Why is the Strait of Hormuz so pivotal to the future?

The Strait of Hormuz has been in the headlines since the war with Iran began in February. So, let’s ask four questions:

What is the strait? 

Why is it so pivotal to the global economy?

What can be done to lessen Iran’s control?

How would the Bible guide us in seeking peace in the Middle East today?

The history of the Strait

The Strait of Hormuz is a waterway connecting the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. The Persian Gulf borders Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Kuwait, Iraq, and Iran. This region holds nearly three-fifths of the world’s estimated proven oil reserves and about one-third of its estimated proven natural gas reserves.

In addition, the Persian Gulf is the primary route by which these countries import grain, iron ore, and other resources. Moving them overland is not viable: a single oceangoing vessel can carry sixty thousand tons of cereal, enough to fill two thousand trucks.

However, vessels coming and going through the Persian Gulf must traverse the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow “bottleneck” connecting the Persian Gulf to the northwest with the Gulf of Oman to the southeast and then out to the Indian Ocean. The strait is about 104 miles long; its width varies from 60 miles to 24 miles.

The origins of the name “Hormuz” are nearly as complicated as the politics surrounding it. It could be derived from Persian words for “Place of Dates” or the Zoroastrian god “Hormoz.” Or it could be named for Ifra Hormizd, the mother of King Shapur II of Persia, who ruled from AD 309 to 379. Or it could come from the Greek word for “cove” or “bay.”

The strait is bordered by Iran to the north and the UAE and Oman to the south. Ships moving through it follow a traffic separation scheme: inbound ships use one lane and outbound ships another, both of which are two nautical miles wide. A similarly wide “median” separates them.

United Nations rules allow countries to exercise control of territorial seas up to twelve nautical miles (13.8 miles) from their coastlines. At the narrowest point, the strait and its shipping lanes lie entirely within Iran and Oman’s territorial waters, meaning that ships traversing the strait must pass through them.

The significance of the strait

During 2023–2025, 20 percent of the world’s liquified natural gas and 25 percent of seaborne oil trade passed through the strait. More than 85 percent of these exports went to Asian markets; disrupting them could lead to a major oil supply crisis for Japan, India, South Korea, and China.

The region also accounts for a third of nitrogen fertilizer exports. Up to 30 percent of internationally traded fertilizers normally transit the strait. And the strait is a vital channel for other imports to the Middle East, including food, medicines, and technological supplies.

Prior to recent events, about three thousand ships usually sailed through the strait each month, an average of 138 ships per day. For decades, they have been given free passage through it.

Since February 28, this has fallen to just a handful of ships per day.

With the persistent threat of closure over the years, oil-exporting countries in the Gulf region have developed overland routes. Saudi Arabia operates the 1,200-km-long East-West Crude Oil pipeline, for example, which can carry up to five million barrels of crude oil per day. The UAE has connected its inland oilfields to the port of Fujairah on the Gulf of Oman via a pipeline capable of carrying at least 1.5 million barrels per day.

However, diverting through these alternatives would lead to a drop of eight to ten million barrels per day. And oil loading at Fujairah has been disrupted by drone attacks.

Gulf countries are working to build additional infrastructure that would bypass the strait, but none is foolproof. Saudi Arabia’s east-west pipeline leads to the Red Sea, where transport through the Bab al-Mandeb Strait is threatened by Yemen’s Houthis. A railway from the Red Sea to Qatar could cost $25 billion or more. Additional refineries and pipelines would take years to build at extraordinary cost.

And all such bypasses would lie in striking range of Iranian missiles and drones. As one official said, “If the Iranians are fully committed to laying waste to Gulf energy infrastructure, they could do it.”

Closing the strait

Beginning on March 4, 2026, Iranian forces have declared the strait “closed,” threatening and carrying out attacks on ships attempting to transit it. Iran has the capacity to mine the strait, using moored mines that float under the water’s surface and detonate when they contact a ship, and bottom mines that sit on the seafloor and explode when they detect a ship nearby.

Iran also has a variety of shore-based anti-ship missiles, as well as naval vessels that can attack ships in the strait.

Threats to naval traffic are nearly as restrictive as attacks themselves. Since the conflict began, major maritime insurers have suspended or repriced war-risk coverage for ships traveling through the strait and the Persian Gulf. Traffic has been reduced by about 95 percent, leading to disruptions in global energy that have driven prices sharply higher and intensified geopolitical tensions. The US government has responded by establishing a reinsurance facility providing up to $40 billion in coverage on a revolving basis.

In recent weeks, the US has attacked Iran’s coastal defense systems, missile and drone sites, and maritime capabilities, and has been blocking Iran on the strait. Iran has responded in turn by attacking Bahrain, Jordan, and UAE tankers in the strait.

