ConflictClarifier

متتبع أزمة إيران-الخليج 2026
CC
Events Archive
strikeApr 14, 2026

Trump’s Iran Blockade Not Working as Multiple Ships Pass Through

Summary

At 10 a.m. ET on Monday, the U.S. navy began its blockade of Iranian ports, aimed at the Iranian tankers and the other Iran-friendly ships which have managing to traverse the Strait of Hormuz. Trump had been demanding Iran open the international waterway, which usually sees the transit of one-quarter of the world's seaborne oil trade. Since the war has begun though, traffic has plunged 90 percent, sparking global supply panic and rising oil and fuel prices. Following the breakdown of talks between U.S. and Iranian negotiators on Sunday, Trump announced the U.S. would blockade the already impacted strait to retaliate against Iran. But it doesn't appear to be working. In the first 24 hours since the operation began, at least seven ships have made it through including four tankers linked to Iran. One was a Chinese-owned vessel sanctioned by the U.S. in 2023 for carrying Iranian oil. That was spotted on the other side of the Strait in the Gulf of Oman on Tuesday. Along with question as to how the U.S. would feasibly police the strait in this way, there are also questions around who this is aimed at and why. Many have interpreted the U.S. blockade as being aimed at Iran's shadow fleet which carries oil supplies many suspect go to China- the destination for nearly all Iran's oil exports. Iran had blocked most traffic but not all Since the U.S. and Israel launched their offensive on February 28, oil tanker traffic through the strait is down from a prewar 138 ships per day to a daily average of 3.4,according to TankerTrackers.com. That includes 150 tankers, 100 of which are vessels of the so-called shadow fleet, the maritime intelligence company wrote. or sanctions-evading ships largely understood to be delivering oil to China via Malaysia. In the first weeks of the war, Iran showed it was ready to attack ships, with vision of at least two tankers being hit by Iranian missiles or speedboats. However in the past fortnight, a pattern emerged, calculated through shipping data sites, which appeared to show some ships taking a certain route close to the Iranian coastline, to get out. Reports emerged that ships were having to make payments—varying from $2 million paid in the Chinese yuan currency to crypto—and that Iran was perhaps operating a "toll booth" before allowing passage. Trump has instructed the U.S. Navy to intercept "every vessel in international waters" which paid Iran a toll. "No one who pays an illegal toll will have safe passage on the high seas,” he said. However the U.S. Central Command, in charge of the operation, said it was more select than that. They said the blockade would be enforced against vessels "entering or departing Iranian ports and coastal areas, including all Iranian ports on the Arabian Gulf and Gulf of Oman. “It is unclear what the ultimate goal of the blockade is," Andrea Ghiselli, assistant professor of international relations at Beijing's Fudan University, wrote in an analysis for the Australian Lowy Institute think tank. "One possible explanation was to put pressure on countries that import Iranian oil, especially China, to make them push Iran to accept American conditions for the end of the war. "However, as there are reports of a Chinese-owned ship, one that was known for facilitating the trade of sanctioned Iranian oil, transiting through the Strait without being stopped, that first hypothesis appears wrong." Iran's been making money Analysts say first and foremost President Trump is applying a U.S. blockade to try and harm the Iranian economy. Its sanctioned oil exports remains a central pillar of its economy, and since its ships have been the only ones regularly getting out through the strait since March, it has likely increased its cash flow by hundreds of millions, according to a Bloomberg analysis. But the double-bind, while aimed at inflicting maximum pressure on Iran's economy, will also intensify "the worst global oil supply shock in history," Rapidan Energy Group CEO Scott