Iran Wants Bitcoin Payments From Oil Ships Seeking Hormuz Passage

[fuguebtc]

Because if Iran surrenders their Uranium stockpile, then the United States will stop attacking them.

Who or what would guarantee that the United States would stop invading Iran if it handed over uranium and stopped enriching it?

The United States disregarded international law and launched a preemptive attack on Iran while negotiations were underway. What guarantees that if Iran meets the US demands, they will stop attacking?


I believe Iran has learned its lesson and will not easily hand over its trump card without firm guarantees.

[Fortify]

Iranian officials said Bitcoin payments would ensure the tolls “can’t be traced or confiscated due to sanctions.”

• Iran plans to require oil tankers passing through the Strait of Hormuz to pay transit fees in Bitcoin.
• Officials say using Bitcoin will help avoid sanctions by making payments harder to trace or seize.
• The proposal follows a ceasefire and could raise tensions with other oil exporters over control of the Strait.

Source: https://decrypt.co/363641/iran-bitcoin-payments-oil-ships-seeking-hormuz-passage

If something like this were to happen, how do you think crypto market would be affected?

Realistically it's not going to happen, while Iran can exert military force over the waterway it does not own the whole thing and the territorial waters of other countries are not subject to it's control. Iran has to play a very careful balancing act, because on the one hand America is asking for equally ridiculous demands and should be embarrassed, but on the other if Iran escalates this into a bigger issue then other countries might actually take action against them in concert with America. Iran has taken a beating already but dished out it's faits fair share in return. They actually have other countries on their side because the war does not seem to have clear aims or a timeline for completion - it just keeps getting more messy. It should not throw that bargaining chip away by implementing such a charge.

[passwordnow]

We've got some update on the Strait of Hormuz again because of the US blockade, it's said that Iran has decided to close the Strait again.  

Iran closes Strait of Hormuz again over US blockade

Iran has accused the US of violating the ceasefire agreement by maintaining a blockade on its ports.

The United States disregarded international law and launched a preemptive attack on Iran while negotiations were underway. What guarantees that if Iran meets the US demands, they will stop attacking?


I believe Iran has learned its lesson and will not easily hand over its trump card without firm guarantees.

The US never learns, they're on a negotiation and yet keep on violating it? What we can see, it's still Iran that has to dictate the negotiations here.

[justdimin]

The solution turned out to be extremely simple-the U.S. will also block the Strait of Hormuz for those ships that have paid for passage through it! And anything could happen there-seizure/confiscation of ships and cargo, and so on.
Importantly, Iran may achieve tactical “successes,” but strategically, Iran will simply lose the ability to sell its oil, since the only route for its delivery is… the Strait of Hormuz, which will be blocked.
Other regional oil suppliers to the market are already actively working on solutions that will allow them to bypass the Strait of Hormuz altogether. As a result, in the long term,  blocking the strait will become a problem  precisely for Iran.

P.S. The best example of the saying: “Both sides can play this game.”

What USA is not realizing is that, the ships that are passing are not enemy ships, some of them are allies, some of them are not allies but not at war with them.

So let's assume for a moment that it's a French ship, sure USA does not "love" France, we all know that, but that doesn't mean it's enemy, in theory it's a NATO ally as well, so if you are stopping a French ship, from passing, even after it has paid a toll, you are doing something that is illegal and make you be hated by everyone, including your own allies. It's the typical bully method of USA, if you guys can't have it, nobody else can. It's as simple as that.

[Myleschetty]

According to what I read from today's news at this present time which was allegedly stated by the Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.
The Strait of Hormuz is not fully open to all ships on a permanent basis. But, Iran has stated a completely open to all commercial vessels for the remaining period of the temporary 10days ceasefire linked to the Israel-Lebanon situation.

They have not agreed to a permanent peace agreement with the United States.

The media is very misleading. If that's for real, then they should have stated that it's not yet signed into deal. What I've read is that they've said they've fully opened it and these headlines are just giving the vibes of " - Iran " who said that it's not fully open. I wonder what will happen if this ceasefire ends and if Iran is truly opening the Strait after that period that they have given. Or we just hope for the best that they'll open it wholly when they agree on all conditions that both parties have set.

The statements made by President Trump and the Iranian Foreign Minister are also deceptive, in addition to the media. The minister will tweeted that Trump is misrepresenting the circumstances.

