The U.S.-Iran conflict has evolved into what resembles a game of chicken in the Strait of Hormuz, with each side betting that the other will make concessions under the pressure of economic pain.
For Tehran, closing the strait and threatening maritime traffic provides leverage over the global economy and a means of pressuring Washington. The United States, meanwhile, has imposed a naval blockade on Iran, betting that the economic pain will be enough to force Tehran to concede.
Alan Eyre, a diplomatic affairs expert at the Middle East Institute in Washington, said each side believes that inflicting greater economic hardship on the other could force it to reassess its strategic calculations.
President Donald Trump said the United States has “complete control” of the Strait of Hormuz. Hussein Taeb, commander of Iran’s paramilitary Basij forces, responded that the strait was “under Iran’s control and management.”
The statements came as rhetoric and accusations between the two sides intensified, while international diplomatic efforts continued to end the war and prevent it from spreading.
Pakistani government sources said Tehran and Washington had moved closer to an agreement to extend a ceasefire that had lasted 60 days under a memorandum of understanding signed by the two sides on June 18. The issues being discussed through mediators include the return of the United States to the interim agreement and setting a timetable for implementing the commitments.
But comments by Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, that Tehran would keep the Strait of Hormuz closed until the United States accepted Iran’s conditions have lowered expectations for a deal. The Basij commander’s latest remarks further underscored the extent to which Iran has hardened its position on the issue.
Traffic has also declined through the Bab al-Mandab Strait, which links the Gulf of Aden to the Red Sea, because of attacks by the Houthis, an Iranian-aligned militia that Washington has designated as a terrorist organization. The latest attack targeted a Tanzanian-flagged vessel and killed four crew members.
The Numbers
The number of vessels passing through Hormuz fell to its lowest level in a week, with 15 ships crossing on Tuesday, according to data from the shipping-tracking company Kpler. Eleven used the route Iran established unilaterally. The number fell to just seven on Wednesday. Before the war began, about 130 vessels passed through the strait each day.
Shipping traffic remained slow throughout July, averaging 26 crossings a day, and in June, when the average was 33 crossings, amid Iranian attacks on vessels.
According to Kpler, about 40 percent of vessels chose the route controlled by Iran, while roughly another 40 percent sailed without activating their tracking systems — effectively switching off their location transmitters — leaving their routes unknown.
MBN’s analysis of Kpler data on crossings since March shows that the waterway recorded about 4,000 crossings, roughly 1,300 of them along the Iranian route, compared with only 232 crossings through the Omani channel and Omani territorial waters. The data also show that a significant share of the vessels were under sanctions.
Stephanie Douche, Kpler’s external communications officer, told MBN that she could not confirm which side controls the strait. She noted that a large number of vessels are now using the Iranian route, while some are not using tracking devices.
As Tehran disrupts shipping through the waterway, the United States has tightened its blockade of Iranian ports. The U.S. military said Wednesday that an MH-60 helicopter operated by the U.S. Navy fired two Hellfire missiles to disable the steering equipment of a Panama-flagged cargo ship sailing in the Gulf of Oman toward an Iranian port.
In its latest statement, U.S. Central Command said that during the blockade of Iran, through Aug. 12, U.S. forces had diverted 59 commercial vessels, disabled three ships and boarded two others to ensure full compliance with the blockade.
The figures underscore the U.S. military’s ability to severely disrupt maritime traffic to and from Iranian ports.
Elizabeth Dent of the Washington Institute said Trump’s statement about having “full control of the strait” showed that the conflict had increasingly come to revolve around the Strait of Hormuz. Washington views the waterway as a critical security issue and a top national security priority, she said, but conditions on the ground point to a state of severe deadlock and volatility.
Dent added that Iran would need to launch only a single projectile at a vessel to “disrupt traffic” through the Strait of Hormuz.
Washington has reiterated its commitment to unrestricted freedom of navigation and its opposition to any country claiming uncontested, absolute sovereignty over the waterway.
Rafael Cohen, a Washington-based military expert specializing in Middle East affairs, told MBN that the conflict has shown that preventing passage through the narrow waterway — particularly by large, relatively slow container ships and oil tankers — is far easier than keeping the waterway open.
In an interview published this week, Trump suggested that the uncertainty could continue for some time, saying he could simply “move forward quietly” and allow Iran’s economy to collapse, or deliver a very powerful blow against it.
Nader Hashemi, an associate professor of Middle East and Islamic politics at Georgetown University, said Tehran believes it has the upper hand after the regime managed to survive, while Trump believes the economic pressure being imposed on Iran, which is contributing to the collapse of its economy, will force Tehran back to the negotiating table.
Iran is demanding, before reopening the strait, an end to the naval blockade, the release of frozen Iranian assets, and an end to conflicts across the region, including in Lebanon and Gaza.
The demands suggest that Iran has raised the bar to a level unacceptable to the United States. As a result, although some members of the Trump administration may want to reach a deal, they cannot do so without greater room for maneuver and negotiation, Cohen said.
Dent said Omani-mediated talks with Iran could succeed if there were guarantees that an agreement would advance U.S. objectives of ensuring free and safe navigation for commercial vessels, which could also benefit global trade.
But it is clear that the Iranians “have taken a maximalist position, and any agreement that gives Iran control over routing, fees, or access would clash with both the U.S., and regional, goals,” Dent said.
Adapted and translated from the original Arabic.
