TRANSIT PASSAGE VS. SOVEREIGNTY: REINTERPRETING INTERNATIONAL LAW IN THE STRAIT OF HORMUZ AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR INDIA-IRAN RELATIONS

The Strait of Hormuz occupies a central position in global maritime trade and energy security. At the same time, it represents a site of persistent legal and political contestation between the principle of transit passage under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and assertions of coastal state sovereignty by Iran. This article examines these competing legal interpretations and evaluates their implications for India-Iran bilateral relations. It argues that India adopts a pragmatic legal approach that seeks to uphold international maritime norms while maintaining strategic engagement with Iran. By combining doctrinal legal analysis with foreign policy considerations, the study highlights how legal ambiguity in international straits shapes diplomatic behavior and regional stability. The article contributes to the literature by bridging the gap between international law and applied geopolitics in a critical maritime chokepoint.