Throughout the monthlong conflict, several actors have been accused of profiteering. Fuel retailers raised pump prices within hours of the first strikes, major oil companies stand to gain from crude near $100 a barrel, and marine insurers hiked war‑risk premiums by hundreds of percent after Tehran effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz. But the boldest claim is that Iran has begun charging ships up to $2 million for “safe passage” through the strait.
Lloyd’s List, a leading maritime publication, reported that at least one tanker is believed to have paid. Iranian officials have been inconsistent: some deny the report, while lawmaker Alaeddin Boroujerdi told state TV that such fees form part of a “new sovereign regime” aimed at covering “war costs.”
If true, legal experts say the practice would violate international maritime law. Robert Huebert, an international relations scholar, stressed that freedom of navigation is fundamental to global trade and that fees or obstructions would draw opposition from many states.
Practical obstacles also limit the fee’s immediate impact. With more than 3,200 vessels stranded, Peter Sand of Xeneta said the $2 million charge is not the main barrier — safety is. Even so, the willingness of major importers to enter talks and potentially pay large sums, on top of soaring insurance costs, highlights desperation among fuel‑dependent nations to secure supplies.
How any payments have been made remains unclear given sanctions that restrict Iran’s access to Western financial systems. Reports say India, Pakistan, Iraq, Malaysia and China have been in direct talks with Iranian officials to arrange safe passage. Bloomberg cited unnamed sources saying several vessels have paid to transit, though payments do not appear systematic. One source suggested Tehran might formalize transit fees as part of a peace settlement.
Iran has also informed the International Maritime Organization (IMO) that it will allow “non‑hostile” vessels to transit Hormuz with Tehran’s coordination. Officials say Iran approved only three to five transits per day so far; the new claim is that vessels not considered enemies may pass. The IMO is working on urgent provisional measures to facilitate the safe evacuation of merchant ships confined in the Gulf and emphasizes protecting seafarers’ lives and welfare while encouraging willing ships to transit without attack.
Calls for naval escorts have grown. US President Donald Trump has urged European NATO allies to join a multinational escort mission in the Gulf to protect commercial shipping. Most European countries have so far resisted immediate involvement, though some — including Germany, France and Italy — have indicated willingness to contribute once active hostilities end. The IMO cautions that naval escorts are not a sustainable long‑term solution and that a multilateral diplomatic route to de‑escalation is essential to allow civilian seafarers and ships to operate safely.
Edited by: Srinivas Mazumdaru