An Iranian lawmaker has called for imposing annual fees on countries using submarine fiber-optic cables passing beneath the Strait of Hormuz, describing the strategic waterway as a national resource that should generate revenue for Iran.
Hossein Ali Hajideligani, a member of the Iranian Parliament’s presiding board, said hundreds of billions of dollars in global financial transactions move daily through the undersea communication lines crossing the strait.
“The Strait of Hormuz is a God-given treasure, placed at Iran’s disposal,” Hajideligani said, arguing that countries benefiting from the cables should pay annual fees to Tehran, according to news reports.
The Strait of Hormuz is regarded as one of the world’s most critical maritime corridors not only for oil shipments but also for global digital communications, with several major submarine fiber-optic cables connecting India and Southeast Asia to Europe through Gulf states and Egypt.
Iranian officials and media outlets linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps have increasingly highlighted the strategic importance of these digital infrastructure routes in recent weeks.
Iran had previously warned that undersea cables in the Gulf region represented a vulnerable point in the global digital economy, raising concerns internationally over the security of critical communications infrastructure.
Last week, media outlets affiliated with the Revolutionary Guard openly called for Iran to generate revenue from undersea internet cables crossing the Strait of Hormuz, portraying the waterway as both an energy chokepoint and a potential source of digital leverage.
Hajideligani also urged Iranian authorities to impose additional fees on ships using the strait, saying the proposals were consistent with guidance attributed to messages from Mojtaba Khamenei.
The Iranian lawmaker further called for an end to negotiations with the United States, accusing Washington of using diplomacy to buy time rather than recognizing what he described as Iran’s “absolute rights.”
He claimed that the United States was the party seeking a ceasefire and alleged that Washington’s diplomatic efforts were driven largely by domestic political considerations.
