"Hormuz" Free or "Gulf" Hostage: No Opening on Conditions

Working to reopen the Strait of Hormuz with Iranian consent and under Iranian control, based on Omani-Iranian understandings and concessions made to ensure its continued opening on Iranian terms, would not constitute a genuine solution to the crisis. Rather, it could turn the strait into a hostage to Iran’s decisions, making the security and economy of the Gulf, as well as the future of its generations, dependent on a political mood that can change at any moment. The problem is not merely about reopening the strait, but about the more critical question: who holds the authority to decide on its opening and closure, and who can wield it as a pressure card at will? If navigation decisions in the Strait of Hormuz become subject to Iranian will, Gulf states will not achieve genuine security; instead, they will shift from the risk of war to the risk of continuous extortion. Trade, energy, investments, and development will remain hostage to any political or military dispute with Iran. Indeed, accepting Iranian control over the strait may, under certain circumstances, be more dangerous than continuing confrontation. War, regardless of its cost, has a beginning and an end. In contrast, turning the strait into a permanent pressure card means that the Gulf’s economy, global energy security, and the region’s future will remain under constant threat. We do not want the Strait of Hormuz opened by Iranian will, nor on Iranian terms, nor do we want to replace war with an agreement that makes Iran the de facto decision-maker in the strait. What is required is to guarantee freedom of international navigation in the strait without the oversight or dominance of any state, ensuring that Hormuz remains an open global passage that Iran or any other country cannot use as a political or economic pressure card. Furthermore, continued Iranian or U.S. interference in Gulf affairs will not create lasting stability; rather, it will turn the Gulf into an open arena for conflict, placing its security, development, economy, and markets at the mercy of the possibilities of war and escalation. Therefore, Gulf states must reconsider all arrangements that tie their security to external powers, whether Iran, the United States, or others, and work toward building an independent Gulf decision-making framework to protect navigation, energy, the economy, and security. The Gulf does not need oversight from anyone, nor does it need to be a hostage to great-power or regional rivalries; instead, it needs a unified Gulf force and independent decision-making to protect the interests of its peoples. A complete Gulf withdrawal from any arrangements that make Gulf security hostage to Iran or any external power may be the closest solution to building an independent Gulf security architecture that protects the strait, guarantees freedom of navigation, and preserves development, stability, and the future of Gulf generations. The Strait of Hormuz does not belong to Iran, nor is it a bargaining chip in the hands of any state; it is a vital passage for the entire world, and freedom of navigation within it must remain a principle not subject to extortion or political bargaining.