The Strait of Hormuz is a vital route for oil. Closing it could backfire on Iran
The U.S. military's strike on three sites in Iran over the weekend has raised questions about how its military might respond.
The Strait of Hormuz is between Oman and Iran, which boasts a fleet of fast-attack boats and thousands of naval mines as well as missiles that it could use to make the strait impassable, at least for a time.
Iran's main naval base at Bandar Abbas is on the north coast of the strait. It could also fire missiles from its long Persian Gulf shore, as its allies, Yemen's Houthi rebels, have done in the Red Sea.
About 20 million barrels of oil per day, or around 20% of the world's oil consumption, passed through the strait in 2024. Most of that oil goes to Asia.
Here is a look at the waterway and its impact on the global economy:
An energy highway in a volatile region
The strait connects the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. It's only 33 kilometers (21 miles) wide at its narrowest point, but deep enough and wide enough to handle the world's largest crude oil tankers.
Oil that passes through the strait comes from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq, Iran, Kuwait, and Bahrain, while major supplies of liquefied natural gas come from Qatar. At its narrowest point, the sea lanes for tankers lie in Omani waters, and before and after that cross into Iranian territory.
While some global oil chokepoints can be circumvented by taking longer routes that simply add costs, that's not an option for most of the oil moving through the strait.
That's because the pipelines that could be used to carry the oil on land, such as Saudi Arabia's East-West pipeline, they don't have nearly enough capacity. 'Most volumes that transit the strait have no alternative means of exiting the region,' according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Closing the Strait of Hormuz would send oil prices massively higher — at least at first
If Iran blocked the strait, oil prices could shoot as high as $120-$130 per, at least temporarily, said Homayoun Falakshahi, head of crude oil analyst at Kpler, in an online webinar Sunday.
That would deal an inflationary shock to the global economy — if it lasted. Analysts think it wouldn't.
Asia would be directly impacted because 84% of the oil moving through the strait is headed for Asia; top destinations are China, India, Japan and South Korea. China gets 47% of its seaborne oil from the Gulf. China, however, has an oil inventory of 1.1 billion barrels, or 2 1/2 months of supply.
U.S. oil customers would feel the impact of the higher prices but would not lose much supply. The U.S. imported only about 7% of its oil from Persian Gulf countries through the strait in 2024, according to the USEIA. That was the lowest level in nearly 40 years.
Iran has good reasons not to block the strait
Closing the strait would cut off Iran's own oil exports. While Iran does have a new terminal under construction at Jask, just outside the strait, the new facility has loaded oil only once and isn't in a position to replace the strait, according to Kpler analysts.
Closure would hit China, Iran's largest trading partner and only remaining oil customer, and harm its oil-exporting Arab neighbors, who are at least officially supporting it in its war with Israel.
And it would mean blocking Oman's territorial waters, offending a country that has served as a mediator between the U.S. and Iran.
The US would likely intervene to reopen the strait
Any price spike would probably not last. One big reason: Analysts expect that the U.S. Navy would intervene to keep the strait open. In the 1980s, U.S. warships escorted Kuwaiti oil tankers through the strait to protect them against Iranian attacks during the Iran-Iraq war.
A price spike 'wouldn't last very long' and the strait would likely be reopened 'very fast,' said Kpler's Falakshahi.
