Iran’s Strait of Hormuz Attacks Spark Global Oil Fears

Global Oil Supply Threatened as Iran Targets Key Waterway

DUBAI – The vital Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint for global oil transport, is once again at the center of escalating tensions. Recent weeks have seen a surge in attacks impacting shipping in the region, with Iran appearing to deliberately target critical infrastructure, including cargo ships and oil facilities connected to key bypass pipelines. The unfolding situation has sent shockwaves through global oil markets, causing prices to skyrocket and raising concerns about a potential worldwide energy squeeze.

Escalating Attacks in the Strait of Hormuz

MSNOW reporter Josh Einiger, reporting from Dubai, detailed the current volatile atmosphere. “People have been reporting hearing intercepts in the skies over parts of Dubai as this air campaign continues to ramp up,” Einiger stated. He further elaborated on Iran’s apparent strategic targeting: “Iran, however, has been seeming to be much more intentional about targeting specific infrastructure, critical infrastructure, especially around the Strait of Hormuz.”

The attacks have extended to direct assaults on commercial shipping. “They right now, in the last couple of hours, have targeted not one, not two, but three individual cargo ships on one side or the other of the Strait of Hormuz. One of them was on fire. The crew had to abandon ship,” Einiger reported, highlighting the immediate danger to international maritime trade.

Bypassing the Strait: Limited Options

The Strait of Hormuz accounts for approximately 20 percent of the world’s crude oil transit. In anticipation of such disruptions, the United Arab Emirates has developed alternative routes, notably a pipeline connecting its largest oil refinery west of Abu Dhabi to a major oil storage facility in Fujairah, on the Gulf of Oman. This pipeline is designed to allow oil to be loaded onto ships, bypassing the Strait entirely.

However, recent Iranian actions have also impacted these alternative routes. “In the last three days, there have been attacks by Iran at both ends of that pipeline. The oil refinery was attacked yesterday. It has been taken offline by the government, and the oil farm at the end of the line on the Gulf of Oman had been attacked a couple of days before,” Einiger explained. The refinery, which produces nearly a million barrels of crude daily, has been shut down, underscoring the severe impact of the attacks.

A second pipeline, running across Saudi Arabia to the Red Sea, has also been a contingency for decades. However, this route faces its own challenges, particularly given recent instability in the Red Sea involving Iran-backed Houthi rebels. “So not a lot of great options for the oil industry as it watches the supply of oil globally become quite concerning, and the prices skyrocket,” Einiger concluded.

US Escort Plan Faces Practical Hurdles

Amidst the growing crisis, discussions around a potential U.S. plan to escort ships through the Strait of Hormuz have surfaced. However, shipping executives and experts in the region express skepticism about its feasibility. “I’ve spoken the last couple of days with a variety of shipping executives and experts in this region. Who say that it really isn’t all that practical,” Einiger reported.

Several key obstacles were identified:

• Defensive Capabilities: “A U.S. frigate might not necessarily be able to protect a tanker against a swarm of drones, any more than anybody else would.”
• Insurance Concerns: “Insurance companies would not necessarily be willing to insure voyages across the strait until they know it’s safe, especially if there are mines in the safe.”
• Crew Safety: “These are human beings who work for a living, who would have to put themselves in grave danger and might not be willing to do that.”

Given these challenges, Einiger suggested, “So there really it seems unlikely that there’s going to be any movement through the strait even if the U.S. military were willing to escort some of these ships.”

Expert Analysis: Predictable Response, Underestimated Scale

Former U.S. Ambassador to the UAE and former Assistant Secretary of State Barbara Leahy offered her perspective on Iran’s actions. “I think unfortunately, tragically, it’s a mix of both,” she said, referring to whether Tehran’s response was predictable or underestimated by the White House. “Look, everything that Iran has done to date has been predictable. They’ve talked about it for years, but especially on the back end of the June 12-day war, they began to prepare for exactly this sort of round two of the conflict that they saw, very unfinished with Israel and indeed with the U.S.”

