SEOUL, August 13 (AJP) - South Korea should draw on its historically strong relationship with Iran to seek a role in postwar reconstruction and favorable terms for safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz, a senior Iranian envoy in Seoul said.
“We should close our eyes and look to the future,” Mohammad Esmaeil Passandideh, counselor and deputy head of mission at the Iranian embassy in Seoul, said in a recent interview with AJP. “The post-war period will be a great time for Korea to rebuild damaged relations,” he said. “It will be too late for Korea to wait for the green light from the United States.”
The appeal comes after South Korea spent months reshaping its energy supply chain around disruptions in the Gulf.
Before the war, roughly 70 percent of South Korea’s crude had historically passed through the Strait of Hormuz. Middle Eastern crude has since fallen to about half of total imports, from roughly two-thirds a year earlier, with American, African and Latin American barrels taking its place.
The war began on Feb. 28, when joint American and Israeli strikes hit Iranian nuclear and military infrastructure and killed Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. His son Mojtaba Khamenei was elected to succeed him on March 8.
A ceasefire brokered by Pakistan and a memorandum signed in June halted the largest exchanges, but disputes over Iran’s nuclear program, the Strait of Hormuz and sanctions remain unresolved.
Passandideh said more than 3,000 Iranians had been killed and strikes had damaged energy infrastructure and nuclear facilities. He did not provide an estimate of the financial cost.
He described the postwar outlook as uncertain, but said one Iranian response was predictable.
“Some concepts are not acceptable for Iranians — like surrender,” he said. “They will resist, not only for one month or two months.” That resistance, he said, has reshaped Tehran’s approach to Hormuz.
Before Feb. 28, Iran’s goal had been to maintain peaceful and safe passage through the strait. The attacks fundamentally changed the security calculation.
“The security situation around the Strait of Hormuz fundamentally changed,” Passandideh said.
But he rejected the idea that Tehran wanted a permanent postwar closure.
“I want to mention again: Iran is not looking to close or blockade the Strait of Hormuz after the war,” he said.
Iran nevertheless no longer appears to view security in the waterway as something it should provide at its own expense.
Tehran created the Persian Gulf Strait Authority in May and began imposing fees reportedly ranging from about $1 million to $2 million per voyage, depending on vessel size and cargo.
Iran’s parliament is also considering legislation that would bar vessels linked to the United States, Israel and other states Tehran considers hostile while charging others for passage.
U.S. President Donald Trump has separately demanded that vessels pay the equivalent of 20 percent of their cargo value in return for U.S. Navy protection of the waterway.
Asked how Iran would price its own system, Passandideh answered by comparison.
“I think that we will be cheaper than Trump,” he said.
He said the strait could not simply return to its prewar order and argued that regional states should take more responsibility for their own security.
“We believe bringing safety and security to our region is not by the United States, by foreigners,” he said. “By ourselves, by our countries.”
“I believe it is time to know the United States cannot secure safety for others.”
Pressed on whether high tolls could ultimately drive Asian shipping away from the Gulf and hurt Iran itself, Passandideh returned instead to what Iran had already paid during the war.
“We paid a lot during this war. We paid the cost for our safety,” he said. “We expected the international community to defend us, to condemn the aggressors. Who blamed the United States and Israel? Who?”
Iran, he argued, should no longer be expected to bear the cost of securing one of the world’s most important energy corridors by itself.
“Maybe some countries should pay more for reaching this security,” he said.
South Korea, he suggested, is among the countries from which Tehran expected more.
“During this war, we provided free and secure passage for Korea,” Passandideh said, adding that Iran had expected Seoul to speak more forcefully in return.
South Korea and Iran have a relationship stretching back more than six decades, including years when Korean builders were heavily involved in Iranian infrastructure projects and Iranian crude was an important part of Korea’s energy supply.
But relations deteriorated as U.S. sanctions tightened and billions of dollars in Iranian oil proceeds became frozen in South Korean bank accounts. The funds were eventually released in 2023 as part of a U.S.-Iran prisoner exchange.
The nuclear dispute remains another obstacle to the relationship Passandideh wants rebuilt.
He argued that the issue was not weapons but Iran’s right to maintain a civilian nuclear program on the same terms as other countries.
“A peaceful nuclear program is our choice, and it is our right,” he said. “Iranians cannot accept any double standard.”
He said Tehran had no intention of developing nuclear weapons.
“We don’t want nuclear weapons, and we don’t have any plan to make nuclear weapons,” he said.
Iran and six world powers reached the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in 2015, restricting enrichment and expanding international monitoring before Trump withdrew the United States from the agreement in 2018 and reimposed sanctions.
For Passandideh, the postwar question is whether South Korea treats its retreat from Iran as permanent or tries to rebuild a relationship that once carried considerable economic weight.
His argument was defiant on sovereignty and security, but he ended on the cost being borne inside Iran.
“I hope my country and our people can overcome these challenges,” he said. “Living is so hard. The cost of living is so high.”
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.