Can Iran really shut down the Strait of Hormuz?

Amid Israel’s ongoing attacks in Gaza and Iran, US President Donald Trump’s unprecedented decision to bomb three Iranian nuclear sites has deepened fears of a regional conflict in the Middle East.

Over the weekend, the United States military carried out its first known strikes against Iran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution toppled pro-Western Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

Tehran has vowed to respond, prompting fears of escalation.

During an address to a meeting of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in Istanbul, Turkiye on Sunday, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the US crossed “a very big red line” by attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities.

One way Iran could retaliate is to shut the Strait of Hormuz, a vital trade route where one-fifth of the world’s oil supply – roughly 20 million barrels – and much of its liquified gas, is shipped each day. That would lead to a surge in energy prices.

So, what do we know about the strategic passage, and can Iran afford to block it in response to the US and Israeli aggression?

(Al Jazeera)

What is the Strait of Hormuz?

The Strait of Hormuz lies between Oman and the United Arab Emirates on one side and Iran on the other. It links the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea beyond.

It is 33km (21 miles) wide at its narrowest point, with the shipping lane just 3km (2 miles) wide in either direction, making it vulnerable to attack.

Energy traders have been on high alert since Israel launched a wave of surprise attacks across Iran on June 13, fearing disruptions to oil and gas flows through the strait.

While the US and Israel have targeted key parts of Iran’s energy infrastructure, there has been no direct disruption to maritime activity in the region so far.

Still, even before the US strikes on Saturday, the escalation of the conflict between Israel and Iran had sparked ocean freight rates to surge in recent weeks.

Freight intelligence firm Xeneta said average spot rates have increased 55 percent month-over-month, through to last Friday.

Who would need to approve the closure?

Iran has in the past threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz, but has never followed through on the threat.

Iran’s Supreme National Security Council must make the final decision to close the strait, Iran’s Press TV said on Sunday, after parliament was reported to have backed the measure.

However, the decision to close the strait is not yet final, as parliament has not ratified a bill to that effect.

Instead, a member of parliament’s National Security Commission, Esmail Kosari, was quoted in Iranian media as saying: “For now, [parliament has] come to the conclusion we should close the Strait of Hormuz, but the final decision in this regard is the responsibility of the Supreme National Security Council.”

Asked about whether Tehran would close the waterway, FM Araghchi dodged the question on Sunday and replied: “A variety of options are available to Iran.”

In his first comments since the US strikes, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said that Israel has made a “grave mistake” and “must be punished”, but did not make any specific reference to either Washington or the Strait of Hormuz.

How would the closure work in practice?

Iran could attempt to lay mines across the Strait of Hormuz.

The country’s army or the paramilitary Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) may also try to strike or seize vessels in the Gulf, a method they have used on several occasions in the past.

During the 1980s Iran-Iraq war, the two sides engaged in the so-called “Tanker Wars” in the Persian Gulf. Iraq targeted Iranian ships, and Iran attacked commercial ships, including Saudi and Kuwaiti oil tankers and even US Navy ships.

Tensions in the strait flared up again at the end of 2007 in a series of skirmishes between the Iranian and US navies. This included one incident where Iranian speedboats approached US warships, though no shots were fired.

In April 2023, Iranian troops seized the Advantage Sweet crude tanker, which was chartered by Chevron, in the Gulf of Oman. The vessel was released more than a year later.

What would it mean for the global economy?

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Sunday called on China to encourage Iran to not shut down the Strait of Hormuz after Washington carried out strikes on Iranian nuclear sites.

Speaking to Fox News, Rubio said: “It’s economic suicide for them if they do it [close the strait]. And we retain options to deal with that, but other countries should be looking at that as well. It would hurt other countries’ economies a lot worse than ours.”

For starters, shutting Hormuz risks bringing Gulf Arab states – which have been highly critical of the Israeli attack – into the war to safeguard their own commercial interests.

Closing the strait would also hit China.

The world’s second-largest economy buys almost 90 percent of Iran’s oil exports (roughly 1.6 million barrels per day), which are subject to international sanctions.

According to Goldman Sachs, a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz could push oil prices above $100 per barrel. That would push the cost of production up, eventually affecting consumer prices – especially for energy-intensive goods like food, clothing and chemicals.