The Strait of Hormuz has simply become - The Strait of Trumporz.

      

But jokes aside, is the strait actually now open to all ships? Did Iran agree to a permanent peace agreement with the United States? And, I believe, the most important question - Did the United States get all of Iran's enriched Uranium stockpile?

Because if Iran surrenders their Uranium stockpile, then the United States will stop attacking them.

According to what I read from today's news at this present time which was allegedly stated by the Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.
The Strait of Hormuz is not fully open to all ships on a permanent basis. But, Iran has stated a completely open to all commercial vessels for the remaining period of the temporary 10days ceasefire linked to the Israel-Lebanon situation.

They have not agreed to a permanent peace agreement with the United States.

Actually, the strait is open to ALL vessels except to the United States warships.

What's more important is Iran's enriched Uranium stockpile. Trump said in a speech in Phoenix that "the United States will excavate all of them", and take them in U.S. territory. But Iran denied it and said that "their Uranium is not going anywhere".

That's exactly what I meant when I said that the Strait is not fully open to all ships. In the interim, I hope both sides reach a consensus and invest funds in worthwhile projects that will benefit the general public instead of squandering money and the lives of the average person during the conflict.

[Coyster]

We've got some update on the Strait of Hormuz again because of the US blockade, it's said that Iran has decided to close the Strait again.  

Just like i said in my last post in this thread, the situation is very confusing, i was pretty sure Iran would not uphold the deal of keeping the Strait open, if the U.S. continued its blockade of their ports, and that's exactly what has happened here. Reports are that a few ships were able to pass after the announcement that the Strait was open, but now most vessels are turning back after this latest information.

The situation is quite funny, more like both parties are playing chess with the global economy. Neither party believes the other holds the advantage in this war and that could mean we are far from an end to hostilities.

[DrBeer]

The solution turned out to be extremely simple-the U.S. will also block the Strait of Hormuz for those ships that have paid for passage through it! And anything could happen there-seizure/confiscation of ships and cargo, and so on.
Importantly, Iran may achieve tactical “successes,” but strategically, Iran will simply lose the ability to sell its oil, since the only route for its delivery is… the Strait of Hormuz, which will be blocked.
Other regional oil suppliers to the market are already actively working on solutions that will allow them to bypass the Strait of Hormuz altogether. As a result, in the long term,  blocking the strait will become a problem  precisely for Iran.

P.S. The best example of the saying: “Both sides can play this game.”

What USA is not realizing is that, the ships that are passing are not enemy ships, some of them are allies, some of them are not allies but not at war with them.

So let's assume for a moment that it's a French ship, sure USA does not "love" France, we all know that, but that doesn't mean it's enemy, in theory it's a NATO ally as well, so if you are stopping a French ship, from passing, even after it has paid a toll, you are doing something that is illegal and make you be hated by everyone, including your own allies. It's the typical bully method of USA, if you guys can't have it, nobody else can. It's as simple as that.

You’re confusing the concepts of blocking and attacking ships.
The IRGC attacks and fires on ships-all except its “allies.” And these aren’t friendly Arab nations; this is China, one of the key consumers of Iranian oil. The rest of the ships are, in most cases, subjected to terrorist attacks. Terrorist attacks, specifically, because an armed attack on civilian ships in international waters is terrorism. The U.S. doesn’t lay mines in the strait, doesn’t shoot up tankers, and doesn’t fire missiles at every ship within range. I hope I’ve explained the difference clearly?

[bitgolden]

This has been tested and we are not seeing anything improving for the bitcoin world because we still go up and down based on how the war is going on, and not based on bitcoin payments. After all, few million dollars will not change that much, hell even few million dollars per day would matter.

It's a good "news", and as a news it has more value than the actual payments because the payments are too small considering the liquidity and volume of bitcoin where we reach billions, so this small situation won't matter.

[r_victory]

Chainalysis warns: paying Iran in crypto could lead to sanctions against ships for 'material support'

Any payment destined for the Iranian regime, including fees related to passage through strategic maritime routes, can be interpreted as “material support”. This classification puts shipping companies at direct risk of violating restrictions imposed by the U.S. and other countries.

“Doing so could bring a significant risk of sanctions violations, as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is sanctioned by multiple jurisdictions and Iran is subject to comprehensive US sanctions”, Kaitlin Martin, senior intelligence analyst at Chainalysis, told Cointelegraph.

