Edward Fishman writes:

The United States and Iran have a deal: For 60 days, Tehran will allow ships to sail through the Strait of Hormuz without charging tolls; in return, Washington will lift its naval blockade, waive sanctions on Iranian oil and help Iran get access to its frozen assets. Negotiations on the future of Iran’s nuclear program are also set to begin.

Even if the deal holds, Iran is poised to emerge from the war battered militarily and economically but strengthened strategically, the newly empowered gatekeeper of the world’s most important energy chokepoint. Other countries will take note — and seek their own chokepoints to exploit.

Though President Trump has declared that the Strait of Hormuz will be “permanently toll-free,” Iran’s grip on the waterway is unlikely to loosen. Over the past three months, its authorities have reportedly charged some ships up to $2 million for passage. Even if fees were much lower than that — say, several hundred thousand dollars per ship, roughly in line with rates at the Suez and Panama Canals — Iran would still receive a multibillion-dollar annuity, giving Tehran an overwhelming financial incentive to preserve its new status.

Controlling the strait also offers Iran considerable strategic benefits. Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi of Japan is just one of the many world leaders who have appealed to the Iranian government to secure passage for tankers carrying oil to her country, signaling that Tehran is now in a position to cut side deals with governments all over the world. Over time, the Islamic Republic could use its newfound leverage to obtain further sanctions relief and other diplomatic concessions. And of course, any threat to close the strait — explicit or implicit — will provide Iran with a powerful deterrent against military strikes or economic pressure.

Shipowners and energy traders will bristle at paying fees to Iran, but the costs are unlikely to be prohibitive. For a large oil tanker, $2 million amounts to about $1 per barrel of oil, less than a typical credit card transaction fee. Iran’s threats to shipping in the strait have sent insurance rates soaring, with some premiums estimated to have risen to $7.5 million per voyage. If paying Iran guarantees safe passage, insurance costs could fall, offsetting much of the toll. The Greek shipping magnate Evangelos Marinakis, who manages a fleet of over 200 vessels and tankers, has said that he would prefer paying a toll to “all this hassle.”

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates may grudgingly reach a similar conclusion. They would be among the biggest losers if their greatest geopolitical rival maintains control over the waterway, but they are also desperate to see the Strait of Hormuz reopened so they can restart their lucrative oil exports at full tilt. These Gulf states could accept an Iranian toll as a necessary, if temporary, evil, as it would buy them time to build new pipelines that circumvent the strait, a project that could take a decade. The deputy prime minister of Qatar has already conceded that a “temporary” fee is “negotiable.”

Though Mr. Trump has been adamant that neither Iran nor its cross-strait neighbor, Oman, can administer the waterway, the past few months have revealed that the United States cannot simply force the strait open. When the U.S. military tried to do so in early May, Iran retaliated aggressively. Within 36 hours, Mr. Trump suspended the mission. That same day, Tehran unveiled the Persian Gulf Strait Authority, a government body to oversee traffic through the waterway. Since then, Iran has steadily entrenched its control. [Continue reading…]