US Claims, Iran Controls Hormuz

While Trump claims almost weekly that American forces have full control of the Strait of Hormuz, Iran says it 'calls the shots'

TEHRAN - A widening dispute between Tehran and Washington over control of the Strait of Hormuz has turned the strategic waterway into a battleground not only at sea, but also in the war of narratives surrounding the conflict.

US President Donald Trump has repeatedly claimed in recent days that American forces have achieved “total control” of the Strait of Hormuz and that the waterway is open to commercial shipping. Iranian officials, however, have categorically rejected the claim, insisting that maritime movements remain subject to the supervision and authorization of Iranian forces.

The latest Iranian response came from Brigadier General Abolfazl Zolfaghari, spokesman for Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Construction Headquarters, who described US claims of normal maritime traffic through the strait as “falsehoods and lies.”

“No commercial ship or oil tanker has had and will have the possibility of safe transit through this strait without the permission and supervision of Iran’s powerful Armed Forces,” Zolfaghari said in a statement on Thursday.

He maintained that the Strait of Hormuz remained under the “full management and control” of Iran, adding that Iranian forces were closely monitoring movements by US and Israeli forces across the region.

The commander of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps(IRGC) Navy, Rear Admiral Ali Ozmaei, offered an even more explicit assessment, saying: “The Strait of Hormuz is closed. Our control over movements is complete and decisive.”

“No movement in this strait escapes the eyes of the IRGC Navy,” Ozmaei said, arguing that the situation should be judged by developments “on the ground” rather than statements issued by US officials.

Shipping data challenges Washington’s narrative

Independent shipping data also paints a considerably more complicated picture than the assertion that Washington has established effective control over the waterway.

According to Kpler data cited by Reuters, nine commodity vessels crossed the Strait of Hormuz on Thursday, up from five the previous day but still below the August daily average of 12. Most of the vessels used routes administered or approved by Iran.

The figures are dramatically lower than pre-war traffic levels. The Wall Street Journal reported that only 14 vessels crossed the strait on Tuesday, compared with more than 130 vessels a day before the war. Eleven of those vessels used the route administered by Iran.

The discrepancy is significant. While Washington says it controls the waterway and has sought to guarantee maritime passage, actual shipping patterns suggest that the United States has not restored anything resembling normal commercial traffic.

The US administration has disputed commercial tracking figures, arguing that some vessels have switched off their transponders and that ships moving under military escort may not be fully reflected in publicly available tracking data.

Nevertheless, the low level of observable traffic, together with the continued reliance of many vessels on routes coordinated with Iran, makes the assertion of unqualified US control difficult to reconcile with conditions on the water.

Western analysts question Trump’s “control” claim

Skepticism over Trump’s characterization is not confined to Iranian officials.

The Wall Street Journal reported that the president’s assertion of total US control was contradicted by the reality of maritime traffic, noting that “few ships are listening” to Washington’s claim. Its reporting emphasized the sharp gap between the president’s rhetoric and the limited number of vessels actually transiting the waterway.

Analysts cited in Western reporting have likewise cautioned that even a political agreement to reopen Hormuz would not immediately restore normal shipping. Aarathi Krishnan of Raksha Intelligence Futures said a deal alone would not be enough to return maritime operations to normal, arguing that sustained de-escalation would be necessary to reduce security risks and insurance costs for commercial vessels.

The argument is important because control of a maritime chokepoint is ultimately measured by the ability to provide predictable and secure passage—not simply by military presence or political declarations.

Tehran seeks to institutionalize its role

Iranian officials have repeatedly stressed that Tehran’s role in regulating maritime traffic is not merely a wartime claim.

Iran and Oman have been engaged in discussions over the establishment of new shipping arrangements in the Strait of Hormuz, with Tehran saying negotiations on the coordinates and framework of a safe maritime corridor have reached an advanced stage.

At the same time, Iran’s Parliament is working on a broader strategic plan for the security and development of the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf. Lawmaker Valiollah Bayati said a parliamentary committee had approved the general principles of the plan and seven of its 14 articles.

One of the provisions reportedly bars the passage through the strait of facilities and equipment belonging to the United States, Israel, and countries deemed hostile by Iran.

The developments indicate that Tehran is seeking to translate its military leverage over the waterway into a broader political and legal framework.

Why does Trump keep claiming control?

The repeated US assertion that Hormuz is under American control is also part of a wider political and psychological contest.

For Trump, portraying the United States as the dominant power in the conflict serves an important domestic and international purpose. A claim of complete control over one of the world’s most important energy chokepoints reinforces the image of a president who has achieved military superiority and can dictate the terms of the conflict.

The economic dimension is equally important. Hormuz is a critical artery for global energy markets, and uncertainty over its future has already contributed to higher oil prices and a substantial geopolitical risk premium. The Wall Street Journal reported that Brent crude was heading for a significant weekly gain as stalled negotiations and heightened tensions around the strait continued to unsettle markets.

By projecting an image of US control, Washington can also seek to reassure energy markets and international shipping companies that the United States possesses the capability to guarantee the flow of oil and gas.

Yet the central contradiction remains: a waterway cannot realistically be described as “fully controlled” by a power that has not succeeded in restoring normal commercial traffic.

For Iran, the issue is therefore not simply semantic. Tehran is using its demonstrated ability to monitor and regulate maritime movements as a strategic bargaining instrument in negotiations with Washington and Oman.

For the United States, meanwhile, the challenge is to convert its naval superiority into something much harder to achieve؛ sustained, commercially credible and internationally accepted freedom of navigation.

Until that happens, the competing claims over Hormuz will continue to be tested by the most objective measure available — the ships moving through the strait.