logo
Strait of Hormuz becomes flash point in US-Iran conflict

Strait of Hormuz becomes flash point in US-Iran conflict

Yahoo12 hours ago

The Iranian Parliament on Sunday approved a measure to close the Strait of Hormuz after the United States bombed three nuclear sites in Iran.
The strait, located between Iran and Oman, remains a critical oil choke point, and closing it could have serious implications for both the global and U.S. economy.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in several Sunday interviews, warned against shutting down the strait, calling the move 'suicidal' for the regime. Rubio also called on China — Iran's most crucial oil customer — to encourage the country against shutting it down.
'I encourage the Chinese government in Beijing to call them about that, because they heavily depend on the Straits of Hormuz for their oil,' Rubio said on Fox News's 'Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo.'
Live updates: US bombs cause 'severe damage' in Iran; UN chief calls action 'perilous'
Iran's Supreme National Security Council will ultimately decide on the move.
The threat to block the narrow waterway comes in response to U.S. strikes on three nuclear sites in Natanz, Isfahan and Fordow, the last of which is located inside a mountain. The Trump administration has argued the strikes, dubbed Operation Midnight Hammer, were a monumental success. But it is unclear how much the sites were damaged or how much the attack set back Iran's nuclear program.
The Strait of Hormuz's width and depth allow it to handle the world's largest crude oil tankers, and very few alternatives exist if it is closed, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). Approximately 20 million barrels, or 20 percent of global consumption, flowed through the strait in 2024.
More than 80 percent of the crude oil and natural gas that passed through the Strait of Hormuz in 2024 was destined for Asian markets, with China, India, Japan and South Korea being the top recipients. These countries would likely be the most affected by any closure.
But the U.S. market would also feel some impact if the strait were disrupted. The U.S. has been buying less oil from the Persian Gulf — importing about 532,000 barrels per day in 2024, according to the EIA. Still, consumers are businesses are still likely to see increased prices, given that oil is traded globally. And it could take months for U.S. oil companies to drill more to compensate for those increased prices, The New York Times reports.
Oil prices in the past month increased due to the escalating Israel-Iran conflict, and these are estimated to climb further if Iran blocks the strait. Experts have said they estimate oil prices could increase from $73 per barrel up to $120 per barrel if tankers are blocked.
'If we see any throttling back of the Strait of Hormuz, we'll see a massive increase in the price of oil, and that will impact everything in the U.S.,' Ramanan Krishnamoorti, a professor of petroleum engineering at the University of Houston, told ABC News this month.
Iran has previously seized or interfered with tankers during heightened political tensions, according to the Times.
While Iran's Supreme National Security Council has yet to make a decision, some experts are skeptical that the country will actually close down the Strait of Hormuz. Experts say the move would likely lead to a near-immediate response from the U.S., and it would be self-defeating to Iran's own market.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

The U.S. helped oust an Iranian regime before. Here's what happened in 1953.
The U.S. helped oust an Iranian regime before. Here's what happened in 1953.

USA Today

time10 minutes ago

  • USA Today

The U.S. helped oust an Iranian regime before. Here's what happened in 1953.

