Hormuz reopening clouded by diplomatic cracks and mine risks

The MOU, brokered by Pakistan and signed late Wednesday, established a 60-day negotiating window covering a broad portfolio of issues including Iran’s nuclear programme. Within hours of the ink drying, Iranian state outlet Fars reported that Tehran had placed that core element on hold. The White House did not acknowledge the claim directly but confirmed late Thursday that vice president JD Vance has postponed his anticipated trip to Switzerland, where he had been due to meet Iranian negotiators on Friday. No revised timeline has been given.      Tehran’s rationale centres on what it considers a breach of the deal’s opening clause. Iran secured a commitment that the ceasefire would encompass a halt to all hostilities, including Israeli strikes against Hezbollah in Lebanon. Israel has continued operations regardless, with attacks on Kfar Tebnit and Zabadin on Thursday alone resulting in three deaths. Iran’s position is that these strikes invalidate the entire MOU. The difficulty is that Israel is not a party to the agreement and has refused to be bound by it. Delivering peace in Lebanon as America’s side of the bargain will require Washington to persuade Jerusalem to change its military calculus — a task that so far shows no sign of progress.

On the operational side, Iran’s Supreme National Security Council confirmed that the country’s Persian Gulf Strait Authority would move to issue fast authorisations for vessels wishing to transit in line with the MOU, with mine clearance measures to follow. Ships were advised to adhere to the paths and timings allocated by the authority. Separately, CENTCOM announced it had lifted the blockade on all maritime traffic entering and exiting Iranian ports in accordance with the president’s direction, adding that US naval assets would remain in the general area to ensure all aspects of the agreement are followed.      The Joint Maritime Information Center has lowered its threat assessment for the strait to moderate and confirmed it is open, while warning of continuing mine risk and noting the confirmed location of one specific device. Crucially, JMIC advises vessels to avoid the international traffic separation scheme — the normal transit route — and has provided alternative routing through inshore traffic zones, warning of congestion on those corridors.      BIMCO issued a detailed caution on Thursday, urging owners not to rush. “Iran and the US have now agreed to permit transits through the Strait of Hormuz, but significant safety and security risks still persist,” said Jakob Larsen, the organisation’s chief safety and security officer. “The central part of the Strait is mined and un-navigable, and only the inshore traffic zones close to Oman and Iran are reportedly free of mines.”

Larsen flagged the MOU itself as raising more questions than it answers, citing gaps around safe routes, traffic separation, sequencing of vessels departing the Gulf, and emergency response procedures. BIMCO is calling for an international coordination body to be established to manage the transit process and is encouraging owners to wait for its direction rather than attempt passage independently. “To avoid serious risks associated with an uncoordinated mass transit through the narrow inshore traffic zones, we encourage shipowners to consider waiting for further clarification,” Larsen said.

BIMCO’s chief shipping analyst Niels Rasmussen offered cautious optimism on the commercial outlook. More than 100 laden tankers and nearly 100 in ballast are currently trapped in the Persian Gulf. “Within a couple of months, shipping services could return to pre-war levels,” he said, while noting that cargo volume recovery may lag due to infrastructure damage. Rasmussen specifically highlighted damage to gas production at Ras Laffan in Qatar and the Habshan complex in the UAE as likely to delay LNG shipment recovery and weigh on fertiliser exports.      The World Shipping Council (WSC), liner shipping’s lobby group, welcomed the agreement while emphasising that paperwork alone is not enough. “The immediate priority is safe passage for the seafarers and ships still stranded in the area,” said WSC president and CEO Joe Kramek. “That will require coordination between states, the IMO and industry, backed by the necessary safety and security guarantees.” Kramek added that the crisis had reinforced a fundamental principle: “Ships must be able to pass through the Strait of Hormuz safely, securely and without toll.”      Braemar’s tanker analysts struck a sceptical note on the pace of traffic recovery, arguing the deal will fail to restore flows to pre-closure levels even under optimistic assumptions. Permanent diversion of Saudi crude via the East-West pipeline to Yanbu, combined with the UAE’s accelerating push toward zero Hormuz dependency, means the strait may have permanently shed around 4m barrels per day of its pre-war crude throughput. A further complication is the possibility that Iran may charge transit fees after 60 days.    

Braemar estimates that even in an optimistic scenario where Middle East crude exports rise by 8m barrels per day over the coming months, the VLCC market may not see the rate surge some are anticipating. The reactivation of idle tonnage — including some 54 VLCCs already waiting near the Gulf — will absorb a portion of the demand recovery, while the loss of urgency premium that has kept rates elevated during the closure could send freight levels back toward where they were before the conflict began. A so-called “fear premium” for Gulf-loading routes, however, is expected to persist for some months.     The deeper risk, Braemar noted, is that the 60-day deadline on the thorniest unresolved issues — Iran’s nuclear programme, proxy support and Hormuz administration — could become a rolling target, maintaining a semi-permanent threat of reclosure. For shipowners weighing whether to move, that uncertainty may prove harder to navigate than the mines.