Are the companies that made the payments already being investigated?

[Coyster]

Are the companies that made the payments already being investigated?

Maybe or maybe not. But what is clear is that paying tolls to Itan in order to pass an international waterway is not only "material support" to the regime, but it is also extortion and that should be unacceptable. This is the reason why the United States has also stationed their own blockade on the waterway, to prevent vessels that have paid tolls to Iran from passing. This move which has annoyed the Iranian authorities and has made a lasting solution to this conflict look very unlikely in the short term.

[Kelward]

Are the companies that made the payments already being investigated?

Maybe or maybe not. But what is clear is that paying tolls to Itan in order to pass an international waterway is not only "material support" to the regime, but it is also extortion and that should be unacceptable. This is the reason why the United States has also stationed their own blockade on the waterway, to prevent vessels that have paid tolls to Iran from passing. This move which has annoyed the Iranian authorities and has made a lasting solution to this conflict look very unlikely in the short term.

The question to ask is whether the strait of Hormuz is in the territory of Iran and whether it is right for them to be collecting tolls from oil vessels that passes through the strait? If it is illegal for Iran to collect tolls from these oil company vessels then why wasn't the matter raised before now or is it because they are at war with the US that it suddenly becomes a global crime. I think that the decision whether Iran should continue to collect tolls should go beyond what the united states wants so that it will not escalate the war because Iran cannot listen to whatever the US alone decides in their territory. This matter is very sensitive and it requires diplomatic solutions that goes beyond what only the US wants because one way or another the war is affecting other economies of the world.

[Coyster]

The question to ask is whether the strait of Hormuz is in the territory of Iran and whether it is right for them to be collecting tolls from oil vessels that passes through the strait?

The Strait of Hormuz is located in Iran and Oman's territory, but that doesn't give Iran legal rights to block the strait and charge toll on vessels peacefully passing through. It is illegal and is extortion. That said, they would argue that it is in response to the attacks they have faced from the U.S. and Israel in the past few weeks, and they have to use the waterway to their advantage in the war.

If it is illegal for Iran to collect tolls from these oil company vessels then why wasn't the matter raised before now or is it because they are at war with the US that it suddenly becomes a global crime.

They are only charging tolls as a result of this war. They blocked the Strait themselves and in order to generate revenue from the situation, they are willing to allow certain vessels through, for a fee.

This matter is very sensitive and it requires diplomatic solutions that goes beyond what only the US wants because one way or another the war is affecting other economies of the world.

That's the reason why they have blocked the Strait. To create a shortage of oil globally, causing a hike in the price of energy and looming inflation as well, all of this to force the U.S. to stop its attack in their territory. That's the basics of geopolitics.

[Wind_FURY]

Because if Iran surrenders their Uranium stockpile, then the United States will stop attacking them.

Who or what would guarantee that the United States would stop invading Iran if it handed over uranium and stopped enriching it?

The United States disregarded international law and launched a preemptive attack on Iran while negotiations were underway. What guarantees that if Iran meets the US demands, they will stop attacking?

It would definitely be a REGIME CHANGE. If they could install a person they like to run Iran, then there's no reason to attack the country anymore. In fact, the United States would probably help in the rebuilding process, no?

That would, bare minimum, be GOOD for the people in Iran. Who cares about the people who are currently in power. The plebs/common people matter MORE.

I believe Iran has learned its lesson and will not easily hand over its trump card without firm guarantees.

If that's your belief, then I believe more destruction is coming to Iran.

     ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[DiMarxist]

Are the companies that made the payments already being investigated?

Maybe or maybe not. But what is clear is that paying tolls to Itan in order to pass an international waterway is not only "material support" to the regime, but it is also extortion and that should be unacceptable. This is the reason why the United States has also stationed their own blockade on the waterway, to prevent vessels that have paid tolls to Iran from passing. This move which has annoyed the Iranian authorities and has made a lasting solution to this conflict look very unlikely in the short term.

I will have to commend the blockage of the strait of Hormuz from the united states as timely and welcoming if not , Iran would have used this war and their dominance in the strait of Hormuz to amase money that would have been used to fund the Iranian regime. The united states of America just has to block the strait of Hormuz so that even if any vessel pays Iran they can't successfully pass the strait of Hormuz because there is no way out as a result of the blockage from the united states of America.