Modell told Newsweek. "He [Trump] is essentially accepting higher oil prices as the cost of building this additional leverage, betting that American tolerance for $4-plus gasoline is greater than Iran's willingness to withstand economic pain." The global economic pain will continue as he says it's likely that international shipping will continue to avoid the strait due to sky-high insurance premiums. Ships will also likely be fearing a resumption of Iranian strikes in the Gulf and against Gulf state energy sites if the ceasefire breaks down, he added. Iran launched several strikes on key energy facilities in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates in the first month of the war. Key Saudi refineries in Ras Tanura and Yanbu were hit, with the latter on the Red Sea potentially jeopardising all possible energy-supply routes out of the Gulf. The Red Sea had been seen as an alternative route to the Strait of Hormuz. More than 25 companies operating in the Gulf states, including national and international energy firms, have applied force majeure. China connection China's Foreign Ministry on called the U.S. blockade escalation "dangerous and irresponsible." "The U.S. side has increased its military deployment and adopted targeted blockade actions, which will only intensify contradictions, exacerbate tensions, undermine the already fragile ceasefire situation, and further impact the safety of passage in the strait," spokesman Guo Jiakun told reporters Tuesday. "The root cause of the blockage of navigation in the strait is the war in Iran, and the way to solve this problem is to cease fire and stop the war as soon as possible," he told reporters. China is Iran's biggest oil customer and the recipient of most of the "shadow fleet" supplies. Beijing buys more than 90 per cent of the oil exports and would no doubt be feeling the drawback through the strait. But Iran comprises only an estimated 13 percent of China's foreign-bought oil. So the blockade, while an inconvenience, is no more of an issue for China than for other oil-importing economies, Christopher Weafer, CEO of Eurasia-based strategic consultancy Macro-Advisory told Newsweek. Prior to the war, China had definitely benefited from being able to import almost 1.5 million barrels per day of Iranian oil and at a discount to the prevailing market price. Neither country has ever confirmed the size of the discount, but traders say it has often been 'sizable.'" But China has also been able to get all the oil it needs from the wider market and at the full market rate. "Recall that China—and India—are now also paying the full market rate for Russian oil as a result of the war in the Gulf," said Weafer. He noted before February 28, both China and India had reportedly been buying Russian crude with discounts of between 25 percent and 33 percent. "That stopped almost immediately after the first bombs fell on Tehran. "China has lost access to cheap oil and is now paying the same as other importers. Beijing may be annoyed but can hardly complain— it can still access all the oil it needs but now at the same price as others pay." China is also structurally better prepared than many of its neighbors to deal with the Strait blockage—given its diversified energy mix, alternative overland supply routes abd strategic petroleum reserves estimated to cover roughly 100 days of imports. However, the world's second-largest economy remains vulnerable if the crisis drags on. China's petrochemicals, aviation, shipping and heavy transport sectors are particularly exposed. The timing of the blockade has also raised questions about whether it could undermine Trump's wide-ranging talks with Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping, scheduled for mid-May. Modell said the obstruction is unlikely to deter Trump, but also not likely to derail the meeting. "The U.S.-China summit next month will not weaken President Trump’s resolve to achieve a face-saving outcome in the war with Iran," he said. "Moreover, aside from opportunistic diplomatic intervention, China shows no willingness to exert additional leverage to end the war."

