U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has drawn a line against any Iranian attempt to charge vessels for transiting the Strait of Hormuz, saying Washington would not accept tolls or fees on a waterway that he described as international.
The statement, reported by Kurdistan24, places the disputed shipping lane back at the center of U.S.-Iran tension. Rubio's comments came as he began a regional tour and as diplomacy around the Strait of Hormuz remained linked to broader negotiations over sanctions, security guarantees and the future of maritime access in the Gulf.
The key point in the supplied report is straightforward: Rubio rejected any right for Iran to charge ships moving through the strait. He said no country is allowed to impose tolls or fees on an international waterway. That framing matters because it turns the dispute from a bilateral complaint into a question of accepted maritime practice.
The report says the comment came after Iran and the United States signed a preliminary agreement to halt their conflict and launched the first round of talks in Switzerland under a 60-day negotiation framework. It also says Iran and Oman discussed the administration of the waterway and potential service charges while stressing their sovereignty over the strait. Those details show that the issue is not just theoretical; it is already part of formal diplomatic bargaining.
The source packet further notes that Iranian officials have said the Strait of Hormuz will not return to its prewar status, while U.S. officials have argued for keeping the route open and maintaining a communication mechanism. That divergence helps explain why Rubio’s statement landed as more than a routine warning. It signaled that Washington sees any fee regime as unacceptable even while broader talks continue.
The shipping context gives the dispute practical weight. Maritime traffic had already been disrupted by blockade conditions during the conflict, and the report says vessel traffic on Monday reached its highest level since the fighting began, though it remained below peacetime norms. That means the route is functioning better than it was, but it is still fragile enough that even the suggestion of formal charges has strategic significance.
The article should not add unsupported economic estimates, insurance figures or legal interpretations beyond the packet. What can be verified is that Rubio used the start of his regional trip to restate a U.S. position: the Strait of Hormuz is not a place for unilateral Iranian fees.
That position also fits the wider diplomatic backdrop described in the report. Negotiations are ongoing, regional governments are tracking the route closely, and the corridor remains one of the most important energy passages in the world. If fees were imposed, they could alter shipping decisions, but the packet stops short of quantifying those effects.
Rubio's statement therefore serves as both a legal argument and a political signal. It says the U.S. intends to resist any Iranian attempt to monetize passage through Hormuz, while negotiations over the future of the route are still underway.
