Shipping

Somali authorities say 14 pirates were killed in the 10-day operation to free a Cameroon-flagged cargo vessel.

Turkish and Somali forces have freed a cargo ship held captive by pirates off the coast of Somalia’s semi-autonomous Puntland state, according to authorities.

In a statement on X on Saturday, the Somali Ministry of Defence said that “14 pirates” died in the operation to free the Cameroon-flagged MV Latuf.

Four of their boats were also destroyed, it said.

The Defence Ministry said that “sustained pressure from the forces ultimately compelled the remaining pirates to abandon the vessel”, allowing the forces to take control of the ship.

The rescue operation was conducted under a defence cooperation agreement between Somalia and Turkiye, aimed at strengthening maritime security, protecting Somalia’s coastline and combating piracy, it said.

The Somali Defence Ministry did not provide details about any casualties or the wellbeing of the ship’s crew.

A local elder, Abdullahi Warsame, from the Jiifle community in the Godob Jiraan district of Puntland’s Nugal region, told The Associated Press news agency that the vessel and its crew had been freed.

The MV Latuf left the Turkish Port of Tekirdag in late July. It was hijacked on August 17 in waters off the coast of the Nugal region of Puntland, a semi-autonomous federal state in northeastern Somalia.

According to the Marine Traffic website, the cargo ship has continued its voyage to its reported destination in Dar-es-Salaam in Tanzania.

Piracy was rampant off the coast of Somalia in the 2000s, peaking in 2011, before being curbed by international naval deployments and new protection measures for commercial shipping.

But attacks have surged since April, with at least 15 attacks off the coast of Somalia this year, the highest since 2013, according to figures from the International Maritime Organization. At least five cargo ships have been held hostage, the last of which was seized on August 20 off the coast of Yemen.

A top Iranian official says Iran and Oman have agreed on a new temporary route for shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, but insisted that the waterway will not reopen until the United States fulfils its commitments under an interim peace deal signed in June.

The remarks by Kazem Gharibabadi, Iran’s deputy foreign minister for legal and international affairs, came on Tuesday, after Iran and Oman’s top diplomats held talks in Tehran to finalise the details of a phased framework for managing the strait.

Iran and Oman, both coastal nations on the strait, have been in on-and-off talks for weeks about controlling traffic through the strategic waterway, which handled one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas shipments before the US-Israel war on Tehran began in February.

Most ⁠shipping in the strait has been shut down since then.

Gharibabadi, speaking on state television, said Iran and Oman had agreed the new route’s entry “would be through our territorial waters, and part of the exit route would also be through our territorial waters”.

The transit corridor would be seven miles (11.3km) wide, he said.

“The agreed-upon transit route with Oman is a temporary route,” he added.

Earlier on Tuesday, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met with his Omani counterpart, Badr Albusaidi, in Tehran to discuss the temporary navigation corridor as well as a project to clear mines from the strait, according to a joint statement.

Albusaidi said on X he hoped the countries would “soon announce” the corridor, adding that “future management of the strait and a permanent solution will follow in due course.”

Technical talks are planned to develop a long-term arrangement, including mechanisms for information sharing and navigational and security services, according to the statement.

Mines in Hormuz

The Strait of Hormuz became a flashpoint after Tehran responded to the US-Israel war by closing the waterway. It then announced a new shipping route through its territorial waters, bypassing the internationally recognised Traffic Separation Scheme adopted by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) in 1968. Tehran said that route had been mined.

Then in June, when Iran and the US signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to end the war, Oman and the IMO announced a new transit corridor in the Strait of Hormuz – backed by the US – that hugged the Omani coast.

Iran said the so-called southern route violated the MoU and launched attacks on ships using the corridor, resulting in the collapse of the interim deal.

Diplomatic efforts towards a broader peace deal have since stalled, and passage through the strait remains dangerous. An oil tanker was disabled by an unidentified projectile on Tuesday near Oman’s Ash Shishah, close to the strait’s entrance, the United Kingdom’s maritime trade watchdog said.

