What is the Strait of Hormuz and why does it matter to global trade?

The UK could be hit hard if Iran closes the Strait of Hormuz in response to American strikes on its nuclear sites
Fears of a widening conflict in the Middle East have deepened in recent days after the US bombed Iran. President Donald Trump made the unprecedented decision to bomb three Iranian nuclear sites over the weekend.
The UK was not involved in the air strikes but was informed beforehand. John Swinney has called for the conflict to end, while Keir Starmer said Iran's nuclear programme is a "grave threat" which US military action would "alleviate".
‌
The world is now bracing for Iran's response to the US joining Israel in the biggest western military action against the Islamic Republic since its 1979 revolution.
‌
One way Iran could hit back, according to analysts, is to close off the strait of Hormuz, a vital trade route, through which over a fifth of the world's oil supply, 20m barrels, and much of its liquified gas, passes each day.
Iran's parliament approved a measure to close the strait. Iran has threatened to close the strait in the past, which would restrict trade and impact global oil prices, but has never followed through. This time may be different, though.
What is the strait of Hormuz?
The strait of Hormuz lies between Oman and Iran and links the Gulf to the north with the Gulf of Oman to the south and the Arabian Sea beyond. It is 33km wide at its narrowest point, with the shipping lane just 3km wide.
The strait is one of the world's most important oil chokepoints and is crucial to the US and beyond, as the strength of the global economy is heavily dependent on the flow of oil.
Why is it so important?
‌
About one-fifth of the world's total oil consumption passes through the strait. Between the start of 2022 and last month, approximately 17.8 million to 20.8m barrels of crude, condensate, and fuels flowed through the strait daily, according to data from analytics firm Vortexa.
Members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) – Saudi Arabia, Iran, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Iraq – export most of their crude via the strait, mainly to Asia.
The US Fifth Fleet, based in Bahrain, is tasked with protecting commercial shipping in the area.
‌
What happens if it closes?
Closing the strait would trigger a global oil crisis, skyrocket inflation rates and potentially plunge the economy into a downturn. On Sunday, specialists cautioned that such a move to shut the strait might also elicit "a significant military response" from both the US and its allies.
Ami Daniel, CEO of maritime data company Windward, noted that even the mere "perception" of an Iranian assault on shipping could reduce maritime traffic to a mere trickle.
‌
Countless drivers could be hit with soaring fuel costs at the filling stations. The UK, which relies on imports for roughly half its oil supply, stands to be particularly exposed.
Iran has been warned that shutting down the strait would be tantamount to "economic suicide", as reported by The Telegraph.
‌
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has called on Iran's allies, including China, to exert pressure on Tehran to keep the Strait of Hormuz open, stating that any closure would be a "terrible mistake".
Iranian oil also uses the same gateway, and shutting Hormuz risks bringing Gulf Arab states, who have been highly critical of the Israeli attack, into the war to safeguard their own interests, according to The Guardian.
China would be particularly affected. The world's second-largest economy buys almost 90 per cent of Iran's oil exports, which are subject to international sanctions.
‌
What is Iran saying about the strait?
Iranian lawmakers have voted to obstruct vital shipping routes through this key waterway after Trump decided to engage in the conflict between Israel and Iran.
Iran's Press TV reported at the weekend that the Iranian parliament approved a measure to close the strait of Hormuz However, the vote by the Iranian parliament is not definitive, and state television has emphasised that the ultimate decision lies with Iran's top security officials.
‌
On Sunday Iran's foreign minister, Seyed Abbas Araghchi, said that Trump's decision to bomb Iran " will have everlasting consequences".
Israel has made a "grave mistake" and "must be punished."
He did not, however, make any specific reference to the strait of Hormuz.
Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community!
Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today.
You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland.
No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team.
All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in!
If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'.
We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like.
To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

The Independent

30 minutes ago

• The Independent

‘Morning Joe' stands up for Trump on Iran strikes and says even Hillary Clinton would have bombed nuke sites

