Strait of Hormuz Remains Paralyzed Despite US Push to Reopen

Two and a half weeks into Operation Epic Fury, the joint U.S.-Israeli military campaign against Iran, the Strait of Hormuz remains effectively closed to commercial shipping — and the international coalition that President Trump demanded to reopen it does not exist.

The waterway through which roughly 20% of the world's oil passes daily has seen tanker traffic collapse by more than 90% since Iran began enforcing a de facto blockade in early March [1]. Oil prices have surged from roughly $67 per barrel before the war to peaks above $126, and remain stubbornly above $100 [2]. The International Energy Agency has declared this the largest oil supply disruption in recorded history, authorizing an unprecedented release of over 400 million barrels from strategic petroleum reserves worldwide [3].

Yet as the economic damage mounts — gasoline up 7.5% domestically, European natural gas prices nearly doubling, Goldman Sachs raising U.S. recession odds to 25% — the path to reopening the strait appears to be narrowing, not widening [4].

Source: FRED / U.S. Energy Information Administration

Data as of Mar 11, 2026CSV

Trump's Coalition of the Unwilling

On March 14, President Trump announced he had demanded "about seven countries" send warships to secure the Strait of Hormuz. He named China, France, Japan, South Korea, and the United Kingdom, arguing that these nations depend far more heavily on Persian Gulf oil than the United States does [5].

"We will remember," Trump warned on March 16, threatening unspecified consequences for nations that refuse to help [6].

The response has been a wall of refusals.

Germany's Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul was blunt: "As long as this war continues, there will be no involvement, not even in an option to keep the Strait of Hormuz open by military means" [7]. Italy's Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini said sending military ships would mean "entering the war" [8]. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer acknowledged the strait must reopen but said explicitly that it "won't be a NATO mission," declining to put British aircraft carriers "into harm's way" [8]. Japan's Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi stated: "We have not made any decisions whatsoever about dispatching escort ships" [8]. Australia ruled out participation entirely. Spain, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Poland all declined [7].

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas summarized the continental consensus: "Nobody wants to go actively in this war" [7].

Trump's attempt to invoke NATO solidarity has been particularly fraught. After years of pressuring the alliance over Greenland, defense spending, and Ukraine, the president suggested that NATO owed him support in exchange for continued U.S. backing of European security — a transactional framing that European leaders rejected outright [9].

A Navy Without Minesweepers

Even if allies materialized, the operational challenge of reopening the strait is staggering — and the U.S. Navy is poorly positioned to meet it.

Iran began laying naval mines in the Strait of Hormuz around March 10, with U.S. intelligence initially reporting "a few dozen" deployed [10]. But Iran retains 80-90% of its small boats and minelaying capacity, with an estimated arsenal of up to 6,000 mines [11]. On March 11, U.S. forces sank 16 Iranian minelaying vessels, but the mining campaign continues [12].

The critical problem: in September 2025, just five months before the war began, the U.S. Navy decommissioned its last four dedicated Avenger-class minesweepers from the Persian Gulf — the USS Devastator, USS Dextrous, USS Gladiator, and USS Sentry. In January 2026, those ships were loaded onto a heavy-lift cargo ship in Bahrain and sent home for scrap [13].

Their replacements — Independence-class littoral combat ships equipped with mine countermeasure mission packages — have never been tested in combat. The Washington Institute has estimated that clearing the Strait of Hormuz could require up to 16 mine countermeasure vessels. The U.S. Navy has seven [13].

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth dismissed concerns about the strait on March 13, but naval analysts are far less sanguine. The Netherlands' Prime Minister Rob Jetten, whose country has significant minesweeping expertise, told Dutch media it would be "very bad to launch a successful mission there in the short term" [7].

The timeline for mine clearance, even under ideal conditions with no ongoing hostilities, could stretch weeks to months — and Iran shows no signs of stopping its minelaying operations while the war continues.

Iran's Selective Passage: A Geopolitical Weapon

Perhaps the most strategically significant development is not the closure itself but Iran's selective reopening.

