Why is the US seeking UN help to open Hormuz after undermining it?
The initiative marks a notable shift for the Trump administration, which since returning to office in 2025 has frequently criticised the United Nations and questioned its relevance
The United States is turning to the United Nations for support in reopening the Strait of Hormuz despite years of criticism of the international body by President Donald Trump's administration.
The Strait of Hormuz, located between Iran and Oman, is one of the world's most strategically important waterways. About one-fifth of global oil and natural gas supplies transit through the narrow passage during peacetime, says Al Jazeera.
Recent attacks on commercial shipping and the reported placement of mines in the water have sharply disrupted traffic, sending oil prices higher and raising concerns about a broader economic shock.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio accused Iran of "blowing up ships" and laying mines in the strait, framing Washington's response as a defensive effort to protect global commerce and freedom of navigation.
What is the US proposing at the UN?
The United States, alongside Gulf allies including Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Qatar, has circulated a draft UN Security Council resolution aimed at restoring safe passage through the strait.
The draft demands that Iran halt attacks on ships, remove mines from the waterway and stop imposing what the US describes as "illegal tolls."
It also proposes a UN-led humanitarian corridor through the strait to allow the movement of aid, fertiliser and other essential goods.
The resolution operates under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, which gives the Security Council authority to impose sanctions or potentially authorise military action if member states fail to comply. US officials have reportedly adjusted the wording to avoid explicitly authorising force, seeking to reduce the likelihood of a veto.
The draft would also require the UN secretary-general to report within 30 days on whether Iran is complying with the measures.
Why is the move politically significant?
The initiative marks a notable shift for the Trump administration, which since returning to office in 2025 has frequently criticised the United Nations and questioned its relevance.
President Donald Trump has publicly questioned the "purpose" of the UN and suggested his own "Board of Peace" could eventually replace it.
Rubio has described the current resolution effort as a "test" of the UN's "utility."
Analysts say the administration's decision to work through the Security Council reflects both practical and diplomatic considerations. Securing a UN resolution could help Washington build broader international support, increase pressure on Tehran and strengthen the legal basis for protecting shipping routes used by many countries.
The crisis has also underscored the difficulty of managing disruptions to global energy markets without multilateral backing, particularly when rising oil prices threaten economies worldwide.
What obstacles does the resolution face?
The proposal faces major diplomatic hurdles in the Security Council, where Russia and China hold veto power.
Both countries blocked a previous US-backed resolution in April 2026, arguing that the language could open the door to legitimising military action against Iran.
Russia and China are now considering a competing draft resolution, though details of that proposal have not been publicly disclosed.
The main point of contention appears to be the US reliance on Chapter VII authorities and language related to enforcement measures against Iran.
While Washington has softened parts of the text to avoid another veto, diplomats remain uncertain whether the changes will satisfy Moscow and Beijing.
China's UN mission has said it is still assessing the latest US draft, while US officials hope for a Security Council vote early next week.
