To understand Iran, one must look beyond the map and delve into its history. A single strait cannot encapsulate the complexities of this nation. Iran's perspective is always focused on the pathways that shape power dynamics, wealth distribution, and order.
For centuries, Persia stood at the crossroads of Eastern and Western civilizations. Rather than expanding its territory, it sought to control the routes and manage the flow of goods. This historical memory persists today, with the modern Hormuz Strait serving as a contemporary manifestation of that legacy.
Recently, some members of the Iranian parliament proposed the idea of purchasing oil passing through Hormuz at $110 and selling it for $200. This notion is not a mere coincidence; it reflects a deeper issue of control rather than just pricing, resembling a geopolitical declaration more than simple market logic. The ancient Silk Road principle that those who control the pathways set the prices has been revived. Iran does not see itself merely as a Middle Eastern nation; it carries a collective memory of being the master of the routes and aims to reclaim that central position.
Ancient Persia accumulated wealth through two primary methods: tolls and intermediary trade. Those who controlled the routes imposed fees on passing caravans, blocking or plundering them if they refused to pay. The second method involved securing goods from mountainous regions, re-pricing them at strategic locations for profit. These practices were not just commercial strategies but exercises of structural power, determining who could pass, what costs were legitimate, and what was permissible. Today's strategy regarding the Hormuz Strait closely mirrors these two historical pillars.
The 'toll' that Iran refers to is not merely monetary; it encompasses currency systems, payment networks, and financial sovereignty. By mentioning not only the dollar but also the yuan, euro, and rial, Iran signals its intent to diversify payment systems. This approach resembles the financial and information networks established by Sogdian merchants along the ancient Silk Road. When logistics, finance, information, and diplomacy converge into a single network, the pathway transforms from a mere corridor into a platform. Iran is currently attempting to redesign that platform.
From a logical standpoint, this strategy appears coherent. The Hormuz Strait is a critical artery, with over 20% of the world's maritime oil traffic passing through it. While alternative routes exist, they cannot be fully substituted in the short term. Historically, nations controlling such passages have demanded costs.
However, the challenge lies in the discrepancy between logical validity and practical feasibility.
The most significant difference between ancient and modern times is the nature of the adversary. In the past, the opposition consisted of private trading groups with limited means of retaliation. Today, the adversaries are nation-states, particularly the United States and the G7, backed by global naval power. International law exists, and both financial sanctions and military responses are in play. While the power of those controlling the routes remains relevant, the costs of exercising that power have escalated dramatically compared to the past.
This is where the concept of 'counter-blockade' by the United States comes into play. Any attempt to close the Hormuz Strait would inevitably clash with the force that seeks to keep it open. The U.S. possesses the capability to militarily ensure the passage remains open if necessary, going beyond merely safeguarding the strait. In a structure where maritime insurance, financial networks, and global shipping orders are intertwined, a blockade risks self-harm. The longer a blockade persists, the more accelerated the release of strategic oil reserves and the establishment of alternative supply chains become, potentially diminishing the strategic value of the passage itself in the long run.
The figure of $200 proposed by Iran encapsulates this dilemma. To raise prices, supply must be restricted. However, blocking supply prompts immediate international responses. Consequently, attempts to increase prices paradoxically deplete negotiating power. Historically, excessive tolls on the Silk Road spurred the exploration of new routes.
The transition from the overland Silk Road to maritime routes, exemplified by Portugal's discovery of the Cape of Good Hope, serves as a reminder of this lesson. When those in control of the pathways succumb to greed, the routes themselves can vanish.
Shifting focus to the present, these dynamics are already being tested in reality. The Hormuz Strait has become not just a historical metaphor but the epicenter of a shaking global economy. As of 2026, the strait embodies a battleground where actual control, blockades, and counter-blockades are simultaneously in effect. Iran selectively opens and closes the strait, controlling passage, while the U.S. responds by blocking vessels entering Iranian ports.
Maritime traffic has noticeably decreased, with some vessels turning back or rerouting, and others engaging in what is termed 'shadow navigation' by turning off their signals. Oil prices have reacted sharply, spiking in the short term, causing ripple effects in financial and maritime insurance markets. This situation represents not merely a blockade but a 'modern Silk Road war' over control of the passage.
Iran's strategy is clear: it does not completely sever the routes but maximizes uncertainty. Some vessels are allowed passage while others are blocked, simultaneously controlling prices and instilling fear. This is the essence of the 'gray zone gateway control strategy.' However, a crucial difference from the past is emerging. In ancient times, those who controlled the routes held absolute power; today, that is not the case. The U.S. is responding by blocking Iranian ports without directly closing the strait. Thus, while Iran holds the 'entrance,' the U.S. has effectively seized control of the 'exit.'
This scenario transcends mere military conflict; it represents a high-stakes strategic game over 'control of the pathways.' Iran's calculation is straightforward: it aims to maintain the strait's accessibility while asserting control over price ceilings. The idea of buying oil at $110 and selling it at $200 encapsulates a strategy to secure pricing power through control of the passage.
Yet, reality is far more complex than logic suggests. The longer a blockade lasts, the more the international community will respond. The simultaneous release of strategic oil reserves, diversification of supply chains, and enhanced military escorts are all underway. Some logistics are shifting to long-distance detours, increasing costs, but the flow is not entirely halted. Ultimately, while control may raise prices, it simultaneously undermines the exclusive value of the passage.
This is where China's calculations come into play. As a friendly nation to Iran and the world's largest energy importer, China's interests are at stake. While Iran's control may enhance short-term negotiating power, long-term instability poses a significant threat to China's economy. Consequently, China adopts a 'dual strategy,' cooperating in payment networks while promoting diversification in supply chains, neither fully supporting Iran nor completely aligning with U.S. interests.
In conclusion, Iran, the U.S., and China are each pursuing the same goal through different means: 'dominating the pathways.' Iran seeks physical control, the U.S. aims to leverage military and financial order, and China focuses on payment and supply chain dominance. The point of collision for these three powers is the Hormuz Strait.
The essence of this conflict is not about guns and missiles but about who opens the pathways, who blocks them, and who determines the costs. The answer to this question remains unresolved. Iran is holding firm, the U.S. is tightening its grip, and China is calculating its next move.
One undeniable fact remains: control of the pathways equates to power. However, when that control becomes excessively stringent, the world will inevitably seek alternative routes. Iran's 5,000-year history has repeatedly demonstrated this truth. Now, that ancient principle is once again being put to the test.
※ This article was generated using AI and has been reviewed by an editor.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.