MSNBC star Joe Scarborough came to the defense of his one-time pal Donald Trump on Monday morning, insisting that the president's decision to drop over a dozen bunker-busting bombs on Iran's fortified nuclear facilities would have been made by his predecessors — and Trump's 2016 opponent Hillary Clinton. On Saturday, the United States joined Israel's military campaign against Iran that is aimed at destroying the Middle Eastern adversary's nuclear program, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claiming Tehran was just weeks away from developing a nuclear bomb — an assertion he's made for decades now. 'Monumental Damage was done to all Nuclear sites in Iran, as shown by satellite images. Obliteration is an accurate term!' Trump boasted on Truth Social about 'Operation Midnight Hammer,' though experts say satellite imagery reveals the nation's nuclear program is 'far from destroyed.' Meanwhile, after Vice President JD Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth both insisted on Sunday that America wasn't looking for a protracted war that would include toppling Iran's government, the president sang a different tune just hours later. 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!' Trump posted on his social media platform on Sunday afternoon. While a new poll shows Americans overwhelmingly disapprove of Trump's decision to bomb Iran and worry that it will make the US less safe, Scarborough – an early and vocal cheerleader of the Iraq War – said on Monday's broadcast of Morning Joe that any other president would have handled the situation the same as Trump. 'The president had no good options,' Scarborough declared. 'What would Monday look like if he hadn't have moved, if Iran wasn't already at 60 percent, and an ability to create nuclear weapons in a short matter of time, right? … I'm not championing either side of this.' Turning to Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, the Morning Joe host asserted that the president had enough buy-in from the international community to take military action against Iran, adding that other Republican and Democratic commanders-in-chief would have felt obliged to do the same thing. 'I ask you, how difficult would it have been for any president to not take that shot if they knew that Iran was even being attacked by the United Nations?' Scarborough wondered. 'I find it hard to believe that Bush 41, Bush 43, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, you know, go down the list, any president wouldn't have felt compelled to take that strike.' Agreeing with the host, Ignatius said that Trump 'inherited' the war plans with Iran from his predecessors, adding that this would have been what they considered if they found 'diplomacy wasn't working.' At the same time, he said Trump's 'choices were debased at the moment' and the president 'had to make a decision.'Elsewhere in the show, Scarborough also invoked former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger to observe that the president had only 'difficult choices' in front of him when it came to Iran. 'Henry Kissinger famously said that when you're sitting in the White House and trying to make a decision on foreign policy, the possibility of war, you're never handed a good decision and a bad decision. You're handed two very difficult choices,' he stated. 'And the president made that choice.' While Scarborough and his wife/co-host Mika Brzezinski have been loud critics of the president for years now, that wasn't always the case. Considering him a longtime personal friend, the couple provided Trump a hefty boost in the nascent days of his 2016 presidential campaign, giving the then-reality TV star free rein of their program while promoting his candidacy. Though there would be a bitter split between the Morning Joe hosts and Trump prior to his winning the 2016 election, which would include the president peddling wild conspiracy theories about Scarborough killing an intern, the icy relationship may have begun to thaw in recent months. The couple traveled to Mar-a-Lago for an off-the-record huddle with Trump after his electoral victory in November, prompting viewers to briefly boycott Morning Joe over the perceived 'kissing the ring' trip. As for Scarborough's own foreign policy views, the former GOP congressman was a fervent supporter of invading Iraq over the George W. Bush administration's claims that the country was developing weapons of mass destruction. Though he has tried over the years to selectively criticize other cheerleaders of that war without pointing that finger at himself, Scarborough spent the early months of the Iraq War raging at news outlets, media figures and politicians he felt were too negative and critical about the US-led invasion. 'These leftist stooges for anti-American causes are always given a free pass,' he ranted in April 2003 to then-MSNBC colleague Michael Savage. 'Isn't it time to make them stand up and be counted for their views?!'