In the days following the U.S. strikes in Iran, President Donald Trump has threatened to depose Iran's leader and institute a regime change, igniting debates over interventionism and resurfacing memories of the last time America helped topple a government in Iran decades ago. '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 wrote in a Truth Social post on June 22. Live updates: What is Iran's next move? World awaits response to U.S. bombing Trump's post came after officials in his administration, including U.S. Vice President JD Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, took much different tones, saying they were not working to overthrow Iran's government and do not want a regime change. As next steps remain unclear, the specter of American involvement in a plan to depose the Iranian regime raises immediate comparisons to Iran's 1953 coup, when American and British intelligence agencies aided in the forced removal of a democratically elected leader. While the current crisis is a far cry from the domestic and international events surrounding the 1953 coup, talk of regime change evokes memories of the U.S.-backed operation that had far-reaching effects in Iran and across the region more than 70 years ago. Here's what to know about what happened then. More: The risks for Trump of 'regime change' in Iran: Just ask George W. Bush Iran and the U.S.—were they always adversarial? As the Cold War took hold in the 1950s, Washington relied on Iran's reigning Shah to help stem Soviet influence spreading further in the oil-producing Middle East. The British had relied on nearly unfettered access to the Iranian oil industry via the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, later to become BP. US Iran strikes: What does regime change mean? Trump comments on Iran leadership But Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and his monarchist rule were growing unpopular at home among Iranians, and in 1951, Mohammad Mossadegh was elected as prime minister. Shortly after, he nationalized Iranian oil production in a bid to reclaim the country's oil industry and profits from significant foreign control. What led to the 1953 coup in Iran? Britain, shut out from Iranian oil, leaned on the U.S. for assistance. The American government at the time worried that Mossadegh's government signaled an end to Western footholds in the region in the face of Cold War-era anxieties and the USSR's push to expand its influence. In 1953, the CIA and MI6 orchestrated the overthrow of Mossadegh in 'Operation Ajax,' led by senior officer Kermit Roosevelt Jr., grandson of U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt. It led to the overthrow of Mossadegh, who went on trial and was sentenced to house arrest, and restored and centralized power to Pahlavi. He would become the last Shah of Iran. The National Security Archive in 2013 officially acknowledged the U.S.'s role in the coup when it released declassified CIA documents on the operation. Learn more about Iran: 11 facts about the country following US strikes on three of its nuclear sites 'The 1953 coup remains a topic of global interest because so much about it is still under intense debate,' Malcolm Byrne of the National Security Archive wrote alongside the 2013 release. 'Even fundamental questions — who hatched the plot, who ultimately carried it out, who supported it inside Iran, and how did it succeed — are in dispute.' Journalist Stephen Kinzer said in his 2003 book 'All the Shah's Men' that the 1953 coup was a 'great trauma for Iran, the Middle East, and the colonial world,' marking the first time the U.S. overthrew a foreign government and altering how millions, especially in the region, saw the United States. How did the US-Iranian relationship play out after the coup? Iranians overthrew the Shah in 1979, and the Islamic revolutionaries who took over accused the CIA of having trained the Shah's secret police and vowed to battle Western imperialism in the region. They branded America 'the Great Satan,' a nickname that endures to this day. In November 1979, revolutionary students seized the American embassy and took dozens of diplomats and other staff hostage for more than a year. Known as the Iran hostage crisis, it marked the end of a strategic alliance between the U.S. and the Shah's regime, ushering in a new age of hostility between the two nations. The 1953 coup loomed large in the revolution's rhetoric. The lasting impact of the 1953 coup While the U.S. and Iran have butt heads over a range of issues since the 1979 revolution and hostage crisis, including years of strife over Iran's nuclear program, the 1953 coup remains a critical event still invoked in modern Iran. Iranian historian Ervand Abrahamian writes in his 2013 book about the crisis that the coup had lasting impacts on American foreign policy and U.S.-Iranian relations and cast its 'darkest shadow' over Iran itself. 'The coup left a deep imprint on the country—not only on its polity and economy but also on its popular culture and what some would call mentality,' Abrahamian said in 'The Coup.' Contributing: Swapna Venugopal Ramaswamy, USA TODAY; Reuters. Kathryn Palmer is a national trending news reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach her at kapalmer@ and on X @KathrynPlmr.

