Controversy over the Future of Managing the Strait of Hormuz
The file of the Strait of Hormuz has returned to the forefront of the scene with the resumption of negotiations between the United States and Iran via the Qatari capital, Doha, amid ongoing regional tensions and the overlap of political and military tracks, alongside growing debate over Article Five of the memorandum of understanding between the two sides, and what it may carry in terms of implications related to the future management of one of the world’s most important shipping lanes.
US and Middle East affairs analyst Paul Salem addressed the dimensions of this article, noting that it reflects the complexities of the negotiating landscape, amid the overlap of strategic considerations with calculations of regional partnerships, and the divergence of views surrounding the future management of the strait.
Article Five raises concerns about the Iranian role
Salem considered that Article Five of the memorandum of understanding includes, according to his analysis, what he described as “extremely dangerous American concessions” in favor of Iran, explaining that it grants Tehran a pivotal role in managing the Strait of Hormuz.
He added that the article stipulates Iran taking responsibility for opening the strait and overseeing the removal of obstacles that may affect navigation, in addition to negotiating with the Sultanate of Oman regarding the future formula for managing the shipping lane.
He pointed out that these provisions, according to his reading, reflect an important shift in the nature of the proposed arrangements for managing the strait, given its strategic position and importance for global trade and energy flows.
International law imposes restrictions on implementation
Salem explained that the same article restricts Iran’s role by committing it to the provisions of recognized international law, considering that this wording makes implementation mechanisms subject to differing interpretations among the concerned parties.
He added that this makes Article Five, in his description, a “complex and booby-trapped article,” as it may open the door to disputes over how it is applied and the limits of the powers it grants to each party.
Shared interests limit escalation opportunities
Salem believed that developments related to the Strait of Hormuz do not necessarily reflect a conflict that threatens the entire course of negotiations, explaining that keeping the strait open serves the interests of all parties, whether the United States, Iran, or Gulf states, given its strategic importance.
He added that the dispute is not centered on the principle of keeping the strait open, but rather on the nature of the role Iran will play in its management, as well as the size of financial revenues and potential fees that Tehran may obtain from this arrangement, or the mechanism for sharing them with the Sultanate of Oman and other relevant regional parties.
United News Network – UNN Arabic
An independent media platform providing reliable news and objective analysis, aiming to promote peace and cultural dialogue around the world, to convey the truth and build bridges of understanding between peoples.
For more news, you can visit our main page:
Author: Consultant Faisal Al-Mutairi.
Publication date: June 30, 2026.
Update date: June 2026.