Ambassador Leahy emphasized the strategic nature of Iran’s actions: “So taking hostage in a sense the Gulf and through it the international economy was entirely predictable, and it’s very difficult to defend against.”

Russia’s Role and Administration’s Stance

The conversation then turned to allegations of Russian support for Iran. Former U.S. Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul strongly refuted claims made by Trump envoy Steve Witkoff that Russia was not sharing intelligence with Iran. “Of course not. Vladimir Putin’s been lying his entire career,” McFaul stated unequivocally. “The idea that anybody in the U.S. government would take his word, or Mr. Ushakov, the person he identified, Putin’s foreign policy advisor, at their word, it’s insane.”

McFaul criticized the administration’s handling of the situation and its communication regarding Russia’s alleged involvement. “What I see is a government that doesn’t know what it’s doing, has not figured out what the purpose of this war is, changes it every day and is playing defense now on something where Russia very clearly is helping our enemy in this war. Yet they’re afraid to tell the truth ABOUT THAT BECAUSE THEY SEEM QUITE CONFUSED ABOUT THE ENTIRE PURPOSE OF THIS MILITARY OPERATION, THIS WAR,” he asserted.

Geopolitical Ramifications and Russia’s Advantage

Regarding the broader geopolitical implications, Ambassador McFaul suggested a mixed outcome for Russia. “On the one hand, we see yet again, like in Syria, like in Venezuela, that Russia does not come to the aid of its allies and partners like Iran. So that, in that sense, I think is good news for us,” he noted. However, he acknowledged the short-term benefits for Moscow:

“But in the short term, yes, oil prices have skyrocketed. That means Putin has more money to fight his war in Ukraine. And Russian oil doesn’t go through the Strait Hormuz that you’ve been talking about. They have other ways to do it. Therefore, in the short term, they benefited.”

McFaul also pointed to the long-term narrative advantage for Russia. “But in the long term, they also benefit from the narrative around the world. For many years, we, the United States, the Biden administration most certainly has been talking about the illegitimate war that Putin launched without provocation vis-à-vis Ukraine. Now we have a much more complicated argument to try to explain why our war in Iran is legitimate for the rest of the world, but somehow Putin’s war in Ukraine is illegitimate. Now, I believe that. I believe that sincerely, but it’s a very hard argument to make and we’re losing public opinion around the world about the legitimate use.”

Unanswered Questions on War Aims and Nuclear Threat

Ambassador Leahy underscored the administration’s failure to clearly articulate its objectives. “The administration failing consistently to answer four questions – the why, the what, the how, the when – to the American people, but also to the partners who are on the front line receiving all these missiles and drone attacks, as well as partners in Asia, Europe. And finally, the enemy is listening to all of this.” She posed critical questions: “So why now? What was the threat? What are the war aims? How is the U.S. military going to achieve them? And when does this war end?”

The discussion also touched upon Iran’s nuclear program. Leahy noted the disappearance of the nuclear threat from the administration’s stated reasons for the war. “Special Envoy Whitcoff mentioned this now because it has DISAPPEARED COMPLETELY FROM THE ADMINISTRATION’S CITING OF THE REASONS THAT THE U.S. IS IN THE WAR NOW AND WHAT IT’S TRYING TO ACHIEVE.” She highlighted the presence of 400 kilograms of highly enriched uranium in Iran, stating, “And we are highly unlikely to get at those quantities of nearly weapons-grade uranium through military strikes.”

Ambassador Leahy concluded by emphasizing the need for a diplomatic approach: “So I really━what’s missing here at the front end was a sustained and serious diplomatic negotiating effort. And I just━I have to say, I don’t think the administration was serious at all on that front.”

Source: Russia 'very clearly' is helping Iran but admin is 'afraid to tell the truth about that': Fmr. Amb. (YouTube)