The escalating conflict involving Iran is prompting accusations of profiteering, as fuel retailers, major oil companies and maritime insurers reportedly capitalize on the turmoil. The crisis, sparked by attacks ordered by Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu on February 28, has sent shockwaves through global energy markets and raised concerns about potential disruptions to vital shipping lanes.
Adding to the complexity, reports suggest Iran may be charging vessels up to $2 million for “safe passage” through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical waterway for global oil and gas supplies. The claims, initially reported by Iran’s closure of the Strait of Ormuz, have led to a surge in insurance premiums and heightened anxiety among shipping companies.
Lloyd’s List, a respected maritime publication, reported last week that at least one tanker is believed to have already made the payment. While several Iranian officials have denied the reports, Alaeddín Boruyerdí, a member of the Iranian parliament, stated on Iranian state television that such fees were being collected as part of a “modern sovereign regime” in the strait, framing the measure as a way to cover the “costs of the war.”
Such a levy would constitute a violation of international maritime law, according to Robert Huebert, an expert in international relations at the University of Calgary in Canada. “The freedom of navigation is the foundation of international maritime commerce, the ability to transit these areas without any kind of impediment,” Huebert said on a Canadian podcast on March 24. “If a toll were imposed, practically all countries would directly oppose it.”
Despite the high fee, Peter Sand, chief analyst at Xeneta, a maritime analysis firm based in Copenhagen, downplayed its significance, stating that the danger of transiting the Strait of Ormuz remains the primary concern. “Even if it seems high, the transit charge of two million dollars is not the essential factor,” Sand explained to DW. “What matters is that it remains dangerous to pass through Ormuz.”
The willingness of major oil and gas importers to engage in direct negotiations and pay a substantial fee per vessel, alongside soaring insurance costs, underscores the growing desperation of fuel-dependent nations to secure even minimal supplies through the strait. “Some countries may aim for to pay,” Sand added. “It’s a small additional cost to ensure an uninterrupted energy supply.”
Lloyd’s List noted that the method of payment remains unclear, given that Iran is subject to international sanctions, making it challenging to receive payments in dollars through Western financial channels. The publication reported that India, Pakistan, Iraq, Malaysia, and China are in direct contact with Iranian officials to arrange safe passage for their ships.
Bloomberg, also reporting on the matter, cited anonymous sources claiming that several vessels had already paid to transit the strait, although the payments do not appear to be systematic. According to a Bloomberg source, Tehran is considering formalizing the payment of this fee as part of any potential peace agreement with the United States and Israel.
On March 24, Iran sent a letter to member states of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), stating it would now allow the passage of “non-hostile” vessels through Ormuz, with coordination from Tehran. “So far, Iran has approved between three and five transits per day,” Sand stated. “Tehran is now saying the strait is open to those who are not enemies of Iran.”
An IMO spokesperson told DW that the organization is working to establish an “urgent and provisional measure to facilitate the safe evacuation of merchant ships currently confined in the Gulf region.” The IMO also warned that protecting the lives and well-being of stranded sailors is crucial and is pressing for ships willing to transit the Strait of Ormuz to be able to do so without being attacked.
Looking ahead, U.S. President Donald Trump has been urging European NATO allies to join a multinational patrol or naval escort mission in the Gulf to safeguard international maritime transport. However, European countries have largely resisted immediate participation, though many, including Germany, France, and Italy, have signaled their willingness to contribute to an escort or naval patrol mission once hostilities cease. The IMO stated that while naval escorts have been used previously, even during recent attacks by Iran-backed Houthi rebels on ships in the Red Sea, they do not provide a “sustainable or long-term solution.”
“There needs to be a multilateral solution to reduce tension and allow the evacuation of civilian sailors and ships to a safe place,” the IMO spokesperson said.
(cp/ms)
