Skip to content
You can now search across every topic, entity and event.What's new
Iran Conflict 2026
4JUN

500 ships idle as Hormuz stays shut

3 min read
11:25UTC

Zero new tankers crossed Hormuz in the 24 hours after Trump's signature; more than 500 ships stayed anchored as Bimco called a crossing very risky.

ConflictDeveloping
Key takeaway

Brent priced an open strait that no tanker actually crossed; insurers still block transit.

Zero Hormuz tankers transited in the 24 hours after Trump's 16 June signature, despite his declaration that the strait was open. The two crossings logged on 15-16 June were toll passages under the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) authority, Iran's military force that controls mine routes and passage conditions, not a reopening . More than 500 ships remain parked in the Gulf 1. BIMCO, the world's largest shipowner association, calls a crossing "very risky": the floating mines are still live, no IRGC order has cleared the lanes, and not one Protection and Indemnity (P&I) club, the London-based mutual marine insurers, has lifted its Hormuz war-risk exclusion 2.

The insurance point drives the lanes more than the mines do. A tanker without P&I cover cannot dock, because terminals and lenders refuse an uninsured hull. The blockade now runs through London insurance underwriters as much as through Iranian mines, and every owner knows it. Jakob Larsen, BIMCO's chief safety officer, said owners "still consider it very risky to commence transits at this point" while the mines stand uncleared.

Brent Crude, the global benchmark that prices roughly two-thirds of internationally traded oil, fell to between $78.82 and $81.55 on the signing, down as much as 5 per cent 3, near the two-month low it touched a week ago on deal optimism . Markets priced the expectation of an open strait. No moving ship lay behind the fall, because the lanes held zero new transits. The price moved; the cargo did not.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

When a ship sails through a war zone, it needs special war-risk insurance. The P&I clubs, mutual insurance associations based in London, provide this cover for roughly 90 per cent of the world's ships. They said on 16 June that the Hormuz strait is still too dangerous to cover, because Iranian military mines remain in the water and nobody has officially certified them as swept. Without that cover, a shipowner who loses a vessel in the strait cannot claim for the loss. No credible insurer will touch an active mine zone. This is why 500 ships are sitting in the Gulf, not because their owners do not want to move, but because sailing uninsured through an uncleared mine field is commercially and legally impossible.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

The 500-ship backlog and zero-transit outcome have two distinct root causes. The mine threat is physical: CENTCOM's own assessment by mid-May was that 90 per cent of Iran's naval mine stockpile was warehoused, not in-water, but the remaining deployed mines have not been certified as swept. Bimco's Jakob Larsen cited active mines as the primary safety barrier.

The P&I club constraint operates through the International Group of P&I Clubs, which covers roughly 90 per cent of the world's ocean-going tonnage. The group sets a collective de-risk bar that no individual member club can unilaterally lower without triggering reinsurance withdrawal by the London market. P&I clubs cannot issue standard hull and liability cover for a zone the Lloyd's Joint War Committee lists as enhanced-risk without a UN resolution or government certification of safety.

What could happen next?
  • Consequence

    P&I de-listing of Hormuz requires mine clearance certification or a UN resolution; the 60-day nuclear talks window does not address either condition.

  • Risk

    Oil markets pricing a reopening that has no ships behind it face a correction risk if Friday's ceremony also fails to produce mine clearance progress.

First Reported In

Update #130 · Trump signed the war over; it kept going

Argus Media· 17 Jun 2026
Read original
Different Perspectives
China's foreign ministry
China's foreign ministry
Spokesman Lin Jian rejected Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's 25 August warning that Iranian oil buyers face an "economic D-Day", saying sanctions do not help and that Beijing would safeguard its own rights and interests. China's Iranian crude imports had already halved for unrelated reasons.
Iraq's government and Erbil authorities
Iraq's government and Erbil authorities
Erbil authorities said 10 explosive-laden drones were shot down over the city on 1-2 September with no casualties. Iraq's government condemned the attacks without naming Iran as their source, and neither Washington nor Baghdad confirmed the IRGC's claim to have hit US bases there.
Bahrain Defence Force
Bahrain Defence Force
The General Command said air defences intercepted several Iranian missiles and drones on 1-2 September and called the use of such weapons against civilians and private property a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law.
Kuwait's Fire Force and foreign ministry
Kuwait's Fire Force and foreign ministry
KUNA reported a hostile Iranian drone struck a residential complex in Kuwait City on 2 September; Fire Force spokesman Brigadier General Mohammad Al-Gharib said losses were confined to property. Kuwait's foreign ministry called the attack a clear breach of its sovereignty.
Jordan's Armed Forces
Jordan's Armed Forces
Petra carried a statement that air defences intercepted eight missiles violating Jordanian airspace early on 31 August and 10 of 13 fired on 1 September. The statement named no target and did not address the IRGC's claim to have struck Camp Titin and killed US personnel.
CENTCOM
CENTCOM
CENTCOM's 1 September target list named IRGC air defence, radar, maritime and mine-laying sites in Iran but no tanker, after Axios reported anonymous officials describing a Trump-approved "tanker for tanker" drone policy. A CENTCOM spokesman declined to confirm the policy and referred questions to policymakers.