[Coyster]

The united states of America just has to block the strait of Hormuz so that even if any vessel pays Iran they can't successfully pass the strait of Hormuz because there is no way out as a result of the blockage from the united states of America.

That is the idea, to stop Iran from benefitting financially in this war. And to also wage an economic war, like Iran has been doing since the start of the war, by blocking the Strait.

Donald Trump has also announced today that the U.S. attacked and seized an Iranian-flagged vessel in the Gulf of Oman. Apparently, this vessel was attempting to pass through the U.S.'s blockade, but was ultimately stopped and seized. It is interesting to see how this affects the next round of peace talks that is set to happen in Pakistan, i reckon it'd mean there's no resolution in sight.

[Kavelj22]

The United States disregarded international law and launched a preemptive attack on Iran while negotiations were underway. What guarantees that if Iran meets the US demands, they will stop attacking?


I believe Iran has learned its lesson and will not easily hand over its trump card without firm guarantees.

The US never learns, they're on a negotiation and yet keep on violating it? What we can see, it's still Iran that has to dictate the negotiations here.

The white house is engaging in evasive tactics, while Trump is feeding the fire with his contradictory Truth Social posts. On one hand, they reached an agreement to open the crossing in exchange for lifting the blockade on Iranian ports, while on the other hand, Iran opens the crossing om the Strait, but the USA doesn't lift the blockade. On one hand, Donald Trump says he ordered naval vessels to return to their bases, while on the other hand, he threatens to destroy Iranian bridges and ports if Iran refuses to reach an agreement. The only part I can blame in this situation is the USA that doesn't look to be serious in reaching an agreement during ceasefire period.

[STT]

A very simple question: Does the Strait of Hormuz belong to Iran!? Is there anywhere I can find information on this?

Some parts of the sea in this area used by the largest boats with the greatest tonnage do most often use Iran's territory to sail through the strait.   How easy is it to avoid using any of their territory I'm not sure, it might be a far slower more difficult passage but still possible but would have to double check that.

   Otherwise a large part of Hormuz strait is similar to how China claims to own every ship, land and population in the South China sea.   If both policies are followed and all countries in the axis insist on holding the world hostage it would result in the next world war.   Most of the time these countries dont attempt direct violent profiteering on their neighbours only to intimidate and threaten overtly but its an ongoing point of contention for sure; the Ukraine war for example is example of death for profit or intimidation it makes little sense overall much as the Iran war is death and loss to almost every party involved.

• The deep‑water shipping channel lies partly inside Iran’s territorial waters.
• The opposite side (near Oman) is shallower and narrower.
• Tankers with huge draft (oil carriers, LNG carriers) need the deeper route.

[passwordnow]

The media is very misleading. If that's for real, then they should have stated that it's not yet signed into deal. What I've read is that they've said they've fully opened it and these headlines are just giving the vibes of " - Iran " who said that it's not fully open. I wonder what will happen if this ceasefire ends and if Iran is truly opening the Strait after that period that they have given. Or we just hope for the best that they'll open it wholly when they agree on all conditions that both parties have set.

The statements made by President Trump and the Iranian Foreign Minister are also deceptive, in addition to the media. The minister will tweeted that Trump is misrepresenting the circumstances.

Trump wants to look like that he's the superhero of this peace panel even he's not. They keep on violating the potential peace treaty they're about to make with Iran. Let's see later if there will be another news because he's tweet that he'll send another diplomat for an arrangement for this peace talk.

We've got some update on the Strait of Hormuz again because of the US blockade, it's said that Iran has decided to close the Strait again.  

Just like i said in my last post in this thread, the situation is very confusing, i was pretty sure Iran would not uphold the deal of keeping the Strait open, if the U.S. continued its blockade of their ports, and that's exactly what has happened here. Reports are that a few ships were able to pass after the announcement that the Strait was open, but now most vessels are turning back after this latest information.

The situation is quite funny, more like both parties are playing chess with the global economy. Neither party believes the other holds the advantage in this war and that could mean we are far from an end to hostilities.

Some were able to pass but as when Iran has announced it once again of closing the Strait due to the blockade, there were some reports that they have stopped ships that were about to pass. They sure are playing global economy monopoly here through the volatility of the markets.

