Total chaos... 3 paths to cross the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran seeks to control it despite the agreement

- “If any ship attempts to cross the Strait of Hormuz without our permission... or outside the specified route, it is responsible for any consequences.”

This warning was issued on Thursday by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard to ships passing through the Strait of Hormuz - a vital and strategic corridor for transporting oil - which is now emerging as one of the biggest tests of the agreement concluded between Iran and the United States to end the war between them. Just hours later, the Singapore-flagged container ship Ever Lovely was struck by an Iranian drone, a US official told Ofoq News.

President Donald Trump described this attack - the first of its kind on a ship since the signing of the agreement - as a "foolish violation of the ceasefire agreement." In response, on Friday, the US military carried out strikes against Iranian military targets around the Strait of Hormuz.

But a US official played down the possibility of escalation in the wake of the strikes, telling the Ufoq News network that they do not reflect the return of major combat operations. The official Iranian channel Press TV reported that the Revolutionary Guard announced that it had targeted American military sites in the region in response to strikes on Friday, but the American military did not confirm that these strikes had occurred.

Bahrain also announced attacks by Iranian drones on its territory early on Saturday morning, without the nature of the target being targeted. The ceasefire agreement stipulates that Iran will make “arrangements in which it will use its best efforts” to ensure the safe passage of commercial ships through the Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas supplies pass.

Ensuring unhindered freedom of navigation was the main concession Iran made to the United States. But for Iran, reopening the Strait does not mean giving up control over it.

A vaguely worded clause in the agreement stipulates that Iran and the Sultanate of Oman will work together to “determine the future management” of the waterway, effectively giving Tehran an official role in its management. As negotiations with the United States continue, Thursday’s strike is an indication of Iran’s intention to impose its conditions on the Strait, and determine the routes and timing of ships’ transit.

The Revolutionary Guards did not recognize the routes not approved by Tehran, describing them as “unacceptable,” “extremely dangerous,” and “prohibited,” and urging all ships to coordinate exclusively with its naval forces to ensure safe transit. Meanwhile, Iran's recently established Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA) has issued regulations requiring ships to fill out an authorization form via email in exchange for a "guarantee of safe passage" that includes insurance coverage.

Ofoq News Network attempted to contact the Persian Gulf Strait Authority, but emails sent to the authority were returned without a response. Three different ship routes have now emerged in this narrow seaway, and different parties are competing to regulate the movement of dozens of ships through the waterway, which is 21 miles wide.

One of the southern routes passes through the waters opposite the Sultanate of Oman. A second route - which was used before the war - passes through the middle of the strait, while a third route located to the north is under Iranian control. This presents ship operators with a difficult choice about which route to take.

“All of this is causing great confusion regarding safe navigation in those waters,” Dimitris Maniatis, CEO of Marisex, a consulting firm specializing in marine risks, told Ufoq News, adding that “the current situation is very dangerous.” Shipping companies fear US sanctions The lack of clarity on the route to follow complicates efforts to restore trade through the waterway to pre-war levels.

Shipping companies say what the leaders of Iran and the United States may have agreed is not reflected at sea. These competing corridors have caused confusion for companies, as they must navigate not only dangerous waters - facing threats from sea mines, drones and Revolutionary Guard patrol boats - but also complex political currents across the strait.

If ships choose non-Iranian routes, they risk being attacked. However, if it complies with the demands of the Revolutionary Guard and uses the Iranian path, it fears being exposed to Western sanctions if the agreement collapses.

“The global shipping sector wants to avoid dealing with the Iranian side due to fears that it may be exposed to US sanctions in the future,” Maniatis of Marisex told Ufoq News. He added: "People are very wary of the current US administration because they previously announced that paying any transit fees to the Iranian regime may be a reason for US sanctions."

Iran initially demanded payment for transit fees, but later said it would not impose immediate transit fees. Instead, it plans to impose fees for marine services and impose a new environmental tax on ships, a move that has raised eyebrows among America's Arab allies in oil-exporting countries.

Following the attack on the Ever Lovely ship, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) suspended a coordinated humanitarian evacuation operation aimed at removing more than 500 commercial ships - with more than 11,000 seafarers on board - from the Gulf region, “until matters become clearer,” according to a statement issued by the organization. Maritime experts said that at least 4 ships turned back from the shipping lane after that.

As for ships that choose the Omani route - which is less vulnerable to sanctions - they pass very close to each other, which increases the risk of accidents. During the war, insurance premiums rose dramatically with shipowners paying upwards of $1 million per VLCC for protection against attacks.

These premiums are still high even though such incidents rarely occur now. Matthew Wright, senior shipping analyst at Kpler, which specializes in data intelligence and tracking of global shipping and commodity flows, told Ufoq News that ships need to decide which route they will take to obtain insurance that will allow them to cross the strait.

"This does not mean going back to square one, but it makes it very clear that we are still in a 60-day ceasefire period, rather than having a definitive guarantee that the Strait of Hormuz is on a sure path toward reopening," Wright said. He added: "If the differences are not resolved by mid-August, we may end up seeing the three routes being used in a more chaotic and less safe way."

Despite the confusion, maritime risk assessment companies remain cautiously optimistic that ships have begun their perilous journey after months of uncertainty, even if it means dealing with new political realities in the strait by choosing between competing paths and bearing much higher costs. However, the companies themselves warn that there is still a clear gap between what the leaders agreed to in the negotiating rooms and what is actually happening in the Strait.

This uncertainty prompts many shipping company owners to wait for a sustained period of incident-free transits before allowing their ships to sail again. “We are starting from a reality of extreme mistrust between the two sides, so the agreement is a good first step,” Wright explained.

But it is clear that there is a big gap between what the United States is saying and what the Iranians are saying. “We are going through a period of complete chaos,” he added.