Iran Calls Hormuz Control an Atomic‑Bomb‑Level Leverage Amid US Talks

The narrow waterway linking the Persian Gulf to the open ocean handles about a fifth of the world’s oil trade. Control over the passage has long been a strategic lever for Tehran, and recent clashes have amplified its political weight.

Senior adviser Mohamad Mohkber told state‑linked Mehr that the ability to close or restrict the strait “is a capability on the level of an atomic bomb,” because a single decision could disrupt the global economy. He warned that Iran will not relinquish the advantage gained during the current conflict, pledging to cement its authority through either diplomatic channels or domestic legislation.

First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref echoed the sentiment, asserting that recent U.S. actions have solidified Tehran’s position and will neutralize future sanctions. He claimed Iran’s “management will ensure the security of this waterway and benefit all countries in the region,” implying that sanctions aimed at curbing oil sales will lose effectiveness.

The rhetoric follows a series of skirmishes in the strait. Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) vessels and U.S. warships exchanged fire despite a declared ceasefire, as Washington maintains a naval blockade and advances its “Project Freedom” operations. The confrontations underscore the volatility of the corridor even as diplomatic texts circulate through intermediaries.

Iran’s framing of Hormuz as an “atomic‑bomb‑level” asset elevates the strait to a bargaining chip on par with its nuclear program, which has been the focus of sanctions for decades. By portraying the waterway as a shield against economic pressure, Tehran seeks to force the United States to consider the broader cost of any coercive measures.

Analysts note that while Tehran can threaten disruption, a full closure would also harm its own oil exports and regional trade. The historical reference to the Battle of Uhud, used by state media to warn against abandoning the “pass,” reinforces a narrative of strategic indispensability.

What to watch next: whether U.S. negotiators adjust their proposals in response to Tehran’s heightened emphasis on Hormuz control, and if further naval incidents reshape the diplomatic calculus.