Navigating a sea of competing claims: The dual blockade of the Strait of Hormuz and the limits of international law

The 2026 crisis in the Strait of Hormuz has opened a new chapter in the ongoing battle between coastal-state authority and freedom of navigation. It is a legal issue for which the existing international framework is silent. Iran's choice to impose tolls for the safe passage of neutral ships and to use the designated route, followed by the United States of America (US) separately imposing a naval blockade on vessels entering and leaving the Iranian port, drawing on UNCLOS, the law of naval warfare, and the classical neutrality framework. The article maps the gap this crisis has exposed and advances three concrete institutional proposals, i.e., the exercise of power by the UNGA (United Nations General Assembly), a neutral corridor, and the exercise of power by domestic courts, through which the international community might begin to close it.