13APR

Trump's toll-payer order targets allied ships

3 min read

11:20UTC

Trump ordered the Navy to stop any vessel that paid Iran's Hormuz toll, a list that includes French and Japanese ships whose governments refused to join the blockade.

← Back to Trump blockades Iran on a tweet Jump to analysis ↓

ConflictDeveloping

Key takeaway

The blockade threatens to interdict vessels from allies who refused to join it.

France's CMA CGM Kribi and Japan's Mitsui OSK both paid Iran's Hormuz toll in yuan in early April. Under Trump's toll-interdiction order, both vessels, and potentially others from the Philippines and UAE, are targets for US Navy interception in international waters.

CENTCOM's operational order does not include this provision. Whether that reflects a deliberate decision to avoid the most explosive implications of the tweet, or a narrower military reading of the order, is unknown. The gap creates daily legal exposure: any officer who intercepts a French or Japanese vessel under the presidential order, or any officer who does not, acts without clear authority.

The blockade was designed to pressure Tehran. It has instead handed Paris and Tokyo a grievance against Washington . The EU had already rejected Trump's suggestion of a US-Iran "joint venture" on toll collection, citing UNCLOS transit passage rights. France and Japan are now members of the UK's reopening coalition while also appearing on the US interception list for having paid Iran's fees.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Iran has been charging ships a fee , called a toll , to pass through the Strait of Hormuz. Some European and Asian companies paid this toll to keep their goods moving, including a French shipping company (CMA CGM) and a Japanese energy firm (Mitsui OSK). Trump's social media post said the US Navy should stop any ship that had paid Iran this toll , which would include those French and Japanese vessels. France and Japan are US allies who refused to join the blockade. CENTCOM's actual military order did not include this instruction. So right now, there is a gap between what Trump said should happen to allied ships and what the US military is actually doing. That gap has not been publicly resolved.

What could happen next?

Risk
France could invoke UNCLOS Article 300 (good faith obligations) and file immediate ITLOS proceedings if a CMA CGM vessel is stopped, creating an international court process that would take months but generate immediate diplomatic crisis.
Short term · 0.72
Consequence
CENTCOM's omission of the toll-interdiction provision from its operational order leaves a daily decision gap: every officer on patrol near a toll-paying allied vessel must choose which authority to obey without clear guidance.
Immediate · 0.88
Risk
If France and Japan are both targeted as toll-payers and members of the UK's 40-nation reopening coalition, the US blockade and the UK coalition are in direct operational conflict over the same vessels in the same waterway.
Immediate · 0.8

Source Landscape

This story draws on mixed-leaning sources from United States (includes United States state media)

United States×2

Primary parallel: The 1986 US strikes on Libya were preceded by the Gulf of Sidra dispute, in which the Reagan administration asserted the right to transit waters Libya claimed as internal. When Libya enforced its exclusion zone, the US struck back , but only after Libya fired first. The critical difference from 2026: the US asserted freedom of navigation against a unilateral claim, not the right to interdict vessels that paid a fee to a third party's exclusion claim.

Counter-parallel: The 1973 Arab oil embargo saw the US contemplate interdicting tankers carrying Arab oil to neutral states , a plan ultimately rejected by the Nixon administration's legal counsel as having no basis in law of the sea. The 2026 toll-payer order attempts what Nixon's lawyers refused.

The toll-payer provision targets a specific financial architecture Iran built to sustain revenue through the blockade. CMA CGM Kribi paid in yuan on 4 April ; Mitsui OSK's Sohar LNG also transited. If the US actually intercepts either vessel, it would trigger immediate insurance invalidation for all toll-paying transits, collapse the yuan-denominated fee system Iran relies on, and expose French and Japanese shipping companies to US secondary sanctions.

CMA CGM is the world's third-largest container shipping company by fleet capacity. A US interdiction of one of its vessels would force the company to reroute its entire Asia-Pacific portfolio via Cape of Good Hope , adding 10-12 days and estimated $2-3 million per voyage in fuel costs. The knock-on effect for European importers of Asian goods would be measurable within 30 days.

Consensus view: The German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP) and France's Institut Français des Relations Internationales (IFRI) both assess the toll-payer provision as the most legally aggressive element of the blockade: interdicting a vessel flagged by a sovereign state that paid a fee to transit a waterway constitutes an act of hostility against that state under UNCLOS and the 1944 Chicago Convention's principle of sovereign immunity over flagged vessels.

IFRI's Marc Hecker notes that CMA CGM Kribi, as a Malta-flagged vessel with French ownership, creates a dual-jurisdiction dispute between France and Malta.

Counter-view: The Heritage Foundation's James Jay Carafano argues that any vessel paying Iran's Hormuz toll is providing material support to a state the US has designated as a terrorism sponsor, and that IEEPA authority , however lacking in formal instruments , gives the executive branch latitude to treat toll payment as a sanctions violation. He cites the 2019 secondary sanctions on Iranian oil buyers as precedent for targeting third-country commercial actors.

Key tension: Whether paying Iran a transit fee is a commercial transaction protected by freedom of navigation, or a material contribution to a sanctioned state that the US can prohibit extraterritorially , a question no court has yet ruled on in the context of a contested waterway.

First Reported In

Update #67 · Trump blockades Iran on a tweet

CENTCOM / Al Jazeera· 13 Apr 2026

Read original →

Different Perspectives

South Korean financial markets

South Korea, which imports virtually all its crude oil, is absorbing the war's economic transmission most acutely among non-belligerents. The second KOSPI circuit breaker in four sessions — with Samsung down over 10% and SK Hynix down 12.3% — reflects an industrial economy unable to reprice energy costs that have risen 72% in ten days. The market response indicates Korean industry cannot sustain oil above $100 per barrel without margin compression across manufacturing, semiconductors, and shipping.

Migrant worker communities in the Gulf

The first confirmed civilian deaths in Saudi Arabia — one Indian and one Bangladeshi killed, twelve Bangladeshis wounded — fell on communities with no voice in the military decisions that placed them in harm's way. Migrant workers live near military installations because that housing is affordable, not by choice. Bangladesh and India face the dilemma of needing to protect nationals who cannot easily leave a war zone while depending on Gulf remittances that fund a substantial share of their domestic economies.

Azerbaijan — President Ilham Aliyev

Aliyev treats the Nakhchivan strikes as a direct act of war against Azerbaijani sovereignty, placing armed forces on full combat readiness and demanding an Iranian explanation. The response is calibrated to maximise international sympathy while stopping short of military retaliation — Baku cannot fight Iran alone and needs either Turkish or NATO backing to credibly deter further strikes.

Oil-importing nations (Japan, South Korea, India)

The Hormuz closure is an existential threat. Japan, South Korea, and India receive the majority of their crude through the strait — they will bear the heaviest economic cost of a war they had no part in.

Global South governments (Indonesia, Brazil, South Africa)

Neutrality was possible when the targets were military. 148 dead schoolgirls made it impossible — no government can explain that away to its own citizens.

Turkey

Has absorbed three Iranian ballistic missile interceptions since 4 March without invoking NATO Article 5 consultation. Each incident narrows Ankara's political room to continue absorbing without Alliance-level response.