ADVERTISEMENT
While Tehran has not issued a formal, nationwide blockade decree—likely to avoid self-inflicted economic damage—the IRGC’s actions have already disrupted maritime traffic. Tanker tracking data from firms like Kpler and Bloomberg show vessels making U-turns, slowing, stopping, or rerouting around the strait. Major oil companies, trading houses, and LNG shippers—including some of the world’s largest—have suspended shipments through the passage. Some owners instructed fleets to avoid Hormuz entirely, while others advised proceeding with extreme caution. The U.S. Navy issued advisories that it could not guarantee commercial vessel safety in the Persian Gulf, prompting widespread hesitation.
Historically, Iran has repeatedly threatened to close the strait during crises—most notably in 2019 amid U.S. “maximum pressure” sanctions, and again in 2023-2025 amid proxy conflicts—but never fully executed a prolonged shutdown. Partial harassments, seizures of tankers, or mine-laying exercises have occurred, but a complete blockade remains unprecedented. Analysts note Iran’s asymmetric capabilities: swarms of fast-attack boats, anti-ship missiles, naval mines, submarines, and shore-based launchers could impose severe risks without needing a traditional naval dominance. However, U.S. strikes reportedly targeted Iranian naval assets in the Gulf, potentially degrading Tehran’s enforcement ability. Trump has vowed to “obliterate” Iran’s navy if needed, with U.S. Fifth Fleet forces on high alert to escort shipping or forcibly reopen the route.
The immediate market reaction underscores the gravity. Oil markets were closed Saturday (weekend), but Brent crude settled Friday at around $72 per barrel after weeks of risk premiums. Analysts anticipate sharp spikes when trading resumes Sunday evening—potentially $5-20+ per barrel initially, with Barclays forecasting a test of $100 if disruptions persist. In worst-case scenarios involving prolonged closure or attacks on Gulf oil infrastructure, prices could surge to $120-150+ per barrel, per estimates from Kpler, Rapidan Energy, and others. Even partial enforcement—say, 20-30% flow reduction via harassment—could add substantial war-risk premiums.
The broader geopolitical context is explosive. This marks the second major U.S. strike on an oil-producing nation in 2026 (following Venezuela operations), but Iran’s strategic position amplifies risks. Iran’s proxies—Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah, and others—have threatened renewed attacks on shipping and Israel. Gulf states hosting U.S. bases face direct exposure. Diplomatic channels appear frozen; nuclear talks collapsed prior to the strikes.
Tehran views itself on “death ground,” per former NATO assessments, potentially prompting “go big” retaliation: beyond Hormuz, cyberattacks, terrorism against U.S. interests, or strikes on neighbors’ oil facilities. Yet self-preservation tempers action—Iran’s economy relies on oil exports, and full closure invites devastating U.S. counterforce.
As of late February 28, 2026, the strait sees reduced but not zero traffic; some vessels transit cautiously, while others pile up waiting. No confirmed military interdictions or attacks on ships yet, but the psychological effect is profounThe world watches anxiously: will this remain asymmetric harassment, or spiral into open naval confrontation?