The Strait of Hormuz and the Limits of Maritime Law

(Bertina Kudrin – Lawfare) For over 40 years, the Strait of Hormuz has been a geopolitical pressure point. Today’s war, however, has prompted a broader question that extends beyond the conflict: whether international law can regulate economic warfare at sea in an era of globalized commerce. The crisis in the Strait of Hormuz demonstrates how the legal frameworks governing maritime chokepoints face limits when military coercion targets the infrastructure of global trade. As a result of the war, commercial navigation through the strait has ground to almost a stop, with tanker transits down to zero on some days and hundreds of vessels remaining outside the strait, unable to reach ports. Multiple attacks by Iran have deterred merchant vessels from navigating the strait, with Iran announcing that the strait will “be under control of the Islamic Republic.” These attacks include Shahed drone attacks, missiles, and mines, and even an Iranian attempt to use a remote-controlled boat laden with explosives to target a tanker. This combination of attacks on shipping and threats to restrict passage is not new. Similar strategies appeared during World War I, when the United Kingdom imposed a sweeping naval blockade in 1914, intercepting merchant shipping bound for German ports in an effort to weaken Germany’s war economy. Similarly, during the Iran-Iraq “Tanker War” of the 1980s, both sides attacked hundreds of oil tankers in the Persian Gulf as part of a strategy to disrupt the other’s energy exports. During the Tanker War, Iran also used mines to threaten commercial shipping lanes—similar to its mining tactics in the Strait of Hormuz today. – The Strait of Hormuz and the Limits of Maritime Law | Lawfare