Actors involved

USIsraelIranRussiaChina

Sources

  • Micah McCartneyBy Micah McCartney

    At 10 a.m. ET on Monday, the U.S. navy began its blockade of Iranian ports, aimed at the Iranian tankers and the other Iran-friendly ships which have managing to traverse the Strait of Hormuz. Trump had been demanding Iran open the international waterway, which usually sees the t

See this event through different lenses

Compare how Western, Iranian, Israeli, Global South, and Pro-Peace perspectives frame this event.

Compare Perspectives

Community Notes

Community Notes

Loading notes...

Related events

strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranUN
1 source

The US and its allies Britain, France and Germany are pushing other countries on the UN nuclear watchdog's board to pass a resolution next week reporting Iran to the UN Security Council for the first time in 20 years, diplomats said on Friday. If passed, the resolution would follow up on one adopted on June 12 of last year declaring Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for not fully cooperating with an investigation into uranium traces found at undeclared sites.

The US launched an air war against Tehran on February 28 in which, together with Israel, it destroyed or badly damaged Iran's uranium-enrichment facilities. Iran has not let International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors return to the bombed sites since then or verify what remains of its stocks of enriched uranium, some of which was enriched to up to 60% purity, a short step from weapons grade.

Resolution would be culmination of standoff over IAEA's access to nuclear sites A resolution by the IAEA's 35-nation board reporting Iran to the Security Council would also be the culmination of a standoff over IAEA access to those sites, since the board has passed two resolutions in the past year demanding Iran declare its enriched uranium stocks and grant the IAEA full access to verify them.

A draft text for the resolution has yet to be formally submitted to the board and negotiations between countries over the exact wording are ongoing, diplomats said. A draft is usually formally submitted early in the week of a board meeting. As a party to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Iran has the right to develop nuclear technology, including enrichment, for peaceful purposes.

Iran says it would never produce nuclear weapons. It is, however, the only country to enrich to 60% without making a bomb. The amount it has enriched to that level is "a matter of serious concern" to the IAEA. The IAEA believes well over 200 kg of that highly enriched uranium has survived the bombardments and is held in a tunnel complex at Isfahan and at the Natanz facility.

Location: Jerusalem
strikeUnverifiedUSIranChina
1 source

The U.S. Treasury imposed sanctions on the Turkish bank Golden Global Yatirim Bankasi Anonim Sirketi, alleging it facilitated the transfer of Iranian oil revenues into cash and gold. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated these measures are part of "Operation Economic Outcast," an initiative launched following more than six months of conflict to pressure Iran.

Location: Iran
strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranEURussiaChinaUkraineHamas
1 source

Rabobank reported that geopolitical developments, including Russian statements regarding potential peace talks in Ukraine and US-Iran hostilities, continue to dominate market sentiment, though analysts noted these claims remain unverified. The bank also cited unconfirmed reports that South Korea may deploy forces to the Strait of Hormuz and that Israel has stated regime change in Tehran is a primary objective, while noting that Ukrainian media reports of an impending northern Russian offensive lack independent verification.

Location: Tehran
strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranRussiaUkraine
1 source

The White House is now apparently using Russian tactics to convince the American public that the war in Iran is not, in fact, a war. When asked by reporters at the White House on Thursday whether the most intense sustained air campaign by American forces since the invasion of Iraq would be over by the midterms, Vice President JD Vance replied: “I wouldn’t call it a war.

” Vladimir Putin said much the same thing when he invaded Ukraine. Russia was not fighting a war either, the Kremlin insisted; it was merely conducting a “special military operation.” If that comparison strikes you as shocking, consider the contours of the two conflicts.

A vastly more powerful military launched a punishing offensive against a smaller, less well-equipped adversary, inflicted enormous damage without achieving a decisive resolution, and then found itself drawn into a longer, grinding conflict with no clear way out.

The motivations behind the wars may be different, and they’re playing out in different theaters, but the pattern is eerily similar. Now, so too is the attempt by those in power to control how the public understands, and even what it is allowed to call, the obvious war unfolding in front of them.

If This Isn’t a War, What Is? Let us take a moment to assess what exactly has happened since February 28, when the U.S. launched Operation Epic Fury. The opening U.S.-Israeli attack killed Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, along with the commander of the Revolutionary Guard, the defense minister and various other senior officials.

According to the U.S. military’s own accounting, the first 38 days of major combat operations involved more than 10,200 sorties and 13,500 strikes. U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) says those attacks damaged or destroyed more than 85 percent of Iran’s ballistic missile, drone and naval defense industrial base, while knocking out 82 percent of its air-defense missile systems.

The U.S. sent carrier strike groups and warships into the region, later imposing a military blockade on Iranian ports. Meanwhile, American and allied air defenses intercepted more than 6,000 Iranian attack drones and 1,500 ballistic missiles fired at U.

S. forces, Israel and American partners across the Middle East. More than 50,000 U.S. service members remain deployed across the region. The fighting has killed 18 U.S. service members and at least 8,000 people across Iran, Lebanon, Israel and the Gulf states.

More than 750 U.S. service members have been wounded. Last month, during a lull in the fighting, the U.S. Treasury unveiled a sanctions package likened to an “economic D-day” that is designed to make Iran an “economic outcast” and cut the adversary off from all available forms of economic support.

In the announcement, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent openly declared that Iran had been “at war against America” for 47 years. This week, the shooting resumed; the U.S. hit targets in and around the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran blasted missiles at targets in Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan and Iraq.