US on high alert after Iran strikes
US on high alert after Iran strikes

The Hill

time10 minutes ago

  • The Hill

US on high alert after Iran strikes

Thank you for signing up! Subscribe to more newsletters here It's Monday. This humidity is on another level. 🥵 Oh, and if you're in the Washington area, be aware that the new Metro rail changes are in effect. 🗺️ Here's the new Metro map In today's issue: President Trump is meeting with his national security team this afternoon after taking the extraordinary step of inserting the United States into the escalating Israel-Iran conflict. Here's where things stand: Potential retaliation against U.S. troops: Fears over Iran potentially retaliating are high, including against any of the 40,000 U.S. forces in the Middle East. Americans are on alert: The U.S. has issued a number of alerts since the weekend strikes against three Iranian nuclear sites. Russia backs Iran: A Russian spokesperson says Russia is ready to help Iran. And Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi is in Moscow today to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Iran may retaliate economically: Iranian Parliament has reportedly approved a measure to close the Strait of Hormuz. This is a vital passage for trade — especially oil. That could cripple the global economy. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asked China to step in and prevent Iran from closing the strait. 🗨️ Follow today's live blog ➤ THE TWO BIG QUESTIONS: 1 — Did the strikes destroy Iran's nuclear program? The Trump administration has expressed confidence that Saturday's mission to bomb Iran's nuclear sites was successful. Trump claimed he 'obliterated' their nuclear sites — and White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told ABC News this morning that the White House is confident it hit Iran's enriched uranium stockpiles. 2 — Is the U.S. pushing for a regime change? Vice President Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio andDefense Secretary Pete Hegseth all insisted Sunday that the U.S. strikes were *not* intended to force a 'regime change' in Iran. But Trump then left that door open, floating a possible regime change on Truth Social. ➤ HAPPENING TUESDAY: Trump will travel to the Netherlands for the annual NATO summit Tuesday. ➤ HOW WE WENT FROM 0 TO 60 IN A FEW DAYS: Trump said in a statement read by the press secretary at Thursday's White House briefing that he would take up to two weeks to decide whether to strike Iran. But just two days later, the U.S. lobbed bombs at three Iranian nuclear sites. 📸 Satellite images of the strikes What changed in that time?: The New York Times reports that it was intentional 'political and military misdirection' from the White House. 'It was almost entirely a deception. Mr. Trump had all but made up his mind to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities, and the military preparations were well underway for the complex attack.' Plus: Everyone in Trump's orbit had been trying to get in his ear about war vs. diplomacy. Read the NYT report: 'Shifting Views and Misdirection: How Trump Decided to Strike Iran' ➤ MORE READS: The Washington Post: A weakened Iran could turn to assassination and terrorism to strike back The Wall Street Journal: Trump's Iran Attack Revives Questions About War Powers NPR: Iran's relationship with Russia and China could come into play after U.S. strikes The Atlantic: Trump Changed. The Intelligence Didn't.: The president's decision to drop bombs on Iran was opportunistic, not a result of new information. Senate parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough has nixed several more provisions in Republicans' 'big, beautiful' megabill. ⭕ The first — holding White House officials in contempt: Republicans have included language to make it very difficult for courts to hold Trump administration officials in contempt. If passed, that could give Trump officials power to ignore court rulings because there's no easy enforcement mechanism to hold them in contempt. ^ Wow, this is a wild stat: Since January, courts have already ruled *against* the Trump administration at least 197 times, per The New York Times tracker. ^^For context: This controversial provision was included in the House-passed bill, but it went unnoticed by many. Several Republicans later realized it was in the bill after voting 'yes' and publicly said they regret their vote. ⭕ The second — border security and immigration enforcement: MacDonough rejected language that would authorize states — as opposed to the federal government — to conduct border security and immigration enforcement. ⭕ The third — increasing contributions for retirement: MacDonough ruled against GOP language to increase what federal employees would contribute to the Federal Employees Retirement Systems if they don't agree to become at-will employees. 🟩 But what is allowed to stay — AI: A 10-year ban on states regulating artificial intelligence (AI). This is important to keep in mind: The Senate parliamentarian's role is nonpartisan, and she is not deciding what lawmakers can and cannot pass. MacDonoughis sifting through the bill to decide what is allowed to be included in Republicans' reconciliation bill. Remember: Reconciliation is a legislative loophole to pass a bill with just 51 votes, not the usual 60 votes. MacDonough ruled these provisions are a violation of the Byrd Rule. If Republicans want to include them, they will need 60 votes. ➤ WHAT'S HAPPENING ON CAPITOL HILL THIS WEEK?: The Hill's Mychael Schnell posted a helpful breakdown of what to expect in Congress this week. Read: 'Congress returns to divisions over Iran strike amid budget battles' Coming tomorrow: In the latest edition of The Movement, The Hill's latest newsletter, Schnell will take a look at the inside the group making an 'EPIC' impact on the GOP's megabill. Click here to sign up & get it in your inbox. The Supreme Court just agreed to hear a case on whether a former Louisiana inmate can receive damages for having his dreadlocks forcibly shaved in prison. But the court said 'no' to hearing an appeal to Virginia's lifetime voting ban for felons. The House and Senate are in. President Trump is in Washington. (All times EST) 1 p.m.: Trump meets with his national security team. 5:30 p.m.: The Senate holds a vote to end debate on a nomination. 📆Today's agenda 6:30 p.m.: First and last House votes. 📆Today's agenda Tuesday: New York City's Democratic mayoral primary. 🔎What to know Thursday: The next scheduled day for Supreme Court opinions. 🍪 Celebrate: Today is National Pecan Sandies Day. 📱 No more WhatsApp for House staffers: Axios reports that the popular messaging app WhatsApp will be banned on House staffers' devices for security reasons. If you know of any dogs with dog walkers in the Boston seaport, this woman wants you to know that they are being *very* good boys and girls.

