Shift from Nuclear Goals to Hormuz Control: The conflict that began with aims of degrading Iran’s nuclear capabilities and regional networks has primarily become a struggle over control of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global chokepoint for energy and trade, with Iran establishing a new authority to charge transit fees.

Risks of Monetizing Maritime Chokepoints: Iranian (and briefly floated U.S.) attempts to impose tolls on shipping risk violating international maritime law (including UNCLOS), face insurance barriers due to sanctions, raise global trade costs, and could set a dangerous precedent encouraging other nations to weaponize geography at key straits such as Malacca, Gibraltar, or Taiwan.

Broader Strategic Implications: Successful monetization of Hormuz could embolden similar claims elsewhere and intensify existing sovereignty disputes (e.g., Falklands/Malvinas), where emerging energy projects and great-power competition are already elevating the strategic value of maritime routes and resources.

What began as a campaign to diminish Iran’s nuclear capabilities and weaken its global terrorist networks has morphed mainly into a dispute over control of one of the world’s most important trade routes, the Strait of Hormuz, a global choke point for oil, natural gas, fertilizers and other raw materials. 

Incidentally, Iranians’ hopes of freeing themselves from the bloody tyranny of the ayatollahs fell by the wayside. On the contrary, after countless deaths on all sides and massive destruction of the country and the global economy, this criminal regime has been strengthened, demonstrating, once again, the futility or, rather, the counterproductive nature of wars. 

If the current conflict leaves Hormuz under the permanent control of Iran — or the United States — taking a toll, it could mark the beginning of........

© Eurasia Review