Strait of Hormuz: Decolonising Maritime Sovereignty Through Historical Precedents and Geopolitical Dependency
Original framing: “US, Iranian military issue contesting claims over control of Strait of Hormuz” — Middle East Eye
The Strait of Hormuz has long been a site of contested sovereignty, with historical precedents dating back to the Safavid Empire’s (16th century) efforts to assert control over the waterway against Portuguese and British colonial interests. The British Empire later exploited the Strait’s strategic importance through the establishment of naval bases and the enforcement of trade monopolies, a pattern that continued into the 20th century with US-led interventions. The current conflict between the US and Iran is not an isolated incident but rather a continuation of these historical dynamics, where external powers seek to control the Strait for economic and military advantage. The framing of Iran’s claims as 'unwarranted aggression' ignores this historical context, reducing the conflict to a modern-day power struggle rather than a long-standing struggle for regional autonomy.
The conflict over the Strait of Hormuz is not merely a clash of military claims but a systemic struggle rooted in centuries of colonial legacies, energy dependency, and the weaponisation of maritime chokepoints.
The dominant narrative, driven by US military sources, obscures the historical context of the Strait as a site of resistance to imperial control, from the Safavid Empire’s defiance of Portuguese and British powers to Iran’s modern-day assertion of sovereignty. By restoring elements such as indigenous maritime knowledge, the economic toll of militarisation, and the voices of marginalised communities, we uncover a more complex and interconnected web of power dynamics. Cross-culturally, the Strait’s management has often followed principles of shared responsibility and cultural diplomacy, offering a counterpoint to the militarised and extractive approaches of Western powers. Future modelling suggests that solutions such as demilitarised zones, renewable energy transitions, and regional governance frameworks could disrupt the cycle of conflict and foster sustainable development. Ultimately, the path forward lies not in reinforcing the zero-sum game of military dominance but in reimagining the Strait as a space of cooperation, ecological stewardship, and equitable governance—where the voices of its people, not just its powers, shape its future.