Watch: Bernie Sanders reacts to Trump's Iran strikes in real time at 'Fighting Oligarchy' rally
Watch: Bernie Sanders reacts to Trump's Iran strikes in real time at 'Fighting Oligarchy' rally

Yahoo

time10 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Watch: Bernie Sanders reacts to Trump's Iran strikes in real time at 'Fighting Oligarchy' rally

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., was delivering remarks at a "Fighting Oligarchy" rally in Tusla, Okla., on Saturday night when President Donald Trump announced the United States had successfully attacked three nuclear sites in Iran. An aide interrupted Sanders' remarks to deliver the message Trump had just blasted off on Truth Social. "We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan," Trump said in the post. Sanders read the piece of paper with Trump's Truth Social post to his supporters, shaking his head as the socialist senator processed what the president had just announced. "No more wars!" the crowd chanted. Bernie Sanders Says Israeli Pm 'Wrong' Both In The Past And Now: 'We Must Not Get Involved In Netanyahu's War' Trump added in the post: "All planes are now outside of Iran air space. A full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow. All planes are safely on their way home. Congratulations to our great American Warriors. There is not another military in the World that could have done this. NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE! Thank you for your attention to this matter." Read On The Fox News App Bernie Sanders Says Largest 'Fighting Oligarchy' Rally With Aoc Is Making Trump, Musk 'Very Nervous' Sanders nodded along as the crowd continued to chant, "No more wars!" before responding to the news in real time. He said the news was not only "alarming," but "so grossly unconstitutional." "All of you know that the only entity that can take this country to war is the U.S. Congress. The president does not have the right," Sanders shouted. Sanders joins the bipartisan coalition in Congress who have called out the "unconstitutionality" of Trump striking Iran without congressional approval. A bipartisan War Powers Resolution was introduced in the House of Representatives this week as strikes between Israel and Iran raged on, and the world stood by to see if Trump would strike. Congress has the sole power to declare war under Article I of the Constitution. The War Powers Resolution seeks to "remove United States Armed Forces from unauthorized hostilities in the Islamic State of Iran" and directs Trump to "terminate" the deployment of American troops against Iran without an "authorized declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military forces against Iran." "The American people do not want more war, more death!" Sanders said. "It might be a good idea if we concentrated on the problems that exist in Oklahoma and Vermont rather than getting involved in another war that the American people do not want." But Sanders told the crowd not to give up on their vision for America's future. "In this moment in American history, what we have got to do in Vermont and Oklahoma, in Texas, all over this country, is stand up and fight back, and tell them this is our country!" Sanders said. Sanders has been a vocal opponent of the United States joining Israel in its war against Iran as Trump weighed striking its nuclear facilities. "Netanyahu is not the President of the United States," Sanders said on social media earlier this week. "He should not be determining U.S. foreign and military policy. If the people of Israel support his decision to start a war with Iran, that is their business and their war. The United States must not be a part of it," he added. The democratic socialist has been a vocal opponent of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's war against Gaza since Israel retaliated following Hamas' terrorist attacks on Oct. 7, 2023. After Israel launched preemptive strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities last week, Sanders said it was "just his latest violation of international law," likening Netanyahu to a "war criminal." The Vermont senator was speaking at his second rally of the day, part of his southern swing of the "Fighting Oligarchy" tour that Sanders started in response to Trump's sweeping second-term agenda. Rep. Greg Casar, D-Tx., and former Rep. Beto O'Rourke, D-Tx., are slated to join the Vermont senator at his rallies in Texas on Sunday. And Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., joined Sanders on his Western swing of the tour earlier this year. The tour targets deep red districts currently held by Republicans, a strategy picked up by Gov. Tim Walz, D-Minn., who hosted town halls in Republican congressional districts, and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) through their "People's Town Halls" across the United States. Sanders also held a rally in House Speaker Mike Johnson's hometown of Shreveport, La., on article source: Watch: Bernie Sanders reacts to Trump's Iran strikes in real time at 'Fighting Oligarchy' rally

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store