through which a large portion of Asia’s trade and nearly all of China’s energy imports from the Middle East pass. For Beijing, Malacca has for years been its strategic “Achilles’ heel,” as control over these flows is tantamount to control over the very survival of its national economy. It is no coincidence that China is investing enormous sums in ports, bases, and alternative routes from Pakistan to Myanmar to free itself from this dependence.
Next comes Bab el Mandeb, between the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean.
The attacks by the Houthis have demonstrated just how easily a relatively narrow strait can disrupt global trade and force hundreds of ships to take the much more expensive route around Africa.
The Panama Canal also falls into this category, which connects the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and is increasingly at the center of U.S.-China competition. Control over critical port and transportation infrastructure around the canal concerns not only trade but also the ability to influence global maritime flows.
The Bosporus and Dardanelles Straits fall under the same logic. Although governed by the Montreux Convention, their geopolitical value remains immense. Turkey has historically leveraged this status not only as a diplomatic tool but also as a “shield” to restrict other powers’ access to the Black Sea.
However, we must distinguish any “tolls” that may be imposed in the Strait of Hormuz or elsewhere in the future from the agreed-upon transit fees provided for in the Montreux Convention, as Ankara operates within an institutional framework, in contrast to the arbitrary practices or threats that occasionally arise at other strategic chokepoints around the globe.
Even regions that until recently were considered peripheral are taking on new significance. The Arctic and the sea lanes opening up due to melting ice are becoming a source of competition between the U.S., Russia, and China. Within this context, discussions about Greenland, the Arctic islands, and control over future trade routes take on a different dimension.
In reality, what we are witnessing is not merely a dispute over the Strait of Hormuz. It is the return of geography to the center of international politics. For three decades, globalization created the impression that trade flows were a given and unimpeded. Today, however, the major powers are returning to the logic of “chokepoints”—that is, points where a narrow strip of sea can affect the entire global economy.
The real question is not whether tolls will be imposed in the Strait of Hormuz. It is whether the Strait of Hormuz will mark the first step toward a new era, in which power will be measured not only by armies and economies, but also by the ability to control the maritime gateways through which the planet’s wealth flows.
For decades, globalization convinced the world that sea lanes were merely lines on a map. Today, it is becoming clear that they remain the arteries of global power. And whoever controls these arteries gains the ability to influence the entire system. In the 21st century, power will not be measured solely by aircraft carriers, missiles, or artificial intelligence. It will also be measured by who holds sway over the planet’s maritime gateways.