Rather than maintaining a blanket blockade, Tehran has begun granting passage to ships from countries it considers non-hostile — effectively weaponizing access to the strait as a tool of geopolitical realignment [14].

Pakistan has sent an Aframax tanker through successfully. India has transited two LPG carriers. Turkey negotiated passage for one of its 15 stranded vessels. And Iran has shipped at least 11.7 million barrels of its own crude through the strait since the war began — all bound for China [15].

The most explosive element: reports that Iran may condition broader passage on oil being traded in Chinese yuan rather than U.S. dollars [16]. While the details remain fluid, the proposal strikes at the foundation of the petrodollar system that has underpinned U.S. financial dominance for half a century.

China, which receives 45% of its oil through the Strait of Hormuz, is in active negotiations with Tehran for safe passage of crude oil and Qatari LNG carriers [14]. Beijing has called for "de-escalation" but made no commitment to any U.S.-led naval effort — and has every incentive to negotiate a bilateral arrangement that enhances the yuan's role in global energy markets.

France and Italy have quietly opened their own diplomatic channels with Tehran about vessel passage [14], further undermining the unified Western front that Trump's coalition concept requires.

Source: GDELT Project

Data as of Mar 16, 2026CSV

The Economic Damage Is Already Here

The closure's economic reverberations extend far beyond the price of crude.

European natural gas prices nearly doubled after Iranian drones struck Qatari gas facilities on March 2, prompting QatarEnergy to halt all production [4]. Mortgage rates in the U.S. spiked to 6.11%, their highest level of 2026, as inflation fears pushed Treasury yields above 4.21% [17]. Food prices are expected to rise within 60 days as higher energy, fertilizer, and transport costs cascade through supply chains [4].

Oxford Economics has modeled what it calls a "breaking point" scenario: if global oil prices average $140 per barrel for two months, the eurozone, UK, and Japan would all enter economic contraction [18]. With Brent crude having already touched $126, that threshold is uncomfortably close.

The IEA's record reserve release of 400 million barrels has provided a temporary cushion, but analysts warn it cannot substitute for actual flows. As one Al Jazeera analysis noted, strategic releases "may calm markets but cannot fix Hormuz disruption" — the reserves are finite, and the closure's duration is unknowable [3].

The Endgame Problem

The fundamental issue is that reopening the strait requires either ending the war, defeating Iran's naval capacity in the strait itself, or negotiating passage — and none of these appears imminent.

The war shows no signs of concluding. Israel has indicated at least three more weeks of combat operations. Iran's new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei — the slain leader's hardline son, appointed under IRGC pressure — has categorically rejected ceasefire talks [19]. The IRGC has vowed that "not a litre of oil" will pass through the strait for Western nations [20].

Reporting has revealed that Trump was briefed before the February 28 strikes on the risk that Iran would blockade the strait but proceeded anyway, sidelining interagency economic analysis [21]. The administration bet that the war would be swift — Trump called it "a little excursion" — and that Iran's response would be manageable.

Instead, the United States finds itself in a position without modern precedent: having triggered the largest energy supply disruption in history, lacking the naval assets to resolve it, unable to build an international coalition to share the burden, and watching as its principal geopolitical rival, China, positions itself as the alternative guarantor of energy flows through the world's most critical maritime chokepoint.

The Strait of Hormuz is not just a shipping lane. It is a mirror reflecting the shifting balance of global power — and right now, the reflection is not flattering for Washington.

What Comes Next

The most likely near-term trajectory is a continuation of the status quo: the strait remains effectively closed to Western-allied shipping while Iran selectively permits passage to countries willing to negotiate bilaterally, particularly in non-dollar currencies. The IEA's strategic reserve release buys time but not resolution.

Three developments could alter the picture: a ceasefire that removes Iran's motivation to maintain the blockade; a successful mine-clearing operation, which would require months even without ongoing hostilities; or a bilateral deal between China and Iran that establishes a parallel transit regime, effectively splitting the strait's governance between Western and non-Western spheres of influence.

None of these outcomes is assured. All of them carry consequences that will outlast the war itself.