U.S. use of force to reopen the strait would likely be supported by Europe and 'even unofficially by China,' he said. 'Iran's navy would probably get destroyed in a matter of hours or days.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Israeli airstrikes on Tehran killed inmates in ‘apparent war crime'
Israeli airstrikes on Tehran's Evin prison in June killed scores of detainees, visitors and staff in what Human Rights Watch (HRW) has called an 'apparent war crime'. Iranian authorities have since subjected survivors to abuse, enforced disappearances and inhumane detention conditions, the rights group said on Wednesday. HRW's investigation, based on satellite imagery, videos and witness accounts, found the 23 June Israeli airstrikes destroyed visitation halls, prison wards, the central kitchen, the medical clinic and administrative offices. No evident military targets were identified in the facility, which held more than 1,500 prisoners at the time, many of whom had been jailed for peaceful activism. 'Israel's strikes on Evin prison on June 23 killed and injured scores of civilians without any evident military target in violation of the laws of war and is an apparent war crime,' said Michael Page, deputy Middle East director at HRW. 'The Israeli attack placed at grave risk the already precarious lives of Evin's prisoners, many of them wrongfully detained dissidents and activists.' At least 80 people died in the attack, which occurred during visiting hours, when public areas were at their busiest. HRW described the strike as unlawfully indiscriminate. Israeli officials have called Evin a 'symbol of oppression' but have provided no evidence of military use. The prison attack took place during a 12-day conflict between Israel and Iran in which hundreds of civilians were killed on both sides. US-based rights group Human Rights Activists in Iran (HRAI) said the Israeli strikes on Iran resulted in at least 5,665 casualties, including 1,190 killed and 4,475 injured, both military and civilian. The Iranian security forces also arrested 1,596 individuals during the 12-day war, the group added. In the aftermath, HRW said, Iranian authorities moved prisoners to two main detention centres in Tehran province – Shahr-e Rey prison, or Qarchak, for women, and the Greater Tehran Central Penitentiary, or Fashafouyeh, for men – shackling male inmates in pairs, beating some with batons and using electric shocks (on return to Evin) for protesting their handcuffing and the transfer of death row prisoners. Women were locked in their ward without water or phone access before being moved on 24 June to Qarchak, notorious for overcrowding and inhumane conditions. 'Iranian authorities have committed a catalogue of violations against prisoners in the aftermath of the attack, including beatings, insults, and threats during transfers, and holding prisoners in appalling conditions that have endangered their lives and health. Death-row inmates and those forcibly disappeared are now at heightened risk of torture or execution,' added Page. Some detainees were returned to Evin 46 days later only to face similar violence during transfers. Authorities have withheld information on the fate and whereabouts of some detainees held by security and intelligence agencies, including dissidents, human rights activists, and dual or foreign nationals. Among them is Swedish-Iranian physician Ahmadreza Djalali, on death row since 2017. Families have reported only brief, monitored calls from missing prisoners, with no information on their location or condition, a situation HRW says amounts to enforced disappearance. Transferred prisoners have faced overcrowded, insect-infested cells, with some forced to sleep on floors. 'Iranian authorities should not use Israel's strikes on Evin prison as another opportunity to subject prisoners, including those who should never have been in prison in the first place, to ill-treatment,' he said. HRW has called for independent investigations into violations by both Israel and Iran, with those responsible held accountable for possible war crimes.
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Iran fears ‘existential threat' over Britain's nuclear sanctions
Iran is facing an 'existential threat' if Britain and its European allies reimpose UN sanctions over its nuclear programme, a senior official has said. Britain, France and Germany threatened Iran with crippling economic sanctions it averted in 2015 if it does not begin talks to renew the programme by the end of August 2025. The deal gave Iran's economy much-needed relief after nearly a decade of trade and banking restrictions in return for curbs on its nuclear enrichment programme that would stop it from developing a nuclear bomb. On Wednesday, however, the European powers told Antonio Guterres, UN Secretary-General, they were ready to trigger a 'snapback' mechanism if Iran fails to take action by the deadline, but that they had also offered an extension if it does. 'We have made it clear that if Iran is not willing to reach a diplomatic solution before the end of August 2025, or does not seize the opportunity of an extension, [the E3] are prepared to trigger the snapback mechanism,' the ministers said in the letter. '[We] are committed to use all diplomatic tools at our disposal to ensure Iran does not develop a nuclear weapon,' they added. The warning has prompted urgent internal discussions in Tehran. 'The Islamic Republic does not have the financial or military capacity to endure the snapback of UN sanctions. It would make the people protest again and this time it might be different,' a senior Iranian official told The Telegraph from Tehran. 