Skip to content
You can now search across every topic, entity and event.What's new
Iran Conflict 2026
3SEP

Two US carriers stay, blockade runs on

3 min read
16:40UTC

The USS Abraham Lincoln and the USS George H.W. Bush remained on station in the Gulf as of 18 June, the blockade still redirecting vessels, despite the memorandum's clause that it be removed immediately.

ConflictDeveloping
Key takeaway

Two carriers on station are the proof the order to lift the blockade never reached the fleet.

Two US carrier strike groups, built around the USS Abraham Lincoln and the USS George H.W. Bush, remained on station in the Gulf region as of 17-18 June 1. CENTCOM (US Central Command), the US military command for the Middle East, has issued no drawdown order, and the naval blockade continues to redirect vessels, despite the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) clause that the blockade be "removed immediately."

The blockade is the apparatus that has throttled Iranian seaborne trade through the war, turning the strait into a corridor ships transit only on US sufferance. Trump signed the MOU and ordered the blockade lifted on 16 June , but CENTCOM kept it running pending a signed instrument it has not received. The carriers on station are the physical evidence that the order has not reached the water.

The shipping industry reads operations, not press releases. Insurers, mine-clearance crews and tanker owners need an on-water change before commercial transits resume; a memorandum does not move a hull. Hormuz logged zero new tanker transits the day after Trump signed . The Geneva signing ceremony was scrapped, and Baghaei confirmed the text was finalised electronically, the presidents' signatures applied digitally rather than at any podium.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Think of the naval blockade as a lock on a gate that is run by one department and the key as a different document held by another department. When the US President signed the Islamabad MOU, he was handing over a promise to unlock the gate. But the military commanders operating the lock need a separate written order from the Defence Department before they can actually turn the key. As of 18 June, that order had not arrived. So both aircraft carriers, the Abraham Lincoln and the George H.W. Bush, stayed in position, redirecting ships just as before. The gate remained locked. Separately, the sea still has live floating mines in it. Even if the lock were opened, no commercial ship would sail through a minefield without a guarantee that the mines had been removed.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

The blockade-stays problem has a structural cause independent of politics: the CENTCOM enforcement mechanism runs on a separate chain of command from the diplomatic track that produced the MOU. Trump signed the MOU as the US executive; the blockade is operationalised by CENTCOM via the Secretary of Defense chain. Without a National Security Council decision memo, a SecDef order, and a CENTCOM operational directive, the blockade runs by default.

Mine-clearance progress also blocks the blockade lift. Hormuz was still seeded with active mines on 18 June. BIMCO and the International Chamber of Shipping have stated publicly that commercial vessels will not transit an uncleared minefield regardless of what a ceasefire agreement says. The operational prerequisite for the blockade lift, cleared lanes, does not yet exist.

What could happen next?
  • Risk

    An incident between an on-station carrier and an IRGC vessel, as happened on 15 June with the 'last warning' radio transmission, could escalate to an exchange of fire that voids the MOU before the 19 June ceremony.

    Immediate · Reported
  • Consequence

    The carrier stay gives Iran a public talking point: the US blockade continues despite the signed MOU, symmetrically matching Iran's own non-compliance on Lebanon.

    Short term · Assessed
  • Precedent

    If the blockade does not begin to lift within seven days of signing, insurers will treat the MOU as a rhetorical instrument rather than an operational change, maintaining war-risk exclusions and keeping effective transit near zero.

    Short term · Assessed
First Reported In

Update #131 · Iran deal's first death tests the text

Al Jazeera· 18 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.