Skip to content
You can now search across every topic, entity and event.What's new
Iran Conflict 2026
11JUN

Maersk and CMA CGM halt Hormuz transits

2 min read
09:17UTC

Six of the world's biggest shipping companies have suspended all Hormuz transits after three tankers were attacked in 72 hours — a faster escalation than the entire 1984–88 Tanker War.

← Back to IRGC declares Hormuz shut; US strikes againJump to analysis ↓
ConflictDeveloping

CMA CGM, Maersk, Nippon Yusen, Mitsui, and Kawasaki Kisen have halted all transits through the strait of Hormuz. They join Hapag-Lloyd, which suspended operations within hours of the IRGC's VHF Channel 16 broadcast declaring the strait closed to shipping . Six of the world's largest shipping companies — controlling roughly half of global container capacity — now refuse to send vessels through the passage that carries approximately 20% of the world's traded oil.

The suspensions followed three direct attacks on commercial tankers near the strait: the MV Skylight struck off Oman with four crew injured, the MKD Vyom hit by a projectile that ignited an engine room fire, and the Sea La Donna, details still pending. Oil tankers had already begun avoiding the strait after the opening strikes . The physical attacks converted commercial caution into a full shutdown. Vessel traffic has fallen 70%, with more than 150 tankers anchored in open Gulf waters.

The last sustained military campaign against commercial shipping in these waters was the 1984–88 Tanker War during the Iran-Iraq conflict, which struck 546 vessels over four years. Three have been hit here in 72 hours. When Houthi attacks disrupted Red Sea shipping in 2024, carriers rerouted around the Cape of Good Hope — costly, but viable. the strait of Hormuz has no such bypass. Saudi Arabia's East-West Pipeline and the UAE's Habshan-Fujairah pipeline provide limited overland alternatives, but their combined capacity covers a fraction of normal seaborne Gulf exports.

Every day of closure tightens supply across refineries in Asia and Europe that depend on Gulf crude. Brent opened Saturday at $82.37 , up from the pre-strike price of $73 . Goldman Sachs projected a peak of $110 per barrel; JP Morgan forecast $120–130 if the conflict is prolonged and raised its US recession probability to 35% . With commercial vessels now under direct fire rather than merely pausing, the prolonged-conflict scenario is the one unfolding.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

The companies did not need to be ordered to stop — insurance requirements and duty-of-care obligations to crews left them little practical choice once vessels began being struck. This is a commercial mechanism, not a political one: governments cannot simply instruct carriers to resume without resolving the underlying threat.

Deep Analysis
Synthesis

Iran has achieved the strategic effect of a blockade without physically closing the strait — the carrier suspensions did that. The burden now falls on governments: naval escorts (escalatory), ceasefire (stalled), or absorbing prolonged supply disruption. Gulf oil-producing states face a simultaneous revenue crisis, giving them independent incentive to pressure both parties towards resolution — an actor not yet prominent in diplomatic reporting.

Root Causes

Suspensions are driven by war-risk insurance requirements — which may refuse cover above a defined threat threshold — combined with duty-of-care obligations to crews. Hapag-Lloyd's early suspension likely acted as a coordination signal: once one major carrier exits, competitors can justify the same decision to shareholders and insurers more easily, producing collective action faster than individual commercial logic would suggest.

Escalation

Naval convoy deployment would make the strait operationally a military corridor — the dynamic the Tanker War produced, culminating in the re-flagging of Kuwaiti tankers under the US flag in 1987, a politically costly commitment requiring sustained naval presence. The current US posture is offensive, not convoy protection, making that transition both harder to execute and more escalatory to announce.

What could happen next?
2 consequence2 risk1 precedent
  • Consequence

    With the world's largest carriers suspended, the effective closure of Hormuz to commercial traffic is already achieved through voluntary withdrawal, making the strategic impact of a formal Iranian blockade declaration largely redundant.

    Immediate · Assessed
  • Risk

    Pressure will mount on the US and allied navies to provide armed escorts for commercial vessels attempting Hormuz transits, risking direct military confrontation with Iranian naval or IRGC maritime forces in the strait.

