The Illegality Of Restricting The Strait Of Hormuz – OpEd

Eurasia Review | Richard J. Connaro II

Iran is attempting to reclassify foreign navigation through the Strait of Hormuz from transit passage to innocent passage, seeking to impose restrictions, mandatory reporting, and transit levies on international maritime traffic. This legal manoeuvre directly threatens global energy commerce and military mobility through a critical maritime chokepoint. Under Part III of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, transit passage guarantees continuous, unimpeded movement for commercial and naval vessels.

Coastal state suspension of transit is strictly prohibited. Operationally, this regime permits submarines to navigate submerged and military aircraft to fly in formation without prior authorization from littoral authorities. Conversely, an innocent passage regime enables coastal states to halt surface transits, prohibit submerged maneuvers, and restrict foreign military exercise routines. Arabian Gulf partners are preserving these navigational rights by actively executing surface, subsurface, and airborne transits across the waterway to prevent Tehran from unilaterally rewriting customary maritime law.

Comment

Reclassifying the Strait of Hormuz from transit passage to innocent passage fundamentally alters tactical risk for naval task groups operating under U.S. Naval Forces Central Command. Under transit passage, carrier strike groups maintain defensive screening by launching combat air patrols and deploying nuclear attack submarines submerged through the strait. Reverting to innocent passage would force submarines to surface and restrict flight operations, stripping naval forces of integrated force protection exactly when transiting through restrictive, anti-access chokepoints.

This tactical vulnerability echoes the 1987–1988 Operation Earnest Will, where U.S. Navy surface escorts faced severe operational constraints while protecting reflagged Kuwaiti tankers against Iranian minefields and speedboat attacks. Surrendering normal operating modes in these waters directly compromises the anti-submarine and air defence posture of the U.S. Fifth Fleet.

Strategic Question for Discussion

If Iran attempts to enforce innocent passage rules by intercepting unannounced submerged transits in the Strait of Hormuz, which operational risk presents the greater challenge for the U.S. Fifth Fleet — compromising submarine force protection or risking immediate tactical escalation?

The available evidence points toward submarine force protection as the primary operational vulnerability, as surfacing attack submarines during strait transits exposes high-value assets to coastal anti-ship missile batteries. My assessment is that naval commanders will prioritize maintaining submerged normal modes despite escalation hazards, as surrendering defensive screening compromises the survivability of carrier strike groups in contested waters.

Share your assessment in the comments below.

Read the original article