Gharibabadi, in his comments on Tuesday, said Iran would not consider the strait open despite the agreement with Oman.

He also dismissed a claim by US President Donald Trump that all mines had been cleared from the strait’s international waters, saying it was “only aimed at calming the markets”. He warned that US mine-detection vessels would become “very good targets” if they entered the area.

Gharibabadi insisted the US must fulfil its commitments under the MoU – including sanctions relief and the release of frozen Iranian assets – if it wants a return to the diplomatic track.

He also urged countries to resist US pressure over sanctions on Iran.

Trump had announced last week the “most crushing economic operation ever” against Iran, and threatened sanctions against any country that does business with it.

“We are urging countries not to succumb to American pressure regarding the sanctions that Washington wants to impose on us,” Gharibabadi said, adding that Washington was “mistaken about its ability to enforce its sanctions against our neighbours”.

He said an earlier US sanctions campaign under Trump had failed to achieve its goals and predicted new measures would meet the same fate.

“The new American sanctions are doomed to failure, and we have our own methods to counter them,” he added.

The PanStar Acro, bound for Europe via the Arctic, is testing whether a route opened by melting sea ice can be commercially viable.

A South ‌Korean container ship is sailing to Europe via the Arctic, ⁠in the nation’s first commercial voyage on the route to test its viability as the war in the Middle East rattles global shipping.

The PanStar Acro set sail from Busan New Port on Saturday. “We would like to inform you that the vessel for the Arctic route trial voyage departed” at 9:30pm (12:30 GMT), Seoul’s Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries said in a statement to the AFP news agency.

The PanStar Acro will sail north, the Reuters news agency reported, hugging eastern Russia’s Kamchatka Peninsula, then cross the Bering Sea, and ⁠take the Northern Sea Route, stopping in Felixstowe in the UK, Rotterdam in the Netherlands, and Poland’s Gdansk before returning.

The 2,758 TEU (twenty-foot equivalent unit) container ship operated by South Korea’s PanStar ‌has secured 837 TEU of cargo, including car parts, chemical products and about 100 empty containers on the government-backed voyage.

The journey is expected to take 40 to 45 days, according to the Oceans Ministry.

President Lee Jae Myung has made Arctic shipping ‌a priority for South Korea, with the hope of turning the southeastern ⁠port of Busan into a global maritime hub and position the Arctic as a regular trade route by 2030.

But this new route has been criticised for several different reasons. Environmental groups have warned the route could accelerate polar ice melt, meaning the increase in shipping could worsen global warming.

The project also risks increasing friction with Western allies hoping to keep Russia isolated in its war with Ukraine. Seoul has consulted with Moscow about the journey, Reuters reported, including whether the ship needed ⁠help to tackle any problems, such as ⁠getting stuck in ice.

Last year, 103 transits through the route were made by 88 vessels, up from ⁠97 in 2024 and 43 in 2022, chiefly from nations such as Russia and China, according ⁠to Norway’s Centre for High North Logistics.

But with the Iran war affecting global shipping, governments and shipping firms are scrambling to seek different routes, with the Arctic route increasingly viewed as a viable alternative due to technological advances and environmental degradation.

South Korea’s Vice Oceans Minister Nam Jae-hon said the Arctic route was “bound to become an alternative” to Middle Eastern shipping lanes.

The usual maritime route between Asia and Europe runs through the Suez Canal, but travelling through the Arctic can cut the journey by approximately 7,000 kilometres (4,300 miles) and about 10 days, according to the Korea Institute for International Economic Policy.

However, major carriers including CMA CGM, MSC and Hapag-Lloyd have pledged to avoid Arctic shipping routes due to pressure from environmental groups. The Arctic sea route is believed to be accessible only during the time of year when the ice is melted enough to allow transits without icebreakers.

