STRATEGIC OVERVIEW

For decades the closure of the Strait of Hormuz was the scenario every energy-security study modelled and almost none expected. The standard argument — that Iran would never close a waterway its own exports depend on, and that the US Navy could reopen it within days if it tried — was repeated in this briefing's first edition. Both halves of that argument have now been tested, and both failed.

Before the war, roughly 20 million barrels of oil a day — about a quarter of seaborne oil trade — and a fifth of the world's LNG passed through a channel 33 km wide at its narrowest. Since 28 February that flow has been cut to a trickle, producing what the International Energy Agency has called the largest supply disruption in the history of the global oil market. This update reviews how the closure has been enforced, what it has cost, why neither military escorts nor diplomacy have ended it, and what would have to change for traffic to return.

~10/day
Ship transits, vs 85–100 pre-war
72
Attacks on merchant vessels
$126
Brent peak; ~$102–108 mid-Sept
3–10%
War-risk premium, of hull value

TIMELINE OF THE CLOSURE

HOW THE CLOSURE IS ENFORCED

Selective denial, not a wall

Iran has not physically sealed the strait. It has made transit uninsurable for anyone it has not approved. The Persian Gulf Strait Authority, set up on 5 May, issues permissions to vessels from states Tehran designates as friendly — seven Malaysian ships were let through as early as 6 April — while everyone else faces the risk of attack. The routing dispute that destroyed the June memorandum follows the same logic: Iran requires ships to pass close to its own coast, under its supervision, and has attacked vessels using the lane nearer Oman that the US and the Joint Maritime Information Center promoted.

Drones, missiles and fast boats

Compiled incident lists record about 72 attacks between March and September, killing 20 seafarers and a port worker and injuring 35. Six ships have been seized, including the MSC Epaminondas and MSC Francesca. Targets have ranged from VLCCs and container ships to tugs and the LNG carriers Al Rekayyat and Gaslog Shanghai, both disabled in late summer. Liberia-, Marshall Islands- and Panama-flagged ships account for most incidents, reflecting the world fleet rather than any political selection.

Mines and electronic interference

Mines have done less physical damage than drones but more to confidence. A channel that might contain mines has to be treated as though it does, and six months into the crisis US clearance operations are still under way. Widespread GNSS jamming and spoofing add collision and grounding risk in crowded, shallow water.

WHY ESCORTS HAVE NOT REOPENED THE STRAIT

Washington's public position is that the waterway is open. Energy Secretary Chris Wright said in mid-September that about 10 million barrels a day were moving — "two-thirds or north of two-thirds of previous flows" — and President Trump has described the US as being in "total control". Independent tracking does not support this. IMF PortWatch logged eight transits on 13 September against a pre-crisis norm of about 85 a day; Al Jazeera's ten-day average was 14. As market analyst Chris Beauchamp put it, "Hormuz is not under its control, and oil is not flowing freely."

The gap is explained by economics rather than firepower. War-risk premiums stand at 3–10% of hull value per voyage, against 0.125–0.25% before the war — several million dollars for a single VLCC transit. Escorts can reduce the chance of a hit but cannot make a voyage insurable, and crews and owners have watched ships burn under escort-era conditions in July, August and September. Project Freedom was paused on 6 June when a deal seemed close and has not recovered its tempo since the truce broke down.

ECONOMIC IMPACT

The bypass routes are now targets

Saudi Arabia's East–West pipeline to Yanbu on the Red Sea and the UAE's Habshan–Fujairah line are the main routes by which Gulf crude can reach the market without using the strait. Neither can replace the strait, and September has shown that neither is safe. A drone launched from Iraq temporarily shut the East–West line — by itself equivalent to about 4% of global supply — and Aramco's Jizan refinery has been struck twice in a month. Al Jazeera also reports renewed Houthi pressure on the Bab el-Mandeb approach, which threatens the Red Sea outlet that the Saudi bypass depends on. For more on that theatre see our Red Sea briefing.

