Iran's latest attacks on commercial shipping came just as the United States and Oman were beginning to steer more vessels through a new southern shipping corridor hugging Oman's coastline, an alternative route designed to move traffic farther from Iran's immediate reach. Former U.S. military commanders and regional analysts told Fox News Digital the timing was no coincidence. They said Iran was trying to preserve one of its greatest strategic advantages as new shipping routes and regional infrastructure begin chipping away at Tehran's leverage over the Strait of Hormuz.
For decades, Iran's ability to threaten shipping through the Strait of Hormuz has given it influence well beyond its borders. But that advantage is increasingly under pressure as Gulf states invest in pipelines that bypass Hormuz and the United States and Oman expand use of the southern corridor. Nearly half of inbound commercial traffic through the strait is already using that route, according to maritime intelligence firm Windward.
What the Right Is Saying
Conservative analysts and Republican lawmakers have warned that Iran's attacks on vessels using the southern corridor represent a deliberate strategy to undermine U.S.-Gulf cooperation rather than an opportunistic response. They say Tehran is trying to preserve its ability to control global oil shipments and extract concessions through intimidation.
Retired Navy Rear Adm. Mark Montgomery told Fox News Digital: "The southern route creates a route they can't toll or control. They felt it necessary to attack it." Former Navy Fifth Fleet commander Vice Adm. Kevin Donegan said the IRGC has been trying to make shipping commercially unworkable rather than halt it outright, arguing that Iran only needs to keep insurance premiums high enough to deter commercial carriers.
President Donald Trump has insisted on social media that there will be "NO TOLLS" after the 60-day negotiating period expires. Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan said: "The management of the strait was working fine before the conflict. Why should we now, as a result of a conflict, accept some novel arrangement?"
What the Left Is Saying
Progressive analysts and some Democratic lawmakers have long argued that Iran's leverage over the Strait of Hormuz stems from decades of regional instability partly fueled by U.S. military presence in the Gulf. They contend that expanding alternative shipping routes represents a diplomatic win that reduces reliance on confrontational postures. Some progressive voices have called for broader negotiations that address underlying tensions, arguing that military pressure alone cannot resolve the structural issues surrounding Gulf security.
Former Assistant Secretary of State David Schenker noted that the negotiations reflect Iran's effort to emerge from the conflict with "a new status quo in the Persian Gulf." Progressives have pointed to this as evidence that diplomatic engagement, not just military deterrence, will be necessary going forward. They argue that the temporary toll-free arrangement and the ceasefire memorandum offer a foundation for more comprehensive talks on regional security architecture.
What the Numbers Show
According to maritime intelligence firm Windward, nearly half of inbound commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz is already using the southern corridor hugging Oman's coastline. The figure represents a significant shift in shipping patterns that could reshape regional economic dynamics for years to come.
Under the memorandum of understanding negotiated after the ceasefire, Iran, Oman and Gulf littoral states are expected to negotiate the strait's "future administration and maritime services" while commercial traffic moves toll-free for 60 days. Saudi Arabia has invested heavily in the East-West Pipeline linking Gulf oil fields to the Red Sea, providing an alternative route that bypasses Hormuz entirely.
After Iran attacked vessels using the southern corridor, the U.S. responded with strikes on Iranian military targets tied to maritime operations. Iran retaliated with attacks on U.S. facilities and regional partners before both sides agreed to halt further strikes and return to negotiations in Doha.
The Bottom Line
The conflict over the Strait of Hormuz reflects competing visions for Gulf security as alternative shipping routes reduce Iran's traditional leverage. The 60-day ceasefire provides a window for negotiations over the strait's future administration, but fundamental disagreements remain between Washington's position that there will be "no tolls" and Tehran's effort to secure a formal role in managing the waterway.
Regional analysts warn that Iran's strategy is not necessarily to close the strait outright but rather to keep insurance costs high enough that commercial shipping companies remain reluctant to return. The outcome of negotiations in Doha will determine whether the southern corridor becomes a permanent fixture of Gulf commerce or whether Iran can reclaim its historical leverage over one of the world's most critical oil shipment routes.
Gulf states are simultaneously accelerating investments in pipelines and alternative infrastructure, signaling they view the current crisis as an inflection point for regional security architecture. The question remains whether any agreement can satisfy both Iran's demand for a formal role and Gulf allies' insistence that the previous management arrangement worked adequately.