Strait of Hormuz: The war cannot let go of its most dangerous lever

Tehran – 21 July 2026: The conflict between the United States and Iran has entered a phase in which Washington’s military superiority and Tehran’s strategic ability to act are visibly diverging. For the tenth consecutive time, American forces struck Iranian targets overnight. The stated objective remains to reliably restore shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. Yet another tanker was attacked in the strait. This means that the bottleneck at the exit of the Persian Gulf remains Iran’s most effective instrument, even as the United States has intensified its air operations.

The strait is not merely a regional waterway, but a nerve center of the global economy. The routes for a significant share of globally traded oil and gas supplies pass through it. Every attack on commercial vessels therefore raises insurance premiums, transport costs and uncertainty in energy markets far beyond the immediate war zone. For Europe, this is not an abstract threat: developments in energy prices and the supply of Asian industries have a direct impact on economic growth, inflation and trade.

The political situation is more complicated than the daily tally of attack and counterattack suggests. According to information from Washington, nearly 100 American soldiers have been injured since the beginning of July. At the same time, it is clear that airstrikes alone do not eliminate Iran’s capacity for asymmetric action. Drones, missiles, mines and allied militias are less vulnerable than fixed military installations. The United States thus faces the classic dilemma of a sea power: it can strike targets, but it cannot permanently open a waterway politically through bombardment.

At the same time, mediators are working on a new ceasefire. Oman, Qatar and Pakistan are playing an important role; in Muscat, a proposal that places keeping the strait open at its center was already discussed on 11 July. Whether this develops into substantive negotiations depends on one question that both sides have so far answered differently: should a ceasefire merely secure shipping, or should it also politically contain the broader conflict with Iran?

For Tehran, Hormuz is a lever against military and economic pressure. For President Donald Trump, the passage is a test of American deterrence. That is precisely why a diplomatic solution is so difficult to achieve. Neither side wants to give the impression of yielding under duress. Yet the economic damage of a prolonged shutdown would soon also affect the states that have so far been observing the conflict largely from a distance.