Trump Issues Warning to Iran on Reports of Fees in Strait of Hormuz During Ceasefire

By International Desk

*Published: April 10, 2026*

A two-week ceasefire between the United States and Iran, brokered by Pakistan, took effect following a six-week conflict initiated by U.S. and Israeli military strikes on Iranian targets. The agreement requires Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz to international shipping without impediments, facilitating negotiations. However, reports have emerged alleging Iranian interference in the strait, including unconfirmed claims of attempts to charge transit fees to vessels.

Oman, which borders the southern side of the Strait of Hormuz, denied a report suggesting it had agreed with Iran to impose tolls during the ceasefire period. Omani Transport Minister Ahmed al-Shanfari stated that Oman could not enforce such tolls due to its obligations under international maritime agreements. The denial came after social media posts referenced an Associated Press report—citing an unnamed regional official involved in negotiations—claiming the ceasefire plan allowed Iran and Oman to charge fees on transiting ships, with Iran using proceeds for reconstruction. No independent verification of the AP report was immediately available.

Amid these reports, former U.S. President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social on April 9, 2026, criticizing Iran's handling of maritime traffic in the strait. "Iran is doing a very poor job, dishonorable some would say, of allowing Oil to go through the Strait of Hormuz. This is not the agreement we have!" Trump wrote. He added, "There are reports that Iran is charging fees to tankers going through the Hormuz Strait — They better not be and, if they are, they better stop now!"

The White House account on X, formerly Twitter, reposted the statement later that day, attributing it directly to Trump. The remarks underscore ongoing tensions during the ceasefire, which aims to prevent further escalation after Iran's prior disruptions to strait traffic during the conflict.

The Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint for global oil shipments, is governed by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Article 44 of UNCLOS states that "States bordering straits shall not hamper transit passage and shall give appropriate publicity to any dangers to navigation within or over the strait." The convention specifies that transit passage "shall not be impeded" and "there shall be no suspension of transit passage." Iran, as a non-signatory to UNCLOS, has historically contested aspects of the treaty but has allowed transit under established international norms.

Historical precedents highlight recurring disputes over the strait. During the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s, known as the "Tanker War," both sides targeted oil tankers, prompting the U.S. to deploy warships to escort neutral vessels. In one operation, U.S. forces sank several Iranian naval vessels after attacks on American-flagged ships.

In 2008, Iranian officials threatened to close the strait in response to international sanctions, a statement U.S. officials described as potentially constituting an act of war. Similarly, in 2012, following the European Union's oil embargo on Iran, Tehran reiterated threats to block the strait, which would have disrupted exports from Persian Gulf producers. In response, the U.S., alongside France and the United Kingdom, conducted naval transits through the strait with aircraft carriers and warships. Iran did not follow through on the closure.

Since then, Iran has been accused of harassing and seizing foreign vessels in the strait and nearby waters, often in retaliation to sanctions or military pressures. Notable incidents include the 2019 seizure of British and other tankers amid heightened U.S.-Iran tensions.

Compliance with the current ceasefire remains contested. While reports focus on alleged Iranian fees and interference, Iranian officials, including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), have denied violations and accused the U.S. and Israel of post-ceasefire strikes on Iranian positions. Other media outlets have documented mutual claims of breaches, with the U.S. alleging Iranian non-compliance in reopening the strait fully, and Iran countering with assertions of continued aggression from American and Israeli forces.

The ceasefire's success hinges on adherence to its terms, particularly unimpeded transit through the strait, which carries about 20% of global oil trade. Analysts note that any sustained Iranian controls could prompt international naval responses, as seen historically. Negotiations are scheduled to continue, with Vice President J.D. Vance reportedly outlining U.S. positions ahead of in-person talks this weekend.

No official confirmation of Iranian fee collection has been provided by independent maritime authorities, such as the International Maritime Organization. Shipping trackers, including those from Lloyd's List Intelligence, show increased tanker traffic since the ceasefire but report occasional delays attributed to inspections rather than formal tolls.

The situation echoes long-standing challenges in the strait, where geopolitical tensions have periodically threatened supply chains. Previous U.S. administrations have varied in their responses, from diplomatic pressure to military escorts. The current fragile truce, coming after direct conflict, tests whether diplomatic channels can resolve underlying disputes over sanctions, nuclear activities, and regional influence.

As of April 9, 2026, no further Iranian actions or U.S. responses had been announced, leaving open the question of whether the reported issues will derail talks or lead to enforcement measures.

*(Word count: 852)*