Home > Business > Economy

Seoul's multilateral approach tested as 26 Korean vessels wait for Hormuz passage

Published: 05 Apr. 2026, 16:14 Updated: 05 Apr. 2026, 18:32

Tankers are anchored off the coast of Muscat, Oman, after Iran’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, on March 7. [REUTERS/YONHAP]

As 26 Korean-operated vessels still wait to navigate through the Strait of Hormuz, ships linked to Japan and France have secured passage, highlighting the limitations of Seoul's multilateral approach to the situation and the rising burden on shipping companies.

The Korean government maintains that it will avoid one-off negotiations over individual ships and instead stick to international coordination, but critics point to concerns in the shipping industry over mounting costs due to the prolonged delay.

The vessels operated by Korean shipping companies remain on standby near the strait, according to the government and the shipping industry on Sunday, while vessels operated by companies in other countries have begun finding ways through.

The CMA CGM Kribi, a Malta-flagged container ship operated by CMA CGM, exited Gulf waters on Friday using what Iran called a “safe corridor.” Two other vessels linked to Japan also made it through: the Panama-flagged Sohar LNG, linked to Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, on Friday, and the India-flagged Green Sanvi on Saturday.

The contrasting outcomes have prompted speculation in some quarters that the difference may come down to disparities in state-to-state negotiating power. The Korean government, however, contends that the passages were not the result of France or Japan stepping in directly to negotiate with Iran.

That view was echoed in Tokyo as well. A Japanese government official noted that the Sohar LNG was not bound for Japan and that the government was "not involved in negotiations over its passage," according to the Asahi Shimbun.

A senior official in Seoul explained that the Japan-linked ships were not only registered in places such as Panama and India on paper, but were also effectively structured through third-country entities, including joint ventures with Oman and local Indian subsidiaries.

A cargo ship in the Gulf, near the Strait of Hormuz, floats off Ras al-Khaimah in the United Arab Emirates amid the U.S.-Israeli conflict with Iran on March 11. [REUTERS/YONHAP]

Rather than any quiet diplomatic push by Japan, the government believes it is more likely that the diplomatic influence of countries such as Oman and India, which have traditionally maintained friendlier ties with Iran, or the commercial interests surrounding those ships, played a direct or indirect role.

Officials have reached a similar conclusion about a French-linked vessel that made it through the strait, believing it was most likely granted passage because the private operator accepted Iran’s rules without direct intervention by Paris.

Even as fears grow that the Iran war could drag on, the government is sticking to its principle of not engaging Iran in a separate one-off negotiation over Korean ships.

Behind that decision is the concern about setting a bad precedent. Officials believe that if Korea were to break from the multinational front and enter bilateral talks while the military situation remains unclear, Iran could use that as leverage to demand hefty passage fees or attach political conditions, such as a public statement of support for Tehran.

In other words, putting out the immediate fire could end up stoking Iran’s bargaining power. That is also the logic behind the current multinational approach. A group of 35 countries has been coordinating around the principle of freedom of navigation while avoiding separate bilateral bargaining with Iran.

National Security Adviser Wi Sung-lac, right, speaks with a presidential official during President Lee Jae Myung's meeting with senior aides at the Blue House in Seoul on Feb. 5. [YONHAP]

The issue of possible passage fees in the Strait of Hormuz was also raised at a closed-door Cabinet meeting last Tuesday. National Security Adviser Wi Sung-lac reportedly dismissed the concern, arguing that Iran, after taking major military hits, was in “no position administratively or physically" to impose and collect such fees. Wi added that the international community would not simply accept Iran's actions either.

Wi's comments underscore the mood inside the government that there is little to gain from being dragged into hasty bilateral talks on Iran’s terms. On the 26 Korean ships still waiting, officials assess that there is no immediate emergency need for them to force passage right away.

But the longer vessels remain idle at sea, the heavier the financial damage for shipping companies. With insurance premiums surging and seafarer hazard pay piling up, losses are reaching as much as 140 million won ($92,700) a day per ship.

The pressure is especially acute for smaller carriers, which account for 10 of the 26 vessels. If the standoff drags on, some in the industry say even a wave of bankruptcies cannot be ruled out.

Unlike some foreign shipping companies that can rely on ties to third countries with friendlier relations with Iran, Korean vessels, backed mostly by domestic capital, have fewer workarounds under Seoul’s multilateral approach.

“We need active government support for smaller carriers,” said the Korea Shipowners’ Association at an emergency meeting on March 27. “Disruption to even one vessel can inflict serious losses on the company involved.”

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.
BY YOON JI-WON [[email protected]]