'They are more damaging than war,' a senior Iranian official said. 'The supreme national security council has asked the presidential office to find a way for talks before it is too late.' The council directed the foreign ministry in July to reopen talks with the Trump administration, aiming to revive diplomacy after the war with Israel, which saw the United States intervene by bombing key Iranian nuclear sites. Tehran and Washington held five rounds of talks starting April 12, but the sixth round was cancelled after Israel launched strikes on Iran on June 13. The attacks effectively ended the diplomatic process that had shown signs of progress. 'They are asked to do whatever possible because everyone here knows the situation is not like 10 years ago when the deal was signed,' the Iranian official said. Under the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, any party to the accord can restore previous UN sanctions. The most significant resolution that could be triggered is Resolution 1929. Adopted in June 2010, it expanded sanctions beyond technical nuclear restrictions to target Iran's broader economy. The resolution required all UN members to take 'all necessary measures' to enforce Iran's enrichment ban and ballistic missile restrictions. The 'snapback' mechanism was designed as leverage to ensure Iranian compliance with the nuclear accord, which the European countries were original signatories to the 2015 deal alongside the United States, China and Russia. Levels close to weapons grade President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the accord in 2018 during his first term and ordered new sanctions, but the Europeans said they would stick to the agreement. In response to Mr Trump's withdrawal, Iran started enriching uranium at levels close to weapons grade before Israel began bombing the country in June. While the regime celebrated the end of the June war as a 'victory,' unity has quickly descended into disagreements between hardliners and moderates over the country's future. Hardliners believe they have a chance to bring the country together and show Western weakness, while moderates argue the regime should be open to dialogue. The split became public when a senior Revolutionary Guard official criticised President Masoud Pezeshkian's statements defending negotiations. Aziz Ghazanfari, deputy political chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, said Mr Pezeshkian's 'verbal mistakes have increased' since taking office. Mr Pezeshkian had asked critics: 'If you don't talk, what will you do? Do you want to fight? Well, they hit us, we rebuild, and they'll hit us again. 'I don't think we can achieve anything through fighting. We will not do anything without co-ordination and consent from the Supreme Leader, even if it goes against my own opinion,' he added.
Reuters
6 hours ago
- Reuters
No armed groups allowed in Lebanon, president tells Hezbollah's ally Iran
BEIRUT, Aug 13 (Reuters) - No group in Lebanon is permitted to bear arms or rely on foreign backing, its president told a visiting senior Iranian official on Wednesday after the cabinet approved the goals of a U.S.-backed roadmap to disarm the Iran-aligned Hezbollah group. During a meeting in Beirut with Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran's top security body, Joseph Aoun warned against foreign interference in Lebanon's internal affairs, saying the country was open to cooperation with Iran but only within the bounds of national sovereignty and mutual respect. Larijani said the Islamic Republic supports Lebanon's sovereignty and does not interfere in its decision-making. "Any decision taken by the Lebanese government in consultation with the resistance is respected by us," he said after separate talks with Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, whose Amal movement is an ally of Hezbollah. By "resistance", Larijani was alluding to the Shi'ite Muslim militant Hezbollah, which was founded in 1982, grew into a "state-within-a-state" force better armed than the Lebanese army and has repeatedly fought Israel over the decades. "Iran didn't bring any plan to Lebanon, the U.S. did. Those intervening in Lebanese affairs are those dictating plans and deadlines", said Larijani. He said Lebanon should not "mix its enemies with its friends - your enemy is Israel, your friend is the resistance". "I recommend to Lebanon to always appreciate the value of resistance." The U.S. submitted a plan through President Donald Trump's envoy to the region, Tom Barrack, setting out the most detailed steps yet for disarming Hezbollah, which has rejected mounting calls to disarm since its devastating war with Israel last year. Hezbollah has rejected repeated calls to relinquish its weaponry although it was seriously weakened in the war, with Israel killing most of its leadership in airstrikes and bombings. It was the climax of a conflict that began in October 2023 when the group opened fire at Israeli positions along Lebanon's southern frontier in support of its Palestinian Islamist ally Hamas at the start of the Gaza war. Aoun also said recent remarks by some Iranian officials had not been helpful, and reaffirmed that the Lebanese state and its armed forces were solely responsible for protecting all citizens. Last week, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said Tehran supported any decision Hezbollah makes, adding that this was not the first attempt to strip the group of its weapons.