“The Northern Sea Route has become increasingly viable as the Arctic warms about four times faster than the global average, leading to a sharp decline in sea ice,” South Korean environmental group Paran Ocean Citizen Science Center said in a statement last year. “But making the route commercially viable would require further warming, putting the policy at odds with efforts to combat climate change.”

The El Nino weather phenomenon is expected to increase the likelihood of drought and excess heat across the region.

The Panama Canal is expected to limit traffic starting in early September, as it prepares for lower water levels due to the El Nino weather phenomenon.

On Thursday, the Panama Canal Authority, the body that oversees the waterway, announced that daily transit caps would be set to address concerns about the drier weather conditions ahead.

Under the new measures, 34 vessels will be permitted to sail through the canal as of September 4. A further reduction will start on September 15, when the limit will be 32 ships.

The travel restrictions are a reversal for the Panama Canal Authority. Officials told the news service Reuters in May that they had no plans to limit crossings this year, citing water conservation measures imposed last year.

The canal, which handles about 5 percent of global maritime trade, usually has capacity to accommodate about 40 vessels per day.  Since June, it has seen a daily average of 35 transits.

Any significant decrease in travel through the canal is likely to translate into slower international shipping for industries that rely on the waterway. That, in turn, could increase costs.

A severe drought in 2023, for instance, cut traffic through the Panama Canal by roughly 36 percent, leading to disruptions in global supply chains.

The declining water levels that year were also attributed to El Nino, as well as climate change accelerated by human activities.

El Nino is a naturally occurring weather phenomenon that takes place every two to seven years, when the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean is warmer than usual.

The resulting weather patterns can have an impact across the region and even globally, putting some areas at risk of excessive heat and drought, while others suffer from flooding

Scientists expect a particularly strong El Nino in the coming months, potentially among the strongest on record. That could lead to an increase in cases of extreme weather events.

Panama Canal authorities have previously imposed vessel limits in order to conserve water.

The canal relies on a lock system that lifts and lowers vessels as they travel from the Pacific Ocean to the Caribbean Sea, and vice versa.

But the canal is fed, in part, by freshwater from nearby lakes and reservoirs, most notably Gatun Lake.

Panamanians rely on that lake as well to supply drinking water to nearby cities, including the capital Panama City, putting additional strain on the waterway during times of drought.

The nearly nine-month extended deployment of the USS Abraham Lincoln in the Middle East has triggered a mental health crisis among the crew so intense that some sailors have tried to jump overboard, according to some US media reports.

Family members of the exhausted military crew on board the flagship aircraft carrier, reportedly located in the Gulf region, say there are food shortages, while broken toilets and showers have contributed to unsanitary conditions and poor health.

More than 5,000 staff members have been on board the vessel, which has been conducting maritime security and blockade operations at present around the Strait of Hormuz, for that time. It set sail on November 21, 2025 from its homeport of San Diego for an extended deployment to the Asia Pacific and the Middle East.

Since then, the ship has made just one single-day port stop at Naval Base Guam from December 11-12. The lack of port stops is a major issue for a ship the size and complexity of the USS Abraham Lincoln, experts say.

As US President Donald Trump and his defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, declare the United States is ready to continue an “indefinite” blockade on Iranian ports in the Gulf, we look at how this compares with other lengthy aircraft carrier deployments.

What is happening on board the USS Abraham Lincoln?

Reports by two US publications that cover military affairs, the Navy Times and Stars and Stripes, last week quoted family members of military personnel on board the vessel who said they were suffering from declining mental health and morale, and cases of suicidal ideation.

The Navy Times spoke on record with one sailor’s wife, identified as Annabelle Loma, who said he had attempted to jump overboard amid what she described as “severe burnout”.

The reports prompted urgent questions from US lawmakers. On Sunday, Admiral Brad Cooper, commander of US Central Command (CENTCOM), reportedly visited the USS Lincoln.

