Haydari Nazar
25
This is a very important point, and I agree with you that the Iranian statement should not be interpreted merely as a threat to close the Strait. The declared position since March, and one that was reiterated later, is that the Strait of Hormuz will not return to the arrangements that existed before the war.
On March 25, the spokesperson for the Khatam al-Anbiya Headquarters said that the situation in the Strait “will not return to the past,” and that permission for passage would be determined by Iran. Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf repeated in June that the Strait would not return to its previous operating status and that Iran would manage the waterway under new arrangements.
In my view, this Iranian statement therefore carries a strategic dimension far broader than simply closing the Strait:
- Before the war: Passage through Hormuz was treated as something close to routine.
- After the war: Tehran wants passage to become subject to a new security and political framework.
- Vessels belonging to adversaries: They may face restrictions or be denied passage.
- Neutral or friendly countries: Their vessels could continue to pass, but under arrangements established by Iran and Oman.
- The core message: Iran does not want to return to a situation in which freedom of navigation through Hormuz is effectively understood as an unconditional right for all parties.
WILAYAH NEWS VOICE OF THE GLOBAL AWAKENING