    Short term · Suggested
  • Consequence

    Emergency surcharges and freight rate spikes will flow through global supply chains within weeks, raising the delivered cost of goods across all economies that import via Hormuz.

    Short term · Assessed
  • Precedent

    The collective voluntary withdrawal of commercial carriers from a major international strait under military threat — without governmental compulsion — establishes that economic coercion through targeted anti-shipping operations is an effective strategy with disproportionate effect.

    Long term · Assessed
  • Risk

    Gulf oil-producing states face an acute revenue crisis if they cannot export their primary commodity, creating incentives for them to exert independent pressure on the US towards a ceasefire or to offer financial inducements to commercial operators to resume transits under risk.

    Short term · Suggested
Sources:gCaptain
Mentions:VLCC →Mitsui O.S.K. Lines →National Security Council (Iran) →Maersk →Goldman Sachs →United Arab Emirates (UAE) →Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) →CMA CGM →Iran →Strait of Hormuz →Brent Crude →Saudi Arabia →Oman →Iran-Iraq War →JPMorgan Chase →
First Reported In

Update #7 · Hezbollah enters; tankers burn in Hormuz

gCaptain· 2 Mar 2026
Read original →
Causes and effects
This Event
Maersk and CMA CGM halt Hormuz transits
The suspension by CMA CGM, Maersk, Nippon Yusen, Mitsui, Kawasaki Kisen, and Hapag-Lloyd means roughly half of global container shipping capacity now refuses to transit the waterway carrying 20% of the world's traded oil. Unlike the Red Sea, where Cape of Good Hope rerouting was possible during Houthi disruptions, no viable maritime bypass exists for Gulf hydrocarbon exports.
Led to
Three P&I clubs pull Gulf war risk cover
Major shipping lines halting Hormuz transits signalled risk level that triggered P&I insurance cancellation
Occurred 3 Mar 2026
Read story →
Different Perspectives
Oil markets and Lloyd's of London
Oil markets and Lloyd's of London
Brent fell to $89.25 on ceasefire probability, not new barrels, with traders voting for Trump's deed over Tehran's denial. Lloyd's has not repriced Hormuz war-risk cover because its trigger requires a UN Security Council resolution or government certification, so tanker insurance costs remain elevated regardless of the spot move.
Pakistan and Qatar mediators
Pakistan and Qatar mediators
Pakistan's Mohsin Naqvi was in Tehran for his second visit in under a week, using the Pakistan-Qatar channel that delivered April's ceasefire after an identical public-denial cycle. The channel carries both civilian and military buy-in from Islamabad, the only configuration Iran's split command cannot dismiss as a partial signal.
India
India
India summoned the US Deputy Chief of Mission after three Indian sailors were killed aboard MT Settebello, the first formal grievance from a major non-belligerent directed at US enforcement. Indian seafarers supply roughly 12 per cent of the global maritime workforce; their presence on third-flag Gulf tankers is structurally inevitable regardless of bilateral diplomacy.
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)
The IRGC declared Hormuz closed on 11 June while civilian negotiators were on the same mediation channel, then issued no public comment on the MoU framework. Its silence on the framework, rather than any foreign ministry statement, is the operative approval signal; the corps' unilateral Hormuz closure shows it did not treat the diplomatic track as binding on its operations.
Iran foreign ministry (Baghaei)
Iran foreign ministry (Baghaei)
Esmail Baghaei told IRNA that reports of a finalised deal were 'merely speculation' and that Iran had 'not yet made a final decision'. The denial is structurally identical to Iranian foreign ministry statements during the April ceasefire talks, which produced a binding text within 48 hours of the same language.
Trump administration / CENTCOM
Trump administration / CENTCOM
Trump cancelled the third strike day and called the MoU 'very strong' and almost ready to sign, while CENTCOM kept tanker enforcement running in the same 24-hour window. The administration is simultaneously withdrawing the military pressure it claims drove the deal and sustaining the enforcement campaign it is trying to trade away.