He praised the crew and stated on social media that “service at sea for long periods isn’t for everyone, while claiming the ship has the lowest number of mental health-related cases of the navy’s 11 active aircraft carriers. “It is uniquely challenging and tough, and every single one of us, including me, reacts to stressors in different ways,” he said.

But there is growing concern among Republican and Democratic lawmakers over what they see as a lack of accountability after Hegseth dismissed mental health reports last week as “completely misrepresented”.

When Trump was asked last week whether the USS Lincoln had been at sea for too long, he told reporters: “No, not nearly long enough.”

The USS Lincoln mission was supposed to end in May but has been extended repeatedly since then.

Last week, it emerged that another ship, the USS George Washington, has been rerouted from its position in the Pacific and will arrive in the Gulf within a week to take over duties from the Lincoln.

How long can US aircraft carrier deployments be?

The longest aircraft carrier deployment since the Vietnam War was the USS Gerald R Ford’s 326-day mission, which began in June 2025, under Trump’s second term in the White House.

That mission included NATO exercises in the Mediterranean, support for the US military operation that captured Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, and operations in the Red Sea during the US-Israel war on Iran.

After beginning its mission as a routine deployment to the Asia Pacific region, the Ford then moved into the South China Sea for security operations, before being deployed to the Arabian Sea and the Gulf of Oman to help the US enforce its naval blockade of the Iranian ports.

During this time, the USS Ford met several technical problems, including an onboard fire, which also triggered congressional scrutiny back home.

Lengthy deployments during the Vietnam War

Some of the longest aircraft carrier deployments in US history took place in and around the Gulf of Tonkin during the Vietnam War, with the USS Midway operating for 332 days, the USS Coral Sea operating for 329 days and the USS Saratoga operating for 308 days.

Similar to the USS Lincoln, they faced issues as well. Reports said the intense flight schedule of the active air combat during the Vietnam War pushed crew and operations to their limits.

While there are a number of lengthy aircraft carrier deployments from other countries, they pale in comparison to the US Navy’s record.

Russia’s Admiral Kuznetsov conducted a five-month mission to the Syrian coast which began in October 2016, but suffered several technical breakdowns, including aircraft losses.

The United Kingdom’s HMS Queen Elizabeth completed a seven-month deployment in 2021, which included combat strikes on targets in Iraq and Syria, despite significant breakdowns due to engineering issues.

Why is this issue so critical?

Many lawmakers have raised questions over whether the US can maintain an “indefinite” blockade in the Gulf if conditions on board a flagship aircraft carrier are so dire.

In a letter to Hegseth last week, Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal raised the alarm over reports of deteriorating mental health on board, as well as shortages of basic supplies, water contamination, an increase in safety incidents and even disruptions to mail services, through which those on board receive care packages.

“These reports warrant immediate attention, but they also raise a broader question: whether the Navy can sustain the operational tempo now being demanded of its carrier force, particularly as this administration repeatedly commits US forces to conflicts of its own choosing and increasingly relies on aircraft carriers to sustain those operations,” Blumenthal wrote.

Experts say the lack of port stops is a major issue for the USS Abraham Lincoln.

Harlan Ullman, a retired senior naval officer and chairman of the strategic advisory firm Killowen Group, told Al Jazeera that ships require onshore care to keep advanced technology operational over long periods.

“Ships need maintenance, particularly ships that are extremely complicated with very advanced weapon systems such as nuclear-powered carriers with very advanced systems, and there are things that you cannot do in terms of maintenance under way,” Ullman said.

“There are lots of things that you can do at sea, but there are far more things that can only be done in port,” he pointed out.

Ullman noted that extended deployments “erode the readiness and capability of that ship the longer it’s at sea, and it lacks the ability to repair and extend maintenance”.

He added that the Trump administration must prioritise naval readiness over politics, saying “this is a national issue, not a local one; and the administration should not be so defensive. It should say, ‘OK, we’ll see what’s going on, and then if there are some issues, we’ll take care of them.’”

