Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps rejected two temporary shipping corridors proposed by the UN's International Maritime Organization and Oman to move vessels through the Strait of Hormuz. The plan sought to evacuate hundreds of ships that had been stranded for months as mines blocked the established traffic-separation route.
The proposed coordinates described one northern lane through mined Iranian waters and another, more navigable southern option in Omani waters. The IMO and Oman said movements would need scheduling, including assigned transit days and waiting areas, so the large backlog could pass in an organised way.
Oman's National Hydrographic Office issued the coordinates, but the IRGC response indicated that Tehran had not agreed. The force called alternative routes dangerous and unacceptable, warned ships not to leave approved channels, and said coordination with the IRGC Navy was required for passage.
The rejection complicated a recent increase in traffic following a memorandum of understanding between Iran and the United States. Under that arrangement, Tehran promised its best efforts to restore free navigation and not impose tolls for at least 60 days. A separate attack on a vessel later on June 25 pushed oil prices higher, illustrating how quickly security events could reverse market expectations.
Oman and Iran were simultaneously discussing the strait's longer-term administration. Their foreign ministries formed a working group, but their approaches were not identical. Oman considered a system of voluntary payments for environmental and safety services, drawing on mechanisms used around the Malacca and Singapore straits.
Muscat wanted any arrangement to meet the requirements of the maritime convention’s Article 43 under UN law. Gulf and Western governments warned against compulsory fees, which they argued would conflict with freedom of navigation. Oman, a party to the convention, maintained that contributions under its concept would be voluntary rather than tolls.
Iran viewed control of the waterway as leverage in wider negotiations about sanctions, frozen assets and its nuclear programme. Parliament speaker and chief negotiator Mohammad Ghalibaf said management of Hormuz would not return to the system that existed before the regional war began on February 28. Saudi Arabia and Qatar opposed tolls, although some Saudi diplomats were reportedly open to lawful, limited service fees.
The June 25 decision did not end negotiations, but it prevented the UN-backed evacuation plan from operating as proposed. It exposed the gap between an urgent humanitarian and commercial effort to free ships and Iran's insistence that no route could function without its military's approval.
The existing route’s mine danger made the temporary lanes more than an administrative convenience. Without agreed safe coordinates and sequencing, trapped ships could not simply depart independently. Iran’s objection therefore left both a political disagreement and an immediate navigation problem unresolved.
