Trump's Robber Logic: "If anyone is going to do this (charging for passage through the Strait of Hormuz), it will be us!"

This statement comes from Trump’s public remarks regarding the dispute over tolls for shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

On one hand, he denounces Iran’s proposed fees as illegal; on the other, he repeatedly puts forward startling assertions: if there is a right to charge for strait passage, the rightful collector should be the United States.

Trump’s original words were: “If anyone is going to do this, it will be us (the U.S.).”

Iran controls the northern shore of the strait and has repeatedly proposed managing the waterway and collecting transit fees as a bargaining chip to counterbalance U.S. sanctions and blockades.

The U.S. has long accused Iran of violating international maritime law by charging such fees.

Trump’s rationale is straightforward: the U.S. military deploys fleets in the Middle East “to ensure sea lane security,” positioning the U.S. as the dominant party in conflicts, and thus “the victor has the right to compensation”—even suggesting that “spoils belong to the winner.”

On July 13 local time, Trump suddenly announced a plan to impose a 20% toll on all cargo passing through the Strait of Hormuz.

The announcement triggered strong concerns among Gulf Arab allies (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar). They fear that if the U.S. sets this precedent, Iran will gain legal justification to impose equivalent charges, potentially triggering a wave of imitation across global critical shipping lanes.

Just 24 hours later, Trump urgently revoked the fee proposal.

He publicly explained: Gulf countries had pledged large-scale investments in the U.S., and their capital commitments would substitute for the strait tolls, leading him to abandon the plan.

By early August, Trump’s latest stance:

In the context of rumors about U.S.-Iran negotiations, Trump once again clearly stated his bottom line: he absolutely will not allow Iran to collect tolls from the Strait of Hormuz.

At this stage, he temporarily set aside his own idea of charging fees, with the primary negotiation goal being guaranteed free and unconditional passage through the strait.

The deeper logic behind Trump’s statement, “If anyone is going to do this, it will be us”:

1. A typical Trump-style transactional mindset.

He does not accept the internationally accepted principle of “free and open navigation” on waterways.

In his view: whoever invests military power to control a maritime route has the right to demand economic compensation.

The double standard is crystal clear: Iran charging fees = illegal, threatening global shipping;

U.S. charging fees = compensation for U.S. defense expenditures, consistent with “fairness of interest.”

2. A tool for strategic pressure, not a fixed policy.

The proposal for tolls functions more as a leverage tactic:

Pressuring Gulf oil-producing nations to shoulder the costs of U.S. military presence;

Deterrence against Iran: asserting U.S. control over the strait, eliminating Iran’s ability to profit from the waterway;

Creating negotiation options—readily ready to “abandon tolls” in exchange for concessions.

3. Either Iran or the U.S. unilaterally imposing fees violates existing maritime rules.

If Trump’s plan were implemented, it would completely overturn the global order governing strait passages, potentially sparking imitations at other key chokepoints like Malacca and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.

Positions of various parties:

Iran: Strongly rejects the U.S. toll proposal, warning that if the U.S. forcibly imposes fees, Iran will fully blockade the strait and retaliate in kind;

Gulf Arab states are deeply conflicted: dependent on U.S. military protection yet fearful that tolls could escalate tensions and drive up oil prices;

Ultimately, they secured Trump’s abandonment of the fee plan in exchange for investment pledges to the U.S.;

Europe and East Asian energy importers: generally oppose any side establishing tolls through the strait, fearing increased energy costs and a fundamental reshaping of global shipping rules;

Within the U.S.: many foreign policy officials have warned the policy is self-contradictory—America cannot simultaneously condemn Iran for violating the law while doing the same thing itself.

Trump’s phrase “If anyone is going to do this, it will be us” brutally exposes a logic of power: strength determines who profits from maritime routes.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1872549239907396/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.