What are the drawbacks of deploying aircraft carriers?

Aircraft carriers are built to be on deployment for many months at a time. However, that comes with a high cost, as extended cruises increase the risk of technical breakdowns and can also lead to reduced staff morale and mental health concerns.

Large aircraft carriers are expensive. The USS Abraham Lincoln cost $2.2bn to build in 1989, and it costs tens of millions of dollars to operate on a daily basis.

Recent conflicts in the Red Sea have also underscored the vulnerability of large aircraft carriers. Houthi rebels, who do not possess a formal navy, have nevertheless managed to put significant pressure on large US Navy aircraft carriers operating near the limits of their missile range.

At one point during the US-Israel war on Iran, the USS Gerald Ford was forced to sail hundreds of miles away from the Iranian coast to reduce the risk of being hit by missiles, limiting its effectiveness.

A salvage operation is under way to stabilise the stricken tanker behind a major oil spill off Oman, the risk management company coordinating the effort has said.

The announcement by Ambrey on Thursday came a day after Oman’s environmental authority confirmed that oil from the Caroline Bezengi had reached beaches along the sultanate’s central coast.

The tanker, a suspected member of Russia’s shadow fleet used to transport sanctioned Russian oil, has been leaking crude into waters near the Hallaniyat archipelago since June, when the ship’s crew reported an unidentified explosion.

Ambrey said it was working with Omani authorities and that its services had been engaged as part of a “significant international response” that included salvage vessels, aircraft and specialist personnel.

Apart from Oman and an unnamed “leading international oil spill response company”, Ambrey did not elaborate on which other countries or firms were involved in the effort to salvage the vessel, which has flown the flags of states including Cameroon, Palau and Liberia.

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) – the United Nations maritime agency – said on Thursday that it was “closely monitoring” the situation and would “continue to support ongoing efforts”, without providing further details.

The International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds, a pair of intergovernmental organisations established to provide compensation for oil pollution, said it would not be involved in the cleanup operation after determining that the incident likely resulted from an act of war.

Ambrey, based in Hereford in the United Kingdom, said it expected salvage vessels to reach the Caroline Bezengi soon and that specialist personnel had already boarded the vessel to begin stabilising its cargo.

Ed Wollaston, director of global response at Ambrey, said the “extremely challenging situation” had been complicated by adverse weather from the annual Khareef monsoon.

“However, we have deployed the leading experts in each aspect of the response and have mobilised the appropriate supporting equipment, aircraft and vessels,” Wollaston said in a statement.

“We are working around the clock to mitigate the environmental impact of the situation.”

The oil spill has expanded dramatically in size over the past week, according to analyses of satellite imagery, raising fears for coastlines and ecosystems in the region, including a marine reserve established last year off the Hallaniyat archipelago.

Environmental NGO Greenpeace said on Thursday that, based on satellite imagery, the spill had grown from 45 square kilometres (17sq miles) in late July to about 1,300sq kilometres (502sq miles) as of Wednesday.

Omani authorities as recently as Monday estimated the size of the spill at approximately 400sq kilometres (154sq miles).

Hanen Keskes, Greenpeace’s head of campaigns for the MENA region, said the circumstances of the spill made it “especially challenging” to respond to.

“Given the scale of this – a damaged tanker in a remote location, during monsoon season, with no clear owner or verified insurer to compel a rapid response – this is a case where international assistance should be mobilised urgently,” Keskes told Al Jazeera.

“Capabilities like specialised salvage equipment and expertise can exceed what any one country has on hand, and every day of delay allows more oil to disperse.”

Najmedin Meshkati, an expert in oil spills and a professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of Southern California, said that authorities should have moved faster to contain the spill.

“That two-month interval was the response window, and it closed. In spill response, source control on day three is worth many multiples of source control on day 60,” Meshkati told Al Jazeera.

Meshkati acknowledged, however, that Omani authorities had been dealt a difficult situation.