Oil-importing countries around the world could experience higher inflation and slower economic growth if the conflict persists, which could prompt central banks to push back the timing of future rate cuts.

But history has shown that severe disruptions to global oil supplies have tended to be short-lived.

Before the start of the second Gulf War, between March and May 2003, crude oil surged by a whopping 46 percent at the end of 2002. But prices quickly unwound in the days preceding the start of the US-led military campaign.

Similarly, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 sparked a sharp rally in oil prices to $130 a barrel, but prices returned to their pre-invasion levels of $95 by mid-August.

As Israel-Iran war escalates, Ukraine fears ‘more losses’ to Russia

Ukraine’s Kiev has a Persian word that many Ukrainians apprehensively.

The name of the triangular, explosives-laden, Iranian-designed drones that became a harrowing part of daily life and death in wartime Ukraine is known as Shahed, which was originally spelled as “martyr” or “witness.”

They are now assembled in Yelabuga, a city in the Volga-region of Russia, and go through constant updates to make them faster, smarter, and deadlier with every airstrike that involves hundreds of drones.

Their most recent Russian versions, which were later fatalized in Ukraine earlier this month, include two-way radio communication with human operators, video cameras, and artificial intelligence modules to better identify targets.

In addition to “Moscow” and “Putin,” the word “Shahed” will forever be cursed in Ukrainian, according to Denys Kovalenko, referring to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

After a Shahed exploded above his northern Kyiv neighborhood in 2023, Kovalenko’s face and arms were slit by glass fragments.

Shaheds make up the most recognizable and audible component of Moscow-Tehran’s military alliance, which is being tested this month by Israel and the United States against Iran.

Iranian-made ammunition, helmets, and flak jackets are other factors that the alliance has an impact on the Russia-Ukraine conflict, according to author and expert on Russia-Iran relations Nikita Smagin.

However, Putin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine took place in 2022, according to Smagin, who described it as the “peak of Iran’s significance for Russia as a military partner.”

The Kremlin has invested tens of billions of dollars in its shadow systems and military-industrial complex to provide chips, machine tools, and other non-waffen-related goods.

As Moscow supplied Tehran with advanced air defense systems, missiles, and warplanes, the flow of military technology frequently turned the other way, causing concern for Israel.

Shimon Peres, the then-Israeli president, stated to this reporter in Moscow in 2009 that his visit was intended to persuade the Kremlin to “reconsider” the sale of S-300 surface-to-air missiles to Tehran.

Iranians were expecting to receive Russia’s cutting-edge Su-35 jets earlier this year, but they were unable to land in Iran.

Russia’s ability to withstand Washington’s airstrikes and slow its advance on the ground has already been impacted by Washington’s arms supply to Israel.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the president of Ukraine, claimed on June 9 that the White House had decided to divert 20, 000 anti-drone missiles from Kyiv.

In televised remarks, Zelensky said, “We’ll have more losses without the United States’ assistance.”

The Kremlin “counts on this scenario,” according to analyst Smagin, and additional military aid bound for Ukraine may now be diverted to Israel.

The top brass in Ukraine are already alarmed by this potential distraction.

According to Lieutenant General Ihor Romanenko, former deputy head of Ukraine’s general staff of armed forces, “arms will go to the Middle East, so there are no illusions about it.”

He claimed that there should not be any false confidence in Russia’s ability to defend Iran.

Even though Moscow and Tehran praise their strategic partnership, there is no mutual defense clause in place.

Therefore, he said, it will be difficult for the Kremlin to launch a military operation similar to the Russian airstrikes against Syria’s opposition to back then-President Bashar al-Assad’s shaky regime.

Romanenko claimed that “they won’t significantly alter anything.” However, they will have enough for arms purchases.

Any arms sales may irk US President Donald Trump, who has shown unusual leniency toward Moscow’s actions in Ukraine as a result of his administration’s flawed peace negotiations with Moscow.

Some observers said Moscow’s criticism of Israeli and US strikes on Iran sounded hypocritical because its account of the attacks sounded familiar.

Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs&nbsp stated on Sunday that, “No matter what justifications are used to justify an irresponsible decision to ban missile and bomb attacks on a sovereign state’s territory, [the decision] rudely violates international law, the UN Charter, and UN Security Council resolutions,”

Moscow and Iran are competing for Chinese market share.