The hardline Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) sees the control of the strait as its most important tool to exert pressure on the West. Iranian moderates, by contrast, are increasingly worried that the US blockade implemented in response to Iran’s attacks on the strait is bringing Tehran’s economy close to collapse.

The International Monetary Fund projects that Iran’s economic growth will contract 6 percent this year. Its annual inflation rate is about 69 percent; average Iranians are facing fuel shortages and other wartime deprivations.

Opening the strait

Iran is currently in talks with Oman, whose coast lies on the southern edge of Hormuz, to create a temporary channel for ships to pass safely. Tehran wants to collect tolls from ships transiting the strait. One proposal would allow Persian Gulf-bound ships to enter through Iranian waters for a fee, while vessels leaving would pass through Omani waters without a toll.

Mediators in Egypt, Pakistan, and Qatar hope that once there is a temporary fix for the strait, Iran and the US might be able to resume negotiations. Arab Gulf states are pushing to bring the Strait of Hormuz back to the previous status quo.

It isn’t the payment of tolls that concerns them, but the political leverage they would give Iran. As one official said, “Iran would be able to let Saudi tankers in one day and not the next. That is a nightmare scenario for Gulf states.”

Negotiating over the strait

American officials and the public at large are highly frustrated with the on-again, off-again nature of this conflict and of negotiations over the Strait of Hormuz. It seems that progress is declared, then derailed, then declared again. This is unlike anything we are used to seeing in negotiations between military adversaries.

But that is because this conflict is unlike any we are used to waging.

Most governments can be trusted to do what is in the best interest of the public they serve. Not so with Iran’s clerics and IRGC leaders. As I have written numerous times over recent years, both are convinced that their mission in the world is to prepare for the return of the Mahdi, their version of a messiah. They believe conflict with the West and especially with Israel is key to this. Many are convinced that if they attack the West, even with nuclear weapons, the Mahdi would then appear to protect them from retribution.

The Iranian government is highly repressive, as its response to protests seven months ago demonstrated. Human rights groups say as many as twenty thousand Iranians were massacred by their own leaders. For the people to revolt against the military and theocratic regime would be extremely dangerous for them.

Iran’s leadership is Shiite as well, in contrast to the Sunni leadership of most of their Arab neighbors. The differences between the two versions of Islam are deep and historic, leading to numerous conflicts over the centuries. Saudi Arabia and Iran are especially engaged in a rivalry that has been described as a new Cold War.

And the Islamic doctrines of kitman and taqiyya permit dissimulation and partial truths in the service of Islam. As a result, we can trust that Iran’s current leaders will do what they believe to be in the best service of their theocratic and apocalyptic vision, whatever the consequences to their own people and other nations.

Biblical principles to guide negotiations

In negotiating with Iran, Jesus’ call for us to be “wise as serpents and innocent as doves” comes first to mind (Matthew 10:16). In Scripture, the serpent was a symbol of shrewdness and intellectual cunning (cf. Genesis 3:1; Psalm 58:4–5), while the dove is symbolic of innocence and peace (cf. Genesis 8:12).

First, we need to understand Iran’s metanarrative, its overarching purpose for its nation and leaders. We should remember that they are committed to preparing for the Mahdi by rebuilding the Persian Empire through a “Shiite crescent” that extends through Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. They will do whatever they consider necessary to this end, from dissembling in negotiations to military attacks on anyone they perceive to be their enemy (and thus the enemy of Islam as they understand it).

Second, we should seek to work in concert with allies in the region and beyond to counter Iran’s regional aspirations. The Gulf nations are obviously more existentially threatened by Iran than we are. Muslim negotiators will understand Iran better than non-Muslims. As Solomon noted, “in an abundance of counselors there is safety” (Proverbs 11:14).

Third, we should understand the urgency of this moment. Iran is mobilizing terrorism across the West and in the US, as Dr. Ryan Denison’s recent Focus article demonstrates. If they obtain a nuclear weapon, they could use it to strike Israel in the belief that the Mahdi would protect them from mutually assured destruction. At the very least, such a weapon would drive other nations in the Gulf to seek these weapons as well, further destabilizing an already destabilized part of the world.

And Iran’s use of the Strait of Hormuz to threaten the global economy will be disruptive so long as it is permitted. As Solomon observed, “The simple are killed by their turning away, and the complacency of fools destroys them” (Proverbs 1:32).

Conclusion

We should always be praying for wisdom for our leaders, but especially in these challenging days (1 Timothy 2:1–2). And we should pray for spiritual awakening to continue and advance in Iran, leading millions of Iranians and their leaders to the only Prince of Peace and thus to the only peace that lasts.

Alexander MacLaren was right: “Peace comes not from the absence of trouble, but from the presence of God.” Let us seek such peace for Iran, the US, and our souls, to the glory of God.