The Strait of Hormuz, a vital passageway for global energy transport that accounts for nearly 20% of the world’s oil and gas shipments, has approached a state of near paralysis since the onset of the US-Iran conflict in early 2026.
What started as a swift escalation of military hostilities soon extended into the Gulf waters, where Iran and the United States imposed conflicting restrictions. Although an official blockade was never formally announced, the frequency of attacks, threats, and increased insurance costs essentially halted commercial shipping activities.
The crisis ignited on February 28, 2026, when the US and Israel executed synchronized airstrikes under Operation Epic Fury, targeting Iran’s military and nuclear facilities. Iran’s response was immediate, launching missile strikes throughout the Gulf region.
Within hours, the conflict affected maritime operations. Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps began issuing radio warnings to ships traversing the Strait of Hormuz, indicating that navigation through the area was no longer secure.
By March 1 and 2, various vessels had already suffered attacks, including oil tankers and cargo ships that were struck by drones and projectiles, resulting in casualties, including members of the Indian crew, and necessitating evacuations.
Even prior to any official declaration, shipping activity saw a drastic decline, with preliminary reports indicating a 70% drop in vessel movements.
On March 2, Iran officially announced the Strait was “closed,” cautioning that any ships attempting to navigate through would be targeted. However, this closure was not legally recognized as a blockade; rather, it became effectively non-navigable due to increasing risks:
- Surges in war-risk insurance premiums
- Withdrawal of coverage for critical dates
- Permission for crews to refuse passage through the area
By early March, many tankers ceased broadcasting their tracking signals, opting to remain in port or turn back. Although the strait remained technically open, it was practically unserviceable.
On March 4, Iran asserted it had established total control over the Strait. Attacks became more frequent, with multiple vessels either damaged or set ablaze, and drone and missile strikes extended beyond the strait into the broader Gulf. A significant attack on a tanker near Kuwait resulted in an oil spill, indicating an escalation in geographic scope.
By March 12, at least 16 confirmed attacks on shipping were documented, along with numerous suspicious incidents.
Despite the strait’s closure, Iran began permitting limited passage for ships from nations it viewed as neutral or supportive, including China, India, Russia, Pakistan, and Iraq. Humanitarian shipments and fertilizer cargo were also allowed in response to international pressure. This marked a transition from total disruption to controlled access, transforming the strait into a geopolitical filter rather than a completely sealed route.
Throughout mid to late March, the region’s maritime security worsened as vessels continued to be targeted by drones, rockets, and gunfire, with several ships being seized or forced to remain anchored under threat. Reports surfaced regarding the deployment of naval mines, raising alarms among shipping companies and insurers. Consequently, the insurance markets categorized the wider Gulf as a high-risk zone, significantly increasing operational costs and deterring transit. Alternative routes via Oman’s ports and regional pipeline systems provided limited relief, as they either lacked sufficient capacity or were vulnerable to new threats. In response, some nations, including India and Pakistan, began deploying naval escorts for commercial vessels, although these efforts were modest and resource-heavy, failing to restore normal shipping operations.
The United States escalated its maritime involvement by sending Navy ships into the Strait of Hormuz to conduct mine-clearing operations, deeming this action necessary to uphold “freedom of navigation” in international waters. Iran, however, vehemently opposed the presence of foreign military forces in the area and warned that such deployments would trigger retaliatory actions. Simultaneously, reports emerged indicating that Iran had lost track of some of the naval mines it had laid, complicating efforts to stabilize the waterway and reopen it for safe commercial navigation.
After unsuccessful diplomatic initiatives, the United States officially declared a naval blockade of Iran, considerably expanding the maritime conflict. Under this directive, US forces began intercepting vessels associated with Iranian trade, particularly those entering or exiting Iranian ports, while asserting that neutral commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz would still be allowed. Iran, in response, rejected this declaration and cautioned that any foreign military enforcement would be considered a violation, warranting a forceful response. This situation led to a dual-control scenario in the waterway, where Iran sought to regulate access through intimidation and selective permissions, while the United States aimed to limit Iranian-related shipping through enforcement actions tied to its broader blockade strategy.
By late April and early May, sporadic vessel attacks continued to be reported, resulting in ongoing fragility and unpredictability in maritime security. Commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz remained minimal as inflated insurance costs, persistent security threats, and operational uncertainties dissuaded most shipping companies from utilizing the route. Although a few vessels managed to navigate with naval escort or through negotiated arrangements, these movements were limited and erratic. Consequently, the Strait of Hormuz remained effectively closed not through a single formal declaration, but due to the cumulative impact of these escalating conflicts.
