“Elevated but stabilising. De-facto, Iran retains substantial tactical leverage over the Strait, selectively permitting traffic while signalling readiness to toll or block others. De-jure, most states reject Tehran’s claim, framing the waterway as international. This legal-physical split reconciles the principal divergences: (1) Sovereignty debate (DIV-INT-01) is a matter of competing narratives – Iran asserts authority, others deny it – so both statements coexist as positions rather than mutually exclusive facts. (2) Physical control vs. international status (DIV-CROSS-01) resolves by recognising that international law has not prevented Iran’s coercive capacity; the strait is legally open but practically constrained. (3) “Closed” vs. “soon to open” (DIV-CROSS-02) reflects temporal nuance: limited corridors are reopening for selected ships, supporting Trump’s optimism, while broader commercial freedom remains curtailed, validating claims of ongoing restriction. Expect continued patchy transit improvements, pressure for multilateral naval guarantees, and rising diplomatic costs for Iran if tolling persists. Absent a kinetic coalition operation, full normalisation likely slips months, not weeks.”