Since the United States began enforcing its maritime blockade on vessels linked to Iran, the dispute in the Strait of Hormuz has shifted beyond a simple question of whether ships are passing or not. The core issue now centres on a deeper question: what actually constitutes “passage” in this context.
Washington defines the blockade as preventing vessels entering or exiting Iranian ports, while allowing transit through the strait towards non Iranian destinations in principle. In contrast, Tehran frames the issue around passage through the strait itself and access to open waters, arguing that Hormuz has not been fully closed, even at the height of the crisis.
From the Iranian perspective, the country does not present itself as the party that shut down the strait, but rather as the actor that has ensured its security for decades.
In this context, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei stated that the security of the strait has long been maintained by Iran, and that the recent instability over the past forty days stems from what he described as an imposed war by the United States and Israel. He added that Iran, alongside coastal states, is capable of securing the waterway if US intervention ends.
Similarly, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that Tehran has provided necessary facilitation for the passage of non hostile vessels, noting that the movement of foreign ships continues in coordination with Iranian authorities.
The Iranian Narrative
Based on this framework, Tehran points to specific maritime movements to argue that the US blockade, which began on Monday, has not resulted in a complete halt of navigation.
According to Fars News Agency, satellite tracking data showed an Iranian container ship reaching open waters while transmitting its identification signal and operating near the Pakistani coastline.
The agency also reported that a large Iranian oil tanker, listed under sanctions by the US Office of Foreign Assets Control, entered Iranian waters on Wednesday morning after passing through open waters and the Strait of Hormuz without concealing its location.
In addition, a bulk cargo vessel carrying food supplies reportedly entered Imam Khomeini Port in the northern Gulf after crossing the waterway. However, no clarification was provided regarding the vessel’s origin or whether it had bypassed US naval forces enforcing the blockade.
From Tehran’s perspective, these incidents indicate that the blockade has not completely halted all maritime activity linked to Iran, and that certain vessels continue to enter or exit.
The American Narrative
In contrast, the United States bases its position on a different definition of the blockade’s scope and objectives. The United States Central Command maintains that the blockade targets vessels entering or leaving Iranian ports and coastal zones, while ensuring that freedom of navigation remains intact for ships transiting through the strait to non Iranian destinations.
Under this interpretation, the presence of an Iranian vessel near Pakistani waters does not constitute a breach of the blockade, as movement towards non Iranian destinations falls outside its primary enforcement scope.
US Central Command confirmed on Wednesday that it had turned back ten vessels, stating that no ship had successfully breached the blockade since its implementation on Monday.
At the operational level, Washington measures success not by halting all maritime movement within the strait, but by disrupting trade flows linked to Iran.
According to Reuters, US Central Command reported that none of the targeted vessels succeeded in bypassing the blockade during the first 24 hours, with six ships complying with directives and turning back.
Meanwhile, Associated Press reported that US Central Command commander Admiral Brad Cooper later declared the blockade “fully implemented”, stating that it had effectively halted maritime commercial activity linked to Iranian ports and coastal areas.
Under the US framework, humanitarian shipments are permitted to pass following inspection, and some neutral vessels already present in Iranian ports were granted a limited window to depart.
Shipping Data and Competing Interpretations
Data from the London Stock Exchange Group and Kpler indicated that no Iranian oil tankers carrying crude for export had passed through the strait since the United States declared control over it.
At the same time, Iran continues to point to selective maritime movements to argue that the blockade has not imposed a complete shutdown of all Iran linked activity.
The dispute therefore extends beyond ship movement to the definition of passage itself. Tehran highlights limited instances of transit to argue that the blockade has not achieved total disruption, while Washington emphasises the breakdown of regular commercial flows linked to Iran as evidence that the blockade remains effective.
This divergence in interpretation, particularly between the US claim of disrupting Iranian trade and its stated allowance for transit to non Iranian ports, provides Tehran with a broader space to challenge the effectiveness of the blockade in the media, even without demonstrating its full collapse.