Russia and Iran compete for multibillion-dollar oil trade profits to keep their sanctions-hobbled economies afloat in a certain area.

Russia and Iran compete for China’s market, according to Smagin, and China will have to pay higher prices for Russian oil.

The Strait of Hormuz, a constricting channel between Iran and Oman that is entirely governed by Tehran’s “mosquito fleet” of tiny warships, accounts for one-fifth of the world’s oil exports.

If Tehran decides to close the strait to tankers, crude prices will skyrocket all over the world. Additionally, it would provide Russia with a financial gimmick that would allow it to fund the Ukrainian conflict.

And as Russia’s conflict with Ukraine results in the most damage to its reputation in the Middle East.

Russia suffers a lot from reputation because it runs the risk of not being viewed as a powerful country in the Middle East, Smagin said.

Washington’s focus on Iran and Israel could turn out disastrous for Kyiv if Tehran rejects Trump’s “ultimate ultimatum” to reach a peace deal.

Greece probes Azerbaijani arrested for espionage for links to Iran

An Azerbaijani national is being detained by Greek police after being alleged to have spied on a NATO base on the island of Crete.

The man was detained the day before on suspicion of espionage, according to local media reports on Monday. Authorities are reportedly looking into whether the case is connected to the recent arrest of a man suspected of having Azeri ancestry in Cyprus on suspicion of committing terrorism-related crimes linked to Iran.

According to broadcaster ERT, the 26-year-old was detained in Crete after being seen scouting the US’s Souda Bay air and naval base, citing police and intelligence sources.

Authorities claimed in the report that he had been seen filming warships entering and leaving the bay while photographing strategically sensitive locations.

The eastern Mediterranean base serves as a strategic US and NATO base.

Around 5,000 photos and videos were sequestered by the police. The suspect is scheduled to be detained by a public prosecutor, according to the news release.

A similar incident in Cyprus, where a man was detained for allegedly planning a “terrorist attack” on military installations, led to the arrest.

According to reports, the suspect is also alleged to be of Azeri descent and serves as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)’s representative. He was traveling through a British passport, according to Cypriot media, who cited government sources.

Gideon Saar, Israel’s foreign minister, claimed the IRGC had made an attempt to attack Israelis on Saturday.

In the wake of the conflict between Israel and the US, and Iran, Cyprus and Crete are close to the Middle East and have recently been used as a transit point.

Reports of espionage being discovered have increased on both sides since the hostilities started.

Since Israel’s bombing campaign began on July 13 and several other people who had been detained in recent years have been executed by Iran, among others.

Mohammad-Amin Mahdavi Shayesteh was executed by Iran’s judiciary on Monday for “intelligence cooperation with the Zionist regime,” as Iran’s judiciary calls it.

Additionally, he was found guilty of working with Iran International, a London-based Persian-language TV station that Tehran perceived as having ties to Israel.

Majid Mosayebi was put to death the day before, after it was claimed that he had been proven to have collaborated with Mossad.

Three people were detained in the western province of Kermanshah on suspicion of espionage, according to officials in Tehran late on Sunday, including a person who was a citizen of a European nation.

According to officials, special judicial branches are now being planned for “extraordinary” espionage cases to be handled in provincial prosecutor’s offices and courts, according to officials.

UN nuclear chief estimates damage to Iran’s facilities ‘very significant’

According to the UN nuclear chief, Iran’s nuclear facilities have suffered significant damage as a result of Israeli and American military attacks.

Fordow, the heartbeat of Iran’s nuclear enrichment program, was revealed on Monday at a UN emergency board meeting where UN nuclear watchdog Rafael Grossi claimed craters from ground-penetrating US bombs could be seen.

Israel claimed that Tehran was close to developing nuclear weapons when it launched the attacks on Iran on June 13.

Iran’s three key nuclear facilities, Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, were immediately struck by the US, making the same claim as it did when it first entered the conflict on Saturday. Donald Trump, the president of the United States, claimed the strikes had “obliterated” the three sites.

No one, not even the IAEA, has yet to fully assess the extent of the underground damage at Fordow, according to Grossi, adding that it is anticipated to be “very significant”.