INTELLIGENCE NOTE

The pre-war consensus held that Iran could harass shipping but not sustain a closure against the US Navy. Two hundred days of evidence point the other way: a coastal state with drones, mines and short-range missiles does not need sea control to close a chokepoint — it only needs to keep the risk above what insurers and crews will accept. Reopening Hormuz is therefore a political problem before it is a naval one. — Assessment based on IMF PortWatch, IEA, Al Jazeera, CNBC and JMIC reporting.

DIPLOMATIC SITUATION

Article 5 of the June memorandum committed Iran to "make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels with no charge for 60 days". It did not say which lane, under whose authority, or what would happen on day 61. Those omissions were where the deal broke. The underlying dispute is about sovereignty: Iran wants recognition of its administrative role over the strait — licensing, routing and eventually fees — while the US and the Gulf Arab states insist on unrestricted transit passage under the law of the sea.

Since President Trump declared the memorandum dead and promised a "crushing economic operation", direct US–Iran contact has stopped. The live channel is Iran–Oman, the two coastal states, discussing a joint management arrangement; a round scheduled for 14 September was postponed and no breakthrough is expected soon. Pakistan continues to try to revive direct talks. Any durable arrangement will also have to address the US posture toward Iranian exports, since Tehran has treated the closure and the blockade as a single issue from the start. The nuclear dimension is covered in our Iran nuclear briefing.

OUTLOOK

Indicators to watch: daily transit counts from IMF PortWatch; war-risk premium quotes; whether the Iran–Oman round is rescheduled; the repair timeline and security of the East–West pipeline; and any change in the US position on Iranian oil exports.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Is the Strait of Hormuz closed right now?

Effectively, yes. As of mid-September 2026 only around 8–14 commercial vessels a day are passing, compared with 85–100 before the war. Iran allows ships it has approved; others risk attack, and most insurers will not cover the transit at a commercial price.

When did Iran close the Strait of Hormuz?

The IRGC Navy began warning ships off on 28 February 2026, within hours of the first US–Israeli strikes on Iran, and formally confirmed the closure on 2 March. It briefly eased restrictions in mid-April and again after the 17 June memorandum, but reimposed them both times.

How many ships have been attacked?

About 72 incidents were recorded between March and September 2026, killing at least 20 seafarers and injuring 35. Six vessels have been seized.

How high did oil prices go?

Brent crude peaked at about $126 a barrel in spring 2026, after the largest monthly price rise on record in March. In mid-September it was trading between roughly $102 and $108.

Why can't the US Navy simply reopen the strait?

Escorts and mine clearance reduce risk but do not remove it, and commercial shipping depends on insurance. With war-risk premiums at 3–10% of a ship's value per voyage and vessels still being hit, most owners will not send ships through regardless of naval protection.

Can pipelines replace the Strait of Hormuz?

Only partly. Saudi Arabia's East–West pipeline and the UAE's Habshan–Fujairah line bypass the strait but carry a fraction of normal Gulf exports, and the East–West line was itself damaged by a drone attack in September 2026.

What would reopen the strait?

A political agreement on who manages transit. Talks between Iran and Oman on a joint arrangement are the most active channel, but a round planned for mid-September was postponed, and direct US–Iran talks have been suspended since July.

AUTHOR

EDITOR · ENERGY & HYBRID CONFLICT

Arda Alkis is an energy and hybrid conflict analyst specializing in maritime security, strategic chokepoints, and irregular warfare. His work is based on open-source intelligence and data from ACLED (Armed Conflict Location & Event Data), the International Crisis Group (ICG), and international reporting networks. He focuses on energy-driven conflicts, proxy warfare, and instability across the Middle East, Africa, and global trade corridors.

Read more about the WarWatch editorial team on the About page.

SOURCES AND REFERENCES

TRACK PERSIAN GULF MARITIME INTELLIGENCE IN REAL TIME

⊙ OPEN LIVE MAP