Can Trump Really Make Hormuz “American”?
WANA (Aug 15) – Donald Trump made a statement last night that the White House described as a joke only hours later, but its political significance is unlikely to be dismissed so easily: “Very soon, I will declare the Strait of Hormuz U.S. territory.”
Trump had previously said that the United States had “full control” of the strait. In his latest remarks, he went further, saying: “No ship will pass through unless we want it to.”
The key issue is the shift in language. Washington is no longer talking only about a military presence or operational control over Hormuz. The U.S. president is now talking about turning that control into a political claim over the strait itself.
A senior White House official told The Wall Street Journal, however, that Trump had not held any meeting with his advisers about making Hormuz American and that his remarks were made jokingly.
Vessels in the Strait of Hormuz, Iran, May 22, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency)
But even if “U.S. territory” is treated as a joke, the claim that America has the authority to decide which ships can pass through the strait is not.
To understand Trump’s remarks, it is necessary to look back at the developments of the past several months.
Since the start of the U.S. war against Iran on February 28, Hormuz has gradually shifted from a secondary issue to one of the main arenas of confrontation between Tehran and Washington. The United States used a naval blockade as a tool of pressure on Iran and, after a period of reduced tensions, intensified maritime pressure again in July. Iran, in turn, tied the passage of vessels to conditions and coordination with Tehran.
The result is now clearly visible. Reuters has reported that vessel traffic through Hormuz has fallen to only a handful of ships a day, compared with an average of more than 130 vessels per day before the war.
Trump, therefore, is speaking about a strait that has effectively become a battleground over a basic question: Who has the authority to decide who gets through?
Vessels in the Strait of Hormuz near the beach of Bandar Abbas, Iran, May 21, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency)
A navy can maintain a presence in a waterway, stop vessels and monitor shipping routes. But that is fundamentally different from claiming the right to determine the future status of that waterway.
For that reason, the phrase “U.S. territory” may be better understood not as an immediate legal proposal, but as a picture of the order Washington would like to see in Hormuz after the war.
Trump is essentially seeking an answer to a broader question: If the United States claims to have defeated Iran, what does Washington gain from that victory?
Legally, of course, Trump cannot turn Hormuz into American territory through a speech, nor can a presidential order simply change the strait’s legal status. But the political significance of his remarks lies elsewhere: Washington could seek to turn an operational reality into a political one.
Iran Judiciary Chief Rejects Trump Claims, Asserts Control Over Strait of Hormuz
WANA (Aug 15) – The head of Iran’s Judiciary, Gholamhossein Mohseni-Ejei, asserted on Saturday that the Islamic Republic remains the sole sovereign authority over the Strait of Hormuz, dismissing recent statements made by U.S. President Donald Trump regarding the strategic waterway. “In reality, Islamic Iran is the owner and ruler of this vital waterway,” […]
At the same time, Tehran and Muscat have entered a different phase.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has said that Iran and Oman are working on new shipping routes through Hormuz. An initial temporary route is expected to be established, potentially serving as the basis for a permanent arrangement. In recent days, Iran and Oman have reported progress toward an agreement on the route.
In other words, Iran’s response to the U.S. claim is not merely political; it is operational. If ships are to pass through the strait, Iran and Oman are seeking to determine the route and the mechanism governing that passage.
In recent weeks, the debate over Hormuz has largely been framed around a simple question: Will the strait reopen or remain closed?
Baghaei: Negotiations with Oman Are Proceeding Smoothly and Constructively
WANA (Aug 10) – Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei stated during his weekly press conference that discussions between Iran and Oman regarding the Strait of Hormuz were progressing smoothly and constructively. He noted that while an understanding had been reached concerning the traffic route map, technical details regarding a joint statement were still […]
But if Iran and Oman succeed in establishing a new shipping route, the issue will no longer be simply whether Hormuz is open or closed. The real question will be who defines the route, who guarantees its security and under what conditions vessels are allowed to pass.
Trump is now putting forward a political claim to the “right to decide,” while Iran is attempting to establish a practical mechanism for managing maritime traffic before such a claim can become entrenched.
At the same time, Trump has acknowledged that the standoff is contributing to higher fuel prices in the United States. Brent crude rose by $1.45 to $88.52 a barrel on August 14, putting it on track for a weekly gain of around 6 percent.
That means Hormuz does not impose costs on Iran alone. The longer and deeper Washington seeks to maintain control over the waterway, the greater the economic and political costs it may have to absorb at home.
A woman holds an Iranian flag near an anti-U.S. billboard depicting U.S. President Donald Trump and the Strait of Hormuz, in Tehran, Iran, May 25, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency)
Washington may argue that its military power gives it the ability to control maritime traffic. But turning that capability into a sustainable political reality is far more complicated. Hormuz is not simply a military arena; it is a critical global energy chokepoint, and any decision affecting it has direct consequences for oil prices, insurance, shipping and economies around the world.
Trump’s remarks, therefore, cannot be dismissed simply as an unusual joke, nor should they be interpreted as an immediate legal declaration. They can instead be read as a signal about the post-war order and the gains Washington expects from victory.
Whether that ambition can become reality remains an open question.
Perhaps that is why the real test of Trump’s remarks will not come from another speech, but from what happens inside the strait itself.
If shipping resumes in the coming weeks, it will become clear who determines the routes, sets the conditions and controls the mechanisms governing passage. That reality will reveal more than any speech ever could about whether “U.S. territory” was merely a joke—or a new vision Washington has for the Strait of Hormuz.
