ConflictClarifier

Rastreador de la Crisis Irán-Golfo 2026
CC
Events Archive
strikeApr 14, 2026

Saudi Arabia warns Trump: US blockade of Iran could backfire, choke Kingdom’s own oil lifeline, says report

Summary

Saudi Arabia warns Trump: US blockade of Iran could backfire, choke Kingdom’s own oil lifeline, says report Gulf states don't want the war to end with Iran still controlling Strait of Hormuz, but many, Saudi Arabia included, are pushing Washington to resolve the standoff at the table, WSJ reported, citing regional officials. Saudi Arabia is reportedly urging the United States to lift its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz and return to negotiations, warning that President Donald Trump’s move to choke off Iranian oil could provoke Tehran into disrupting other critical shipping lanes. The blockade, which took effect Monday after weekend talks and Trump’s threats of further bombardment failed to loosen Iran’s grip on Hormuz, is designed to squeeze an Iranian economy already battered by months of war. But Saudi Arabia has cautioned Washington that Iran could hit back by shutting the Bab al-Mandeb, the Red Sea chokepoint that has become the kingdom’s lifeline for oil exports since Hormuz was sealed off, The Wall Street Journal reported, citing Arab officials. Yanbu workaround at risk Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz at the beginning of the West Asia war by striking vessels in the waterway, knocking out roughly 13 million barrels a day of oil exports and pushing crude futures past $100 a barrel. Saudi Arabia has since clawed its exports back to the pre-war level of about seven million barrels a day by pumping crude across the desert to its Red Sea terminal at Yanbu, a workaround that collapses if Bab al-Mandeb is closed, the report added. IRAN WAR 2026 — EXPLAINER Bab al-Mandeb: Iran's second chokepoint, explained A 20-mile strait between Yemen and the Horn of Africa is back in play as Tehran's most credible lever beyond the Strait of Hormuz. GEOGRAPHY An 18-mile gate between Yemen and the Horn of Africa Bab al-Mandeb — Arabic for "Gate of Tears" — is the narrow strait separating Yemen on the Arabian Peninsula from Djibouti and Eritrea on the Horn of Africa. At its narrowest point it is about 29 km (18 miles) wide. It links the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden and, from there, to the Indian Ocean — forming the southern gateway of the Suez Canal route between Asia and Europe. 18 mi Width at its narrowest point (~29 km) 9.3M Barrels of oil & petroleum transited daily in 2023, peak pre-Houthi strikes (EIA) 12% Estimated share of global trade by volume CONTROL One Yemeni shore is all it takes The Yemeni side of the strait is held by the Houthis. Because anti-ship missiles and drones easily reach across an 18-mile waterway, controlling just one bank is enough to threaten every vessel that passes — a capability the group demonstrated during the Gaza war, when its strikes cut oil flows through the strait by more than half. ◆ Yemen coast under Houthi control The group holds the eastern shore of the strait, giving its weapons range across the full width of the passage. ● Gaza war precedent Oil flows through the strait fell from 8.7 million bpd in 2023 to 4.0 million bpd by mid-2024, per EIA and Vortexa data — more than 50% down. → Cape of Good Hope detour Vessels avoiding the strait must loop around southern Africa, adding weeks and millions of dollars to each voyage. SAUDI EXPOSURE Yanbu becomes the western lifeline With the Strait of Hormuz blockaded, Saudi Arabia has increasingly routed crude through Yanbu — its Red Sea oil terminal, which sits north of Bab al-Mandeb — via the 5 million bpd East-West Pipeline from Abqaiq, now running near full capacity. If the Houthis close Bab al-Mandeb, that oil is stranded inside the Red Sea with no southern exit to Asian markets. HORMUZ — EAST EXIT Blockaded. Gulf-side exports already choked off. BAB AL-MANDEB — WEST EXIT If closed, Yanbu's crude has no southern route to Asia. STRATEGIC LEVERAGE Tehran's most credible second lever Iran has openly named Bab al-Mandeb as its fallback chokepoint. Ali Akbar Velayati, a senior adviser to the Supreme Leader, warned in April 2026 that the "Resistance front" views Bab al-Mandeb the same way it views Hormuz — and the IRGC has signalled it may ask its Houthi allies to shut the strait. The lever works without Iran firing a shot itself. THE COMBINED SQUEEZE Two chokepoints, one pressure play Hormuz alone hurts Gulf producers. Bab al-Mandeb alone hurts Red Sea traffic. Together, they shut Saudi Arabia's eastern and western exits at once — and drive up the cost of every container moving between Asia and Europe via Suez. TAGS Iran War 2026Bab al-MandebStrait of HormuzHouthisYanbuRed Sea shipping Sources: U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA); Al Jazeera; Britannica; Time; Earth.org; Vortexa tanker-tracking data White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly defended the blockade. “President Trump has been clear that he wants the Strait of Hormuz to be fully open to facilitate the free flow of energy,” she said. “The administration is in frequent contact with our Gulf allies, who the President is helping by ensuring that Iran cannot extort the United