All this from an administration that almost exactly a year ago launched a rapid rebrand of the Defense Department into the “Department of War”. No boots on the ground, though, so it’s not a war, right? Tell It Kind of Like It Is Even the very best snake-oil salesman would have a hard time convincing people that the war in Iran isn’t a war.

So why is JD Vance even trying? Well, if there’s one thing politicians understand better than anyone, it’s the importance of language and rhetoric. Words have immense power; a well-written speech can unite millions of people, and a catchy slogan like Make America Great Again can come to represent an entire political philosophy.

But war is a pesky word. For one, it implies there will eventually be a winner and a loser. It also brings with it certain expectations—and some very difficult questions. What is the objective? How many people will die? When will it end? And, perhaps most dangerously of all: was it worth it?

Those are not questions the White House wants Americans to be asking. Trump built a substantial part of his political identity around ending, rather than beginning, America’s “endless wars.” When Washington and Tehran signed a memorandum of understanding in June, the White House presented it as proof that Trump’s America First approach could deliver peace without another prolonged Middle Eastern conflict.

Then the hostilities started again. Earlier this week, Trump shared a Truth Social graphic declaring that “Hormuz Oil Volumes are BACK!”, saying 18 million barrels a day were once again leaving the Strait, compared with 20 million before the war. No independent commodity tracking company or energy analyst appeared to verify Trump’s claims.

But most Americans won’t be checking tanker-tracking dashboards. What they’ll care about is the cold, hard fact that diesel hit a new record price this morning, soaring to an average of $5.85 a gallon for the first time ever. Gasoline is $4.15 a gallon on average, compared with $3.

20 at this time last year, according to AAA. The numbers on the sign at the gas station and the price on the grocery receipt aren’t affected by Trump’s tall tales, but they’ll surely affect how Americans vote at the midterms. When viewed in this light, Vance’s attempt to discourage reporters from “call[ing] it a war” begins to make sense.

A war is something that we want to end. It tends to result in a winner and a loser. And its worth is up for debate at all times. A different kind of engagement that doesn’t quite meet the threshold of war—say, a special military operation—is not exposed to the same kind of scrutiny.

Vance effectively made that case himself. “When you ask, ‘When will this end?’ You’re asking me a question like, ‘When will the Iranians stop shooting at ships?’” he said. By that logic, there is no American war—only recurring Iranian provocations that require American military responses.

That’s exactly the logic applied by Putin to Ukraine and supposed expansion of NATO. Putting the Toothpaste Back in the Tube U.S. lawmakers have repeatedly invoked the War Powers Resolution to challenge Trump’s authority to keep fighting Iran without specific congressional authorization.

The law generally gives a president 60 days after U.S. forces enter “hostilities” to secure congressional approval or bring those hostilities to an end. That makes the pauses in fighting hugely important. When the original 60-day deadline arrived in May, Trump told Congress that the temporary ceasefire reached in April meant the hostilities that began on February 28 had ended.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth argued that the War Powers clock could “pause, or stop” when the shooting did. That position is disputed by legal experts, but its political utility is obvious. If every new outbreak of fighting can be treated as a separate skirmish, rather than part of one continuous war, the administration can argue that a fresh 60-day clock starts each time.

Vance’s insistence that there is no continuing “war” fits neatly for an administration that has already tried to divide six months of conflict into separate periods of hostilities, interrupted by ceasefires and pauses. This brings us back to Moscow.

The Kremlin’s own linguistic trick was also about making one sprawling war sound smaller, more limited and more manageable than it really was. From the very beginning of the invasion, Putin described the war as a special military operation. Only after two years of grinding warfare did Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov openly declare Russia to be in a “state of war”—and even then, he said the transformation had occurred because the “collective West” had joined the fight against Russia.

Vance is playing a similar game, but in reverse. Only now—with soaring fuel prices, mounting casualties, concerns over the military’s munitions stockpiles, and midterm elections on the horizon—is the conflict no longer a war. You can’t put the genie back in the bottle, though, and the American people aren’t stupid.

Vance and the White House may discover in November that voters are perfectly capable of recognizing a war, even when the vice president doesn’t want to call it one.

Location: Iran