President Trump posted an...‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎
‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎
‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎
‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎
‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎
‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎
‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎
‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎
‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎



<[link removed]>

August 31


 



Iran’s blockade vs Trump’s tanker claim

Discover Here →
<[link removed]>

 






President Trump posted an AI image of himself helping seize an
Iranian-flagged tanker in the Strait of Hormuz on Truth Social:

<[link removed]>
“This strait will only be opened and closed under Iran’s command, and as long
as you do not accept the reality of defeat and stop indulging in delusions,
Iran will continue to enforce the blockade,” Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister
Kazem Gharibabadi posted on X Saturday.



Click here to discover why this happening →.
<[link removed]>
This ad is sent on behalf of Banyan Hill Publishing.
 

 





This Week’s Top Market Stories (Ad)
Hot
Exclusive: Wall Street Legend’s New Way to Profit From AI
<[link removed]>
Omnia Research


#1 Stock to Buy for Elon’s Hidden Empire
<[link removed]>
Altimetry


Get My No. 1 Gold Stock Now
<[link removed]>
Stansberry Research








THE HILL REPORT

The Strait Has Never Been Closed

Connor Hill · InsightfulWord · August 30, 2026

The Strait of Hormuz is the most consequential piece of water in the global
energy system, and the figures describing it are published annually and are not
in dispute.

Roughly 20 million barrels a day of crude oil and refined products transited
the strait in 2025 — around a quarter of the world's seaborne oil trade. Just
over 112 billion cubic meters of liquefied natural gas passed through in the
same year, close to a fifth of global LNG trade.

The geography is the reason it matters. At its narrowest the strait is about
29 nautical miles across, and the navigable shipping channels are far narrower
still: two miles inbound, two miles outbound, separated by a two-mile buffer. A
very large tanker has limited room to maneuver and a predictable path.

Set against that, a fact that receives far less attention. Despite recurring
threats spanning more than four decades, and despite a period in the 1980s when
both sides of a regional war attacked shipping directly, the strait has never
been closed to traffic.

That record is not a prediction and it should not be read as one. It is a base
rate, and base rates are the appropriate starting point for assessing any
specific claim of imminent closure.

The reason the record looks the way it does is worth understanding, because it
is not primarily about military capability. The countries bordering the strait
depend on it for their own exports and imports, closure would eliminate their
principal revenue, and the interests of every major consuming and producing
state align against it. That alignment has held through several episodes in
which the rhetoric was considerably sharper than the shipping data.

What follows is what transits and where it goes, what the bypass capacity
actually is, what happened during the previous period of direct attacks on
shipping, how insurance and freight rates register risk before anything else
does, and what would distinguish a genuine disruption from a headline.

What Transits and Where It Goes

The destination pattern is the part of this subject most often misdescribed in
Western commentary.

The great majority of crude leaving the strait goes to Asia. China, India,
Japan and South Korea are the principal buyers, and the flows are contracted on
long-term terms with defined loading windows.

That distribution has two consequences. A disruption falls hardest on
economies that are not the ones usually discussing it, and the states with the
strongest interest in keeping the strait open include several with considerable
influence over the countries bordering it.

The United States, meanwhile, imports a small fraction of what it once did
from the region, having become a net exporter of petroleum liquids. That does
not insulate it: oil is priced globally, a supply disruption anywhere raises
prices everywhere, and American consumers pay the world price regardless of
where the barrels originate.

The gas flows are more concentrated still, with a single producer accounting
for the large majority of the LNG passing through, delivered predominantly to
Asian and European buyers under long-term contracts.

Gas has no bypass at all, which is the asymmetry least often noted. Crude has
pipelines around the strait; liquefied gas does not, because it requires
liquefaction plants and export terminals that exist only where they were built.
A disruption therefore affects the two commodities very differently, and the
gas exposure is the more absolute of the two.


What the Bypass Capacity Actually Is

Alternatives exist, they are partial, and their capacity is a published figure.


📊 Live Defense Test

20 million barrels a day

Average crude oil and refined product transit through the Strait of Hormuz in
2025 — about a quarter of world seaborne oil trade — alongside just over 112
billion cubic meters of LNG, close to a fifth of the global trade. Estimated
bypass pipeline capacity is 3.5 to 5.5 million barrels a day. Source:
International Energy Agency, Strait of Hormuz oil security assessment.


Support or oppose: should consuming countries hold larger strategic reserves
given this concentration?

Supporters argue that a quarter of seaborne oil passing a single narrow
channel is precisely the situation reserves exist for, that release mechanisms
are already coordinated internationally, and that the cost of holding is small
against the cost of a disruption. Opponents answer that reserves address a
temporary interruption and not a sustained one, that holding costs are real and
recurring, and that investment in demand reduction and in alternative routes
buys more security per unit spent. Which is the better use of public money?Hit
reply — one line is enough.

Two pipelines carry crude around the strait: one crossing Saudi Arabia to the
Red Sea and one crossing the United Arab Emirates to a port outside the Gulf.
Combined available spare capacity on those routes is estimated at 3.5 to 5.5
million barrels a day.

