Ships

Just days after touting progress toward a shipping agreement with Oman, Iran’s parliament is now reviewing legislation that would permanently bar American and Israeli vessels from the Strait of Hormuz altogether — a move that undercuts the optimistic tone coming out of Washington in recent days and that the Trump administration has flatly rejected. What the Bill Would Do According to Iran’s semi-official Fars news agency, a parliamentary committee is reviewing a preliminary bill that would block “hostile” vessels — explicitly naming the United States and Israel — from transiting the strait. The restrictions reportedly wouldn’t be limited to those two countries alone; they would extend more broadly to “countries and individuals that have caused damage to Iran,” and would remain in place until Tehran considers itself compensated for that damage. The proposal would also impose a transit fee of up to 7% of a cargo’s value on other commercial vessels passing through, with steeper penalties — up to 20% of cargo value — for any vessel that violates the terms. The legislation remains under expert review, with parliament inviting outside specialists to weigh in before a final version is drafted, according to the lawmaker cited by Fars. Washington Pushes Back Hard The Trump administration wasted no time rejecting the proposal outright. “Any temporary routes will be without any impediments — meaning no approvals or permissions and no tolls or charges,” a U.S. official told CNBC in response to the report. “The Strait of Hormuz is an international waterway and no party controls the lanes or the ability to transit through them,” the official added, directly rebutting Iran’s underlying claim of sovereign authority over the passage. A Confusing Diplomatic Picture The bill’s emergence complicates what had appeared, just days earlier, to be genuine momentum toward de-escalation. Iran and Oman announced they’d agreed on the geographic coordinates for a new shipping corridor, with vessels reportedly set to enter through a northern route near the Iranian coast and exit through a southern route near the Omani coast. But Iranian officials have been careful to separate that Oman-specific arrangement from any broader resolution involving the United States, with deputy foreign minister Kazem Gharibabadi stating explicitly that “the path of understanding is between Iran and Oman, and no negotiations with the US have taken place during this period.” That stands in some tension with President Trump’s own public statements. Trump had accused Iranian leaders of being “duplicitous” about the state of peace talks earlier in the week, insisting negotiations were underway “whether Iran wants to admit it or not” — a claim Tehran has repeatedly and directly denied. Testing the Limits of an Earlier Ceasefire The current standoff traces back to a memorandum of understanding signed between the U.S. and Iran on June 17, under which Tehran agreed to allow commercial vessels to transit the strait toll-free for 60 days, in exchange for the U.S. lifting its naval blockade of Iranian vessels and easing other pressure. That framework ultimately broke down, reigniting the fighting and the shipping disruption that has persisted since. Iran has separately warned Gulf states that any renewed U.S. attack on Iranian territory would trigger retaliation against regional energy infrastructure, a threat that underscores just how much is riding on whether the current round of negotiations holds. Reading the Standoff Supporters of the administration’s hardline posture argue this latest legislative maneuver is exactly the kind of move that justifies continued pressure on Tehran rather than premature optimism: a regime that claims to be negotiating in good faith on one hand while advancing legislation to permanently exclude American and allied shipping on the other is not a regime that has abandoned its broader objectives, even as it seeks sanctions relief and an end to strikes on its territory. Iran, for its part, continues to frame its demands as a matter of legitimate sovereign control over waters it considers within its jurisdiction — an argument the U.S. and most of the international community reject given the strait’s status as vital international shipping lane carrying roughly a fifth of the world’s oil and gas. What Happens Next The bill remains in committee and is not yet finalized, meaning its ultimate provisions could still shift before a floor vote. In the meantime, the dueling signals — apparent progress with Oman paired with hardline legislation aimed squarely at the U.S. and Israel — leave the broader question of when, or whether, the Strait of Hormuz fully reopens to normal international shipping traffic as unresolved as ever. This story is developing.