Trump offers US protection in the Strait of Hormuz for a 20% fee. How would that work?
A New Proposal for Strait of Hormuz Security: The Guardian Fee
Trump offers US protection in the Strait – Following the outbreak of hostilities between the United States, Israel, and Iran, maritime operators have increasingly demanded enhanced vessel protection. The Strait of Hormuz, a vital commercial corridor currently under Iranian influence, has become a focal point for shipping concerns. President Donald Trump has stepped forward with an ambitious solution, proposing that American forces will safeguard maritime traffic through this strategic passage—provided shippers agree to a substantial financial contribution.
According to a statement published on his Truth Social platform on Monday, the president outlined his vision for American involvement. He declared that the United States would henceforth be recognized as “THE GUARDIAN OF THE HORMUZ STRAIT.” Under this arrangement, cargo operators would need to compensate the nation for security expenditures. Trump emphasized that this reimbursement would amount to twenty percent of all cargo values moving through the waterway. He framed the charge as a matter of fairness, noting that the funds would cover every expense required to maintain safety in what he described as one of the world’s most unstable maritime regions.
Questions of Implementation and Cost
Despite the clear announcement, numerous practical and legal uncertainties remain. John McCown, who serves as a senior fellow at the Center for Maritime Strategy, highlighted that potential customers need clarity on pricing before committing to the service. McCown pointed out that Trump’s social media message left several calculation methods ambiguous. He posed critical questions regarding the fee structure: Would the twenty percent represent a portion of the total blockade expenses divided among participating vessels? Alternatively, might it reflect a share of the Navy’s escort operations? Another possibility involves applying the percentage directly to the commercial value of transported merchandise.
The White House has yet to provide additional clarification when approached by CNN for more specifics. McCown, who previously led the shipping logistics firm Trailer Bridge as its chief executive, expressed skepticism about market acceptance. He noted that commercial shippers typically allocate between two and three percent of their cargo’s worth toward carrier fees. A twenty percent charge would represent roughly ten times that standard rate, potentially rendering the service financially prohibitive for many operators.
Legal Framework and Historical Precedents
Insurance companies may ultimately determine the viability of this arrangement. If insurers consider the security threats within the strait too severe, they might decline to cover vessels regardless of whether shipowners are prepared to purchase American protection services.
James Kraska, a professor specializing in international maritime law at the US Naval War College, offered insight into the legal dimensions of the proposal. He explained that the Strait of Hormuz qualifies as an international waterway, granting ships the right of free passage according to established legal principles. Iran has occasionally levied what it termed service charges on passing vessels, though such requirements are not currently active. Kraska characterized those Iranian charges as tolls, noting that international law does not permit this practice.
Regarding Trump’s announcement, Kraska interpreted the message as an invitation rather than a mandate. He suggested the United States is proposing to convoy ships through the region while allowing operators to choose whether to participate and pay the associated costs. This voluntary approach would align with international legal standards, distinguishing it from compulsory transit fees that could restrict cargo movement.
“The last time the world faced a situation like this was when Denmark charged foreign vessels for passing through Øresund, from the early 1400s through the mid-1800s. Dues were also assessed on declared cargo value,” said Bjorn Vang Jensen, executive industry adviser at Xeneta, a freight analytics platform.
Jensen added an interesting historical note, observing that American intervention eventually ended Denmark’s toll collection system. While Kraska acknowledged that Trump’s proposal would likely satisfy legal requirements, he cautioned that legality does not automatically equate to advisability. The market response will ultimately reveal whether shippers find the Guardian Fee acceptable or prohibitively expensive in the current geopolitical climate.