That is a meaningful cushion and it is roughly a quarter of what normally
transits. A complete stoppage would therefore leave a substantial shortfall
even with the bypass routes running at full capacity, and those routes have
their own vulnerabilities, one of which was demonstrated when a pumping station
was struck by a drone in 2019.

Strategic petroleum reserves are the other buffer, held by member countries of
an international coordination body with obligations to hold stocks equivalent
to a defined period of net imports, and with an established mechanism for
coordinated release.

Neither mechanism substitutes for the strait. Both change the shape and
duration of a disruption, which is what buffers are for.

Spare production capacity is the third buffer and the most consequential.
Where producers can raise output quickly, a shortfall elsewhere is partially
offset — but the great majority of the world's spare capacity sits with
producers whose own exports transit the same strait, which means the buffer and
the exposure are held by the same countries. That concentration is a published
figure and it is the reason bypass pipeline capacity receives the attention it
does.


What Happened the Last Time Shipping Was Attacked

The most relevant precedent is well documented and is instructive precisely
because it was so severe.

During the Iran-Iraq war, both belligerents attacked commercial shipping in
the Gulf over several years. Hundreds of vessels were hit. Naval escorts were
arranged, vessels were reflagged, and mines were laid and cleared.


Context — what this article is and is not about

Nothing here takes a position on any government's conduct, on the merits of
any policy response, or on who bears responsibility for tension in the region.
Those are political questions on which people differ and on which this piece
has nothing to add. What is described is the physical and commercial structure
of a shipping route, which is measured and published, and the historical record
of how that route has behaved under stress. Readers with any view of the
politics can take the transit figures, the bypass capacity and the freight and
insurance data as given.

Traffic did not stop. It continued at reduced volumes, at substantially higher
insurance cost, with altered routing and timing. Prices rose and then fell back
as the market absorbed the new conditions.

The lesson practitioners draw from that period is that the practical outcome
of interference with shipping is usually a risk premium rather than a stoppage,
and that the premium is measurable in real time.

That is the useful frame for any current episode. The question is not whether
traffic ceases, which the record suggests is unlikely, but how much the risk
premium rises and for how long — and both are observable.


Where Risk Registers First

Four markets price this risk continuously, and they move before any narrative
reaches a general audience.

War risk insurance premiums for transits, quoted as a percentage of hull
value, rise immediately when underwriters reassess a route. They are reported
by shipping press and by brokers, and they are the most direct measure of
professional assessment available.

Tanker freight rates on the affected routes rise as owners demand compensation
for risk and as voyage times lengthen. Rate indices are published daily.

The spread between crude benchmarks priced inside and outside the affected
region widens when supply from one is threatened, which separates a genuine
regional supply concern from a general market move.

And vessel tracking data shows what ships are actually doing — how many
transits are occurring, whether routes have changed, whether vessels are
waiting outside. That is a direct observation rather than an inference.


What Would Distinguish a Genuine Disruption

Five observable things, none of which requires any privileged access.

A sustained fall in the number of transits, visible in tracking data over days
rather than a single day's figures.

War risk premiums remaining elevated rather than spiking and retreating, which
distinguishes a reassessment from a reaction.

Bypass pipelines running at capacity, which is reported and which indicates
that the alternative routes are being used rather than merely being available.

A coordinated reserve release, which requires a decision by member governments
and is announced.

And the physical positioning of vessels: tankers anchored outside the strait
rather than transiting is the clearest single indicator that commercial
operators have concluded the risk is real.

Every one of those is published, most of them daily. Together they describe
what is actually happening on a route that carries a quarter of the world's
seaborne oil and that, through four decades of threats, has stayed open.


The bill, not the debate

A quarter of the world's seaborne oil passes through a channel four miles
wide, and the record of the last forty years — including a war in which
shipping was attacked directly for years — is that traffic continued at a
higher price rather than stopping. Insurance premiums, freight rates and vessel
tracking say what is happening now. When closure is asserted, has anyone shown
you the transit count?Connor Hill reads every reply.


Sources checked: International Energy Agency — Strait of Hormuz: oil security
and emergency response
<[link removed]>
·U.S. Energy Information Administration — World Oil Transit Chokepoints
<[link removed]>
·U.S. Energy Information Administration — petroleum supply, imports and
exports data <[link removed]> · International Energy Agency —
emergency oil stocks and collective action mechanism
<[link removed]> · Congressional
Research Service — Strait of Hormuz and maritime chokepoint security
<[link removed]> · Baltic Exchange — tanker
freight rate indices
<[link removed]>


Connor Hill · InsightfulWord





You’re receiving this email from Insightful Word (IW), a brand of TerraTrance
Technologies, LLC.

Our mailing address: 200 Broadway Blvd NEAlbuquerque, NM 87102



Have a question or need assistance? Reply directly to this email or contact us
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>



The content of this email may not be copied, reproduced, forwarded, shared, or
distributed without the prior written consent of TerraTrance Technologies, LLC.

Privacy Policy <[link removed]>
Terms & Conditions <[link removed]>
Unsubscribe
<[link removed]>



© 2026 Insightful Word (IW). All Rights Reserved.