States or any other country.” Houthis back in the frame Arab officials told WSJ that Iran is now leaning on its Houthi allies in Yemen, who control a long stretch of coastline along Bab al-Mandeb, to reprise the disruption campaign they waged through much of the Gaza war. Iran’s semiofficial Tasnim news agency, close to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, has floated a Red Sea closure as a response to the US move. “If Iran does want to shut down Bab al-Mandeb, the Houthis are the obvious partner to do it, and their response to the Gaza conflict demonstrates that they have the capacity to do it,” Adam Baron, a Yemen expert at New America, a Washington-based policy institute, was quoted as saying. Gulf states push for talks Gulf states don’t want the war to end with Iran still controlling Hormuz, but many, Saudi Arabia included, are pushing Washington to resolve the standoff at the table, regional officials said. Despite public posturing, both sides are engaging mediators and remain open to talks if each shows flexibility. Story continues below this ad US-Iran Peace Talks: Islamabad Round 1 to Round 2 First direct US-Iran engagement since 1979 hits a wall, but negotiators may return to Pakistan this weekend Ceasefire Declared Guns fall silent in the Gulf Washington and Tehran announce a ceasefire, ending the hottest phase of the war. Round 1 of direct talks is scheduled for four days later in Islamabad. Last Weekend · Islamabad Round 1: Vance meets Qalibaf, no breakthrough US Vice President JD Vance and Iranian Parliamentary Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf lead the first direct US-Iran encounter in over a decade — and the most senior engagement since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Talks end without agreement. Post-Round 1 · Vance Washington tables 'final and best offer' Vance tells reporters the US proposal is on the table and the ball is in Tehran's court. "We leave here with a very simple proposal… our final and best offer. We'll see if the Iranians accept it." Tue, April 14 · Islamabad Pakistan signals Round 2 is on the cards Pakistani and Iranian officials tell Reuters a proposal has been sent to Washington and Tehran for delegations to return. A senior Pakistani official says Islamabad reached out to Iran and received a "positive response" on a second round. Fri–Sun · Expected Window Round 2 window kept open A senior Iranian source says delegations are keeping Friday through Sunday open for a possible meeting. An Iranian embassy official in Islamabad adds the next round "can come sometime later this week or earlier next week" — nothing finalised. Saudi energy officials told WSJ that Riyadh had secured commitments from the Houthis not to target the kingdom or its ships transiting Bab al-Mandeb. But the kingdom has warned Washington that the situation is fluid and the Houthis could escalate, or begin charging transit fees on shipping, if Iran pushes harder. “That would then be a way for Iran to escalate back, saying that if you’re going to restrict our oil exports, we will then disrupt your Yanbu terminal exports,” said Erik Meyersson, chief emerging markets strategist at Swedish bank SEB. The Express Global Desk at The Indian Express delivers authoritative, verified, and context-driven coverage of key international developments shaping global politics, policy, and migration trends. The desk focuses on stories with direct relevance for Indian and global audiences, combining breaking news with in-depth explainers and analysis. A major focus area of the desk is US immigration and visa policy, including developments related to student visas, work permits, permanent residency pathways, executive actions, and court rulings. The Global Desk also closely tracks Canada’s immigration, visa, and study policies, covering changes to study permits, post-study work options, permanent residence programmes, and regulatory updates affecting migrants and international students. All reporting from the Global Desk adheres to The Indian Express’ editorial standards, relying on official data, government notifications, court documents, and on-record sources. The desk prioritises clarity, accuracy, and accountability, ensuring readers can navigate complex global systems with confidence. Core Team The Express Global Desk is led by a team of experienced journalists and editors with deep expertise in international affairs and migration policy: Aniruddha Dhar – Senior Assistant Editor with extensive experience in global affairs, international politics, and editorial leadership. Nischai Vats – Deputy Copy Editor specialising in US politics, US visa and immigration policy, and policy-driven international coverage. Mashkoora Khan – Sub-editor focusing on global developments, with a strong emphasis on Canada visa, immigration, and study-related policy coverage. ... Read More

Actors involved

USIranProxy

Sources

  • Express Global DeskBy Express Global Desk

    Saudi Arabia warns Trump: US blockade of Iran could backfire, choke Kingdom’s own oil lifeline, says report Gulf states don't want the war to end with Iran still controlling Strait of Hormuz, but many, Saudi Arabia included, are pushing Washington to resolve the standoff at 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