9MAR

Iran's five peace terms: Hormuz first

2 min read

05:12UTC

Tehran published five conditions for ending the war. The fifth, permanent control of the Strait of Hormuz, would rewrite international maritime law.

← Back to Mojtaba named leader; oil $116; acid rain Jump to analysis ↓

ConflictDeveloping

Key takeaway

Iran is legislating Hormuz control into permanent law before any ceasefire.

Iran's stated terms for ending the war, relayed through PressTV on 25 March via a senior political-security official, are: (1) complete cessation of all attacks; (2) concrete security mechanisms preventing reimposition of war; (3) guaranteed reparations; (4) end of war across all fronts for all resistance groups; and (5) recognition of Iran's right to control the Strait of Hormuz. ¹

Condition five is not a ceasefire demand. Under UNCLOS, the strait of Hormuz is an international waterway; Iran may regulate transit through its territorial waters but cannot claim sovereignty over passage itself. No US administration could accept this. Iran almost certainly knows that.

Western coverage has framed Iran as simply "refusing talks" . The five-condition structure tells a different story: Iran has a formal position, and its most consequential demand is being legislated domestically through the Majlis bill and formalised internationally through the IMO notification . Iran is building legal architecture to outlast the war, following the same model Egypt used after Suez in 1957: establish physical control during a crisis, then legislate before it ends.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Iran has published five demands it says must be met before it will stop fighting. The first four involve ceasefire terms and compensation. The fifth is different: Iran wants permanent legal recognition that it controls the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow passage through which most of the Persian Gulf's oil leaves. Under current international law, the strait is an international waterway. Every country's ships have the right to pass through it. Iran cannot legally block that passage, even though the water runs alongside its coast. Iran's fifth condition would change that law. No US president can agree to this. And Iran almost certainly knows that. The more telling detail is that Iran is not just saying it; it is also passing a law in its parliament to formalise the toll regime, and filing paperwork with the international shipping body. Iran is building the legal infrastructure of permanent control while the war is still ongoing.

Deep Analysis

Root Causes

Iran's Hormuz sovereignty demand is thirty years in development. Tehran has consistently argued since the 1994 Law of the Sea negotiations that its territorial waters include the strait's northern half, and that innocent passage rights are not absolute for warships of hostile states. The IRGC's toll infrastructure built between 2015 and 2025 was designed to create an operational fact before any legal claim was tested.

The war created the opportunity to formalise what the IRGC had been building. The Majlis toll bill and the IMO notification are the legal superstructure on top of an operational infrastructure that already exists.

What could happen next?

Consequence
Iran's five conditions remove diplomatic off-ramps: any deal requires accepting demands that no allied government can publicly endorse, guaranteeing talks collapse if aired publicly.
Precedent
If the Majlis bill passes before a ceasefire, the Hormuz toll regime becomes Iranian domestic law that any future government would need to repeal, entrenching the leverage beyond this war.

Sources:PressTV

Mentions:PressTV →Majlis →Iran →Strait of Hormuz →UN Convention on the Law of the Sea →

First Reported In

Update #50 · Houthis join; Iran holds two chokepoints

PressTV· 28 Mar 2026

Read original →

Causes and effects

Caused by

Iran: only allied ships may pass Hormuz

Iran's IMO notification revoking innocent passage for hostile parties is the international legal layer underpinning the five conditions, with Hormuz sovereignty as condition five.

Occurred 27 Mar 2026

Read story →

This Event

Iran's five peace terms: Hormuz first

The conditions function less as a negotiating position and more as a public statement that Iran does not intend to negotiate on terms Washington can meet.

Led to

Islamabad four stall on Hormuz terms

Iran's five war-ending conditions, including Hormuz sovereignty, are the structural obstacle the Islamabad Four summit cannot bridge, as Araghchi's statement confirms.

Occurred 29 Mar 2026

Read story →

Trump drops Hormuz as core war objective

Iran's five conditions included permanent Hormuz sovereignty; Trump's private abandonment of that demand narrows the gap between the two positions.

Occurred 31 Mar 2026

Read story →

Different Perspectives

Oil markets / Lloyd's underwriters

Futures markets priced CENTCOM's strikes-complete statement as a de-escalation signal and pushed Brent down 1.7 per cent to $94.71, even as the IRGC declared Hormuz closed. Lloyd's war-risk premiums held elevated because institutional de-listing requires a UN Security Council resolution that Russia and China have just shown they will block.

Pakistan (mediator)

Interior minister Mohsin Naqvi carried dual civilian and military letters to Mojtaba Khamenei in Tehran on 6-7 June with no public response. The IRGC's Hormuz closure on 11 June shows the corps is acting independently of the channel Pakistan is using, making the mediation structurally unable to produce a binding commitment without direct IRGC access.

Russia and China

Russia and China voted against GOV/2026/40 at the IAEA Board, following through on the blocking position coordinated with Grossi in Geneva on 5 June; both states continue to oppose Western institutional pressure on Iran at every multilateral venue.

E3 and IAEA (UK, France, Germany)

The E3 co-sponsored IAEA resolution GOV/2026/40, adopted 21-3-10 on 10 June, demanding Iran disclose 440.9 kg of unaccounted HEU and admit inspectors to four denied facilities. The 10 abstentions and Russia-China noes leave any Security Council referral without a viable enforcement path.

IRGC / Iran military command

The corps declared Hormuz closed to all traffic on 11 June and claimed two vessels struck, overriding the MoU its own civilian negotiators were pursuing through Pakistan. The closure order used the Persian Gulf Strait Authority apparatus to convert a toll mechanism into a military prohibition.

Trump administration / CENTCOM

CENTCOM completed a second day of strikes on Tehran, Sirik and Minab, rejected the IRGC Hormuz closure as inconsistent with observed transit, and said strikes were complete. Hegseth framed the bombing explicitly as the negotiation: the method is coercive deal-making with no stated pause threshold.