Red Sea passage sits between fees, security and liability
The Houthis' denial of a fee plan, continuing Iran tensions and a tanker spill off Oman separated the access, security and liability layers of one maritime route.
Geopolitics··Morning
Passage was declared free
The first dispute at Bab al-Mandeb concerned whether passage had a price. The Houthi-run centre overseeing vessel movements said its safe-transit service in the Red Sea is voluntary and free, and that anyone seeking payment does not represent it. The Houthi Humanitarian Operations Coordination Center told shipping companies on Saturday not to pay or share information with unauthorized parties. The statement followed a Reuters report that the group was considering fees for ships passing Bab al-Mandeb, one week after declaring a maritime blockade on Saudi Arabia. The centre maintained that passage remained free, while Bab al-Mandeb links the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden for oil and cargo moving among Asia, Europe and the Middle East. According to Al Jazeera's report based on Reuters, Saudi Arabia announced a 14-country maritime coalition that same week to protect freedom of navigation.[1]
The security premium rises to the east
Military and financial pressure continued at the eastern end of the same maritime network. Trump told reporters on 31 July that the exchange of strikes with Iran might continue for a while. The same day Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the US is looking for Iranian assets worldwide and that the money would go to the Iranian people. Asked whether Americans should expect the back-and-forth to continue, Trump answered A little bit… You always have to keep your guard up, saying Iran was doing very poorly while crediting those who kept going. Bessent said the search for seized assets is running worldwide. Al Jazeera's live page reported the same day that an Iranian official quoted by the Tasnim agency described a comprehensive prepared response to any US attacks; the official was not named and the plan has not been independently verified.[2]
The accident bill reaches another coast
The spill off Oman made the liability side of passage security visible. Satellite imagery shows oil slicks around the tanker Caroline Bezengi off Oman; the vessel is under European Union and United Kingdom sanctions. It is described as part of the shadow fleet Russia uses to work around sanctions. Images dated 28 July show dark slicks close to the vessel and lighter traces north of al-Qibliyyah island, inside a protected marine area in Dhofar governorate. Remote-sensing specialist Wim Zwijnenburg said at least one of the hulls of the crude storage vessel appears to have been breached and that oil is escaping. Ship tracking data indicate the tanker loaded Russian oil at the Black Sea port of Novorossiysk. Two maritime security sources said trouble began on 8 June off Yemen's port of Mukalla, with assessments pointing to an onboard blast. The International Maritime Organization confirmed it is monitoring the situation. These items are not one event; they expose three layers governing the same route. Denial of a fee defines a claim about commercial access, the prospect of continued strikes affects the security premium, and the sanctioned tanker's spill shows who is left with the bill when an accident occurs. An open strait does not by itself make passage predictable or distribute its risks. For a shipowner the distinction is practical. The free-transit statement bears on a payment decision; the threat of regional strikes enters routing and insurance calculations; and the spill off Oman raises cleanup and compensation liability after an accident. The three reports therefore cannot be reduced to one security indicator: an open route, a predictable commercial cost and an assigned accident burden are separate conditions.[3], [1], [2]
Related columns
For more information on this topic, you can read the related columns.