The white house is engaging in evasive tactics, while Trump is feeding the fire with his contradictory Truth Social posts. On one hand, they reached an agreement to open the crossing in exchange for lifting the blockade on Iranian ports, while on the other hand, Iran opens the crossing om the Strait, but the USA doesn't lift the blockade. On one hand, Donald Trump says he ordered naval vessels to return to their bases, while on the other hand, he threatens to destroy Iranian bridges and ports if Iran refuses to reach an agreement. The only part I can blame in this situation is the USA that doesn't look to be serious in reaching an agreement during ceasefire period.

He keeps on threating Iran with the bridges, schools and even their oil depots too. And there's no other one to blame on this situation but on how USA keeps on playing hero and yet violating the arrangement and making it always look like Iran is the villain.

[fuguebtc]

What USA is not realizing is that, the ships that are passing are not enemy ships, some of them are allies, some of them are not allies but not at war with them.

So let's assume for a moment that it's a French ship, sure USA does not "love" France, we all know that, but that doesn't mean it's enemy, in theory it's a NATO ally as well, so if you are stopping a French ship, from passing, even after it has paid a toll, you are doing something that is illegal and make you be hated by everyone, including your own allies. It's the typical bully method of USA, if you guys can't have it, nobody else can. It's as simple as that.

You’re confusing the concepts of blocking and attacking ships.
The IRGC attacks and fires on ships-all except its “allies.” And these aren’t friendly Arab nations; this is China, one of the key consumers of Iranian oil. The rest of the ships are, in most cases, subjected to terrorist attacks. Terrorist attacks, specifically, because an armed attack on civilian ships in international waters is terrorism. The U.S. doesn’t lay mines in the strait, doesn’t shoot up tankers, and doesn’t fire missiles at every ship within range. I hope I’ve explained the difference clearly?

It is undeniable that the IRGC has attacked several oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz. But it seem you're deliberately overlooking some detail to hastily conclude that those actions were acts of terrorism.

Because before carrying out any attack, Iran had already issued warnings in advance. They only attack ship that ignore warnings and deliberately try to pass through the strait. Oil tankers that turn around will not be attacked


Furthermore, if you believe that Iran's attack on the oil tanker was an act of terrorism. What would you call the US invasion, bombing, and killing of thousands of people, including women and children in Iran? What would you call an act of attacking a sovereign nation?

[Wind_FURY]

What USA is not realizing is that, the ships that are passing are not enemy ships, some of them are allies, some of them are not allies but not at war with them.

So let's assume for a moment that it's a French ship, sure USA does not "love" France, we all know that, but that doesn't mean it's enemy, in theory it's a NATO ally as well, so if you are stopping a French ship, from passing, even after it has paid a toll, you are doing something that is illegal and make you be hated by everyone, including your own allies. It's the typical bully method of USA, if you guys can't have it, nobody else can. It's as simple as that.

You’re confusing the concepts of blocking and attacking ships.
The IRGC attacks and fires on ships-all except its “allies.” And these aren’t friendly Arab nations; this is China, one of the key consumers of Iranian oil. The rest of the ships are, in most cases, subjected to terrorist attacks. Terrorist attacks, specifically, because an armed attack on civilian ships in international waters is terrorism. The U.S. doesn’t lay mines in the strait, doesn’t shoot up tankers, and doesn’t fire missiles at every ship within range. I hope I’ve explained the difference clearly?

It is undeniable that the IRGC has attacked several oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz. But it seem you're deliberately overlooking some detail to hastily conclude that those actions were acts of terrorism.

Because before carrying out any attack, Iran had already issued warnings in advance. They only attack ship that ignore warnings and deliberately try to pass through the strait. Oil tankers that turn around will not be attacked


Furthermore, if you believe that Iran's attack on the oil tanker was an act of terrorism. What would you call the US invasion, bombing, and killing of thousands of people, including women and children in Iran? What would you call an act of attacking a sovereign nation?

It's a very complicated matter. Iran is not wholly good, and the United States is not wholly evil. You could also remember the fact that Iran/IRGC also killed thousands of their own citizens who were joining the protests in early 2026.

Plus I agree to the fact that the United States SHOULD NOT leave Iran alone in enriching Uranium for development of nuclear weapons. We don't need another North Korea.