Trump must reject any Hormuz restriction — Iran cannot control global trade

The Strait of Hormuz is often described as the chokepoint of the Gulf. This is a very narrow frame for a very big truth. Hormuz is not just a regional waterway between Iran and the Gulf countries. It is part of the global economic infrastructure, a narrow corridor through which much of the world’s oil and gas trade passes. It is also a route on which transportation, insurance, fertilizer supply, industrial production and food security depend on much of the world. This is not a local issue. It is part of the operating system of global growth.

Therefore, one principle must be absolute: There can be no negotiations on freedom of passage in Hormuz. If President Donald Trump were to accept any restrictions on passage through the strait, whether in the form of tolls, quotas, selective permits, inspections manipulated for political purposes, or Iran’s de facto right to decide who passes through and on what terms, it would be a major defeat for the United States and the world economy. This means that Washington has accepted the transformation of a global artery into an instrument of oppression.

This cannot be dismissed as a temporary compromise. Once the principle is accepted, the damage is permanent. It’s not just the immediate cost of a few delayed shipments. It sets a precedent that the world’s most important maritime gateways can be politically priced, selectively restricted, and used as bargaining chips by the power that threatens them. If the USA accepts this in Hormuz, every revisionist state will take notice.

THE IRAN WAR IS NEARING ‘COMPLETE’ AS TRUMP HAS A DEADLINE IN HIS EYES – WHAT MAY THE END GAME LIKE

Dependency on Hormuz is highest in Asia. Most of the oil and LNG passing through the strait goes to Asian markets, primarily China, India, Japan and South Korea. Closing the waterway, or even Iran’s claim to regulate access, would therefore do much more than inconvenience Gulf exporters. It will directly hit the industrial centers of Asia. Chinese manufacturing, Indian refining, Japanese utilities and Korean industry will quickly feel the shock through fuel prices, factory production, inflation and investor confidence.

On the gas side, the fragility is even sharper. LNG exports from Qatar and the UAE are largely dependent on the strait. For countries such as Bangladesh, India and Pakistan, the outage will not only be an energy problem. This will become a power problem, an industry problem, and then a food problem. There is no shortage of gas in the power plant. They spread into fertilizer production, factory production and household budgets.

Europe is less directly exposed but is far from isolated. In a tight market, marginal supply determines price. Europe would be dragged into more violent bidding wars for replacement gas, just as it did after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Secondary effects will extend far beyond Europe. High energy prices fuel transportation, insurance, fertilizer and food. The result is inflation in developed economies and fiscal stress in poorer and more import-dependent ones. Countries far from the Gulf will still pay a heavy price for any attempt to weaponize Hormuz.

Therefore, Hormuz cannot be treated as a Gulf security problem to be handed over to the Gulf countries. This disruption is spreading throughout the industrial world, as well as the global south, through energy markets, transportation costs, fertilizer supply chains and food security. This is not a regional dispute with international ramifications. This is an attack on the common economic artery.

WHY IS TRUMP FACED WITH THE ANGRY DECISION TO REMOVE IRAN’S OIL SUPPLY IF HE CANNOT GET A DEAL?

Therefore, the answer should not be framed primarily as a question of whose navy is escorting which tanker. Using force to deter surprise attacks may sometimes be necessary, but this is not a sustainable solution. Even limited violence or the credible threat of it could cause insurance costs to rise and effectively close the strait commercially. A militarized Hormuz is in practice a partially enclosed Hormuz. The more permanent answer is economic and global: a sanctions mechanism comprehensive and credible enough to conclude that Iran stands to lose far more by threatening Hormuz than it can gain by coercing the world in this way.

CLICK FOR OTHER OPINIONS OF FOX NEWS

This does not mean another Western sanctions package with familiar loopholes, but a real pre-packaged economic quarantine: no oil purchases from Iran, no shipping services, no insurance, no access to ports, no banking channels, no petrochemical trade, no barter arrangements, and no backdoor facilitation through third countries. More importantly, these measures mean making it clear in advance that commercial traffic will automatically cease following any blockade, systematic harassment, or attempt to impose actual access fees.

Such a regime must include China. Without China’s participation, the exercise would have been strategically frivolous. A sanctions coalition that excludes one of the major end markets for Gulf energy would amount to declaring that the world is prepared to tolerate pressure as long as it is selectively monetized. The same logic applies to India, Japan and South Korea. They are not spectators. They are among the main beneficiaries of keeping the waterway open and the biggest victims of any disruption.

CLICK TO DOWNLOAD FOX NEWS APPLICATION

The same principle applies to Russia and other states that tend to help Iran escape repression. The point of a real sanctions regime is to force a choice: Is protecting Iran worth jeopardizing more valuable relationships with the Gulf states, India, and other countries in the global south? The threat of serious global sanctions should make this calculation inevitable.

Hormuz is not Iran’s lever, not even its toll road. It is part of the basic infrastructure of global trade. If Tehran tries to weaponize this reality, the world must ensure in advance that the peaceful cost to Iran will be enormous. But the first thing to reject is the idea that America can negotiate access. If Trump agrees to any restrictions on Hormuz, the United States would be legitimizing its usurpation of one of the world’s central economic arteries. This was not going to be a deal. This would be a strategic defeat.