STV News

36 minutes ago

• STV News

Free school meals rolled out to secondary pupils for first time, Swinney says

Free school lunches will be provided to some youngsters in Scotland's secondary schools for the first time in August – although First Minister John Swinney has said making the meals available to all would be 'desirable'. The First Minister said that 'in principle' the Scottish Government supported universal free school meals, saying he would 'prefer that to be the case'. But he added: 'I have got to live within the resources available to me.' Swinney said: 'Of course universal provision is desirable, but I have to deliver policy proposals within the resources the government has got available to it.' His comments came as the Scottish Government confirmed that from August a number of S1 to S3 pupils will be eligible for free school meals – with the First Minister saying that while there is already 'extensive free school meal provision' for primary school children 'this is the first time we have gone into the secondary sector'. The Scottish Government is investing £3 million in a trial project, which will see lunches provided for more than 6,000 high school students – taking the total of youngsters who can claim a free lunch to more than 360,000. The latest phase of the project will see lunches being provided for those students eligible for the Scottish Child Payment in almost 60 schools in eight local authority areas – Aberdeen, Comhairle nan Eilean Siar (the Western Isles), Fife, Glasgow, Moray, North Ayrshire, Shetland, and South Lanarkshire. Swinney said the measure was about 'making sure that poverty is not an impediment to the achievement and the performance of young people'. The trial project will be independently reviewed, with the First Minister saying uptake would be considered, along with the 'beneficial impact of free school meals on the learning opportunities for young people'. The First Minister spoke about the 'targeted intervention' as he visited Springburn Academy in Glasgow, where he ate lunch with some of the students. About 140 pupils at the school could benefit from the free lunches when the trial project comes into being from August. Speaking about the scheme, Swinney said: 'It's a measure designed to tackle the cost-of-living challenges families face, to tackle child poverty and to make sure that children have good health, nutritious food to strengthen their ability to learn in school.' The First Minister added: 'The free school meals programme is key in our national mission to eradicate child poverty, which saves families who take up the offer around £450 per eligible child per year. 'This next phase of the rollout will ensure that this offer is available to more families across the country. 'We know the positive impact that access to a healthy and nutritious meal can have on a pupil's learning and achievement in school. 'This demonstrates how important the programme is in our efforts to close the poverty-related attainment gap in Scotland, ensuring that every child is given an opportunity to succeed in education regardless of their background.' He continued: 'The Scottish Government will also continue its broader support to tackle the cost of the school day, including our £14.2 million School Uniform Clothing Grant and our investment in the £1 billion Scottish Attainment Challenge.' Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country

Reuters

36 minutes ago

• Reuters

Fed's Bowman open to cutting rates at July policy meeting

NEW YORK, June 23 (Reuters) - Federal Reserve Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman, recently tapped by President Trump as the central bank's top bank overseer, said Monday the time to cut interest rates may be fast approaching as she is growing more worried about risks to the job market and is less concerned tariffs will cause an inflation problem. 'It is time to consider adjusting the policy rate,' Bowman said in the text of remarks to be delivered before a gathering held in Prague, Czech Republic. Bowman said inflation appears to be on a sustained path back to 2% and she said she expects 'only minimal impact' on inflation from trade policy. 'Should inflation pressures remain contained, I would support lowering the policy rate as soon as our next meeting in order to bring it closer to its neutral setting and to sustain a healthy labor market,' Bowman said. Last week, the Federal Reserve meeting in a gathering that left its overnight target-rate range fixed between 4.25% and 4.5%. Officials remained in a wait-and-see mode amid the considerable economic uncertainty created by President Donald Trump's erratically implemented trade policy. Fed officials are worried surging import taxes could depress growth while restarting what had been cooling inflation pressures. Bowman said in her speech that she supported the Fed's decision to hold steady. But the appears to see far fewer storm clouds ahead for the economy, and in her speech, she said more clarity is arriving over the outlook. Bowman's openness to cutting rates is joined by that of Fed Governor Christopher Waller, who said in a television interview Friday he'd also consider a rate cut at the July 29-30 meeting. Waller is widely considered to be in the running to succeed Fed Chair Jerome Powell, whose term ends next year. Trump has repeatedly pressured the Fed to pursue very large rate cuts amid insults to Powell. Observers believe any Fed chair would need to align with Trump's desire for much lower short-term borrowing costs. In her remarks, Bowman noted the job market is still in a good place but she's more worried about what lies ahead for the sector, and that's part of what's informing her dovish monetary policy views. 'We should also recognize that downside risks to our employment mandate could soon become more salient, given recent softness in spending and signs of fragility in the labor market,' Bowman said. The Fed official was also quite sanguine on the inflation outlook, saying 'it appears that any upward pressure from higher tariffs on goods prices is being offset by other factors and that the underlying trend in core [Personal Consumption Expenditures] inflation is moving much closer to our 2% target than is currently apparent in the data.'