US could 'administer' Hormuz: Report lays out radical post-war scenarios

The United States could face a pivotal choice regarding the Strait of Hormuz post-war: continuing security operations and managing shipping through the waterway, or relinquishing responsibility to regional powers, potentially resulting in renewed disruptions. The debate gained urgency following President Donald Trump's assertions of control over the strait and ambitious ideas for its management.

A Congressional Research Service (CRS) report investigated the strategic implications for shipping and energy, while congressional hearings focused on the cost and feasibility of maintaining a prolonged US military presence. Trump's rhetoric has moved beyond demanding Iran reopen the waterway, with proposals including "Project Freedom," where US forces would escort civilian vessels through the strait.

Trump also claimed the strait was being secretly used for weeks, and proposed a 20% charge on cargo to fund US security operations. The report considered various scenarios, such as the US seeking its own "formal administration" of the Strait if Iran agrees or becomes unable to continue fighting, which could involve economic incentives like fees or investments.

Another scenario involves a cooperative administration with Iran and/or Gulf Arab states, similar to the Strait of Malacca's mechanism, financing critical navigational infrastructure through voluntary contributions. However, the report also outlines less interventionist possibilities, such as prolonged instability due to Iranian attacks and US retaliatory strikes disrupting traffic, or the US reprioritizing shipping away from Hormuz, reducing resources devoted to keeping the waterway open.

The stakes are immense, as the Strait is a critical gateway between the Arabian Gulf and global markets, handling about 27% of global maritime oil trade.