Grossi explained that centrifuges have an extremely vibration-sensitive nature and the explosive payload that was used.

The Natanz and Isfahan facilities, according to the IAEA chief, were also damaged and bombed by US cruise missiles and Tomahawk cruise missiles.

He claimed that the US struck a fuel-richement plant in Natanz. In addition to the “related to the uranium conversion process,” it also hit the entrances to tunnels used to store enriched material in Isfahan.

On Monday, the Israeli military continued its daytime bombings of Iran, with numerous explosion reports in Tehran and other locations. Another attack on Fordow was also reported by Iranian and Israeli officials.

Iran has continued to launch missile attacks and drone strikes at Israel, and it has pledged to retaliate against the US.

Legislators have supported efforts to suspend cooperation with the IAEA, and Tehran has also threatened to leave the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

Iran has claimed that Grossi and the IAEA were behind the conflict, claiming that Israel used its biased reporting on Iran’s nuclear activities as a “pretext” for its attack.

Grossi once more stressed that “armed attacks on nuclear facilities should never occur,” but he did not directly condemn Israel or the US for the attacks at the IAEA board meeting.

He urged Iran and the US to resume the string of negotiations that were postponed by the Israeli strikes, warning that “violence and destruction could reach unimaginable levels” if the conflict continued.

He once more demanded that IAEA inspectors be permitted to examine the nuclear facilities’ damage. No radiation rise has been reported to date.

“I’m prepared to visit Iran right away. Despite the differences that are already present, we must continue to collaborate,” Grossi said.

The watchdog chief’s visit would be invited, but Iranian authorities have not made that clear.

Iranians’ short-term nuclear enrichment capacity has been damaged or destroyed, but there is still about 9, 000 kg (19, 800 pounds) of enriched uranium at levels of 2 to 60%, according to an ex-IAEA official, Tariq Rauf, who told Al Jazeera.

Shipping giant Maersk divests from companies linked to Israeli settlements

According to the Danish shipping giant, Maersk will cut ties with businesses that are connected to the occupied West Bank’s illegal settlements.

Following months of intense pressure from Maersk activists regarding issues relating to Palestine, the decision was made.

As part of a global campaign led by the Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM), a grassroots organization, its shipments have been subject to scrutiny. PYM has also looked into the transportation of cargo from settlement-related businesses, focusing primarily on Maersk’s shipments of US military shipments.

We further strengthened our screening procedures in relation to Israeli settlements, including aligning our screening process with the OHCHR database of enterprises involved in activities in the settlements, according to a statement on the Maersk website from June 2025.

Businesses that support illegal settlements are included in the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) database, such as those who provide services, equipment, or other financial support to the illegal settlements.

Maersk pointed to the statement on the website of Al Jazeera when asked for more information about its decision. Which or how many businesses did Maersk have connections to?

In the occupied West Bank, about 500 000 settlers have resided in more than 100 settlements spread out throughout Israel. These settlements range from small outposts to larger communities with modern infrastructure, which are prohibited by international law.

The global shipping industry is being sent the clear message that upholding international law and fundamental human rights is not a choice. The world is watching to see who comes after them, according to PYM’s Aisha Nizar, and doing business with Israel’s illegal settlements is no longer feasible.

She argued that Maersk still transports materials for the Israeli military, including parts for its F-35 fighter jets, and called for additional action.

According to Nizar, “Maersk continues to profit from the genocide of our people by regularly shipping F-35 components to massacre and bomb Palestinians.” “We will continue to build up people’s support until Maersk breaks all ties to genocide and puts an end to the flow of weapons and its components to Israel,” Maersk said.

Spain forbade Maersk ships from entering Israel’s ports last year.

PYM made the revelation earlier this month that Maersk was using Rotterdam as a crucial component of a “supply chain of death.”

Rotterdam still participated in Israel’s F-35 program despite a Dutch court ruling that outlawed the Netherlands from exporting F-35 parts to it, according to the report.

In response to those findings, Maersk told Al Jazeera that it upholds a strict policy of not sending weapons or ammunition to active conflict areas, conducts due diligence, particularly in areas like Israel and Gaza, and adapts this due diligence to the changing circumstances.