“It was handed an orphaned wreck with no responsive owner, no verifiable insurer, no functioning flag state, and a compensation regime containing a war exclusion that may void it entirely,” Meshkati said.

“No mid-sized maritime administration on earth is resourced for that. But that is precisely the argument for escalating harder and earlier.”

Damilola S Olawuyi, a professor of energy and environmental law at Hamad Bin Khalifa University in Qatar, said the spill highlighted the need for stronger international mechanisms to hold polluters accountable.

“The obligation of the entity responsible for pollution to pay for the cost of cleanup and remediation, ie, the polluter pays principle, has for long been a bedrock of international law,” Olawuyi told Al Jazeera.

“However, in an era of increasing geopolitical realignments, identifying the responsible polluter has become complex, therefore complicating effective risk reduction, response and remediation measures,” he said.

A vast oil spill from a leaking tanker reached Oman’s coastline on Wednesday, its environment agency said.

This oil spill threatens to become one of the world’s worst in years after spreading largely unchecked for several weeks, experts say.

On Monday, Oman said it was working to contain the spill, which had by then affected roughly 390 square kilometres (150sq miles), according to analysis by the country’s environment agency.

The slick now covers an area of more than 2,000sq km (770sq miles), said John Amos, an oil spill specialist who reviewed satellite imagery obtained by Reuters. It could affect about 40km (25 miles) of coast near Ras Madraka, as well as Masirah Island, Oman’s Environment Authority said.

Here’s what we know.

What happened?

Oil has been leaking from the tanker Caroline Bezengi since it ran aground about 22 nautical miles (41km) from the Omani coastal town of Sharbithat some time after the crew reported a suspected explosion on June 8. It had been en route from Russia to India.

Reuters reported that the tanker was carrying an estimated 800,000 barrels of sanctioned oil and that it ran aground on June 30.

An investigation by the news agency AFP found that the ship had been stranded for several weeks near Oman’s al-Qibliyyah Island.

In the meantime, the oil has been spreading towards Oman’s coastline.

The Oman News Agency (ONA) quoted the country’s environment authority saying that “today’s monitoring results showed that some beaches in the Ras Madrakah area were affected by oil pollution”.

The Indian Ocean town sits about 200km (125 miles) from al-Qibliyyah.

The slick is now concentrated around the Hallaniyat Archipelago off the southern coast, where a marine reserve was established last year to protect sensitive ecosystems home to diverse marine life, including rare sea turtles.

On Wednesday, the ONA reported that “a coastal stretch of up to 40 km in the [Ras Madrakah] area is expected to be affected”.

The southern beaches of Masirah Island, which lies 15km (nine miles) off the coast of Oman, could be contaminated “in the coming hours”, affecting a 10-20km (six-to-12-mile) stretch of coastline, it said.

An unnamed spokesperson for the United Nations International Maritime Organization said it was “closely monitoring” the leakage.

How did this happen?

British maritime security company Vanguard told AFP that the tanker had suffered “explosions” in early June as it sailed off the coast of Yemen, causing water to enter several sections of the vessel. It ran aground off the coast of Oman some time after this.

There has been no official explanation for the explosions and no party has claimed an attack. However, the vessel was navigating two separate wars on its journey from Russia to India. Tankers have been frequently targeted in the Gulf region in recent months as the US war on Iran has continued.

In April, the Caroline Bezengi sailed from the Russian port of Novorossiysk on the Black Sea, a flashpoint in the Russia-Ukraine war.

It is believed to be part of Russia’s “shadow fleet” used to circumvent Western sanctions on its oil exports. It last sailed under a Cameroonian flag.

Rentoor Shipmanagement and Villar Shipmanagement, both based in China, are registered as the ship’s owner and operator, respectively, according to the open-source database OpenSanctions.

Russia’s shadow fleet includes ageing vessels that have often been criticised for poor maintenance, lack of insurance and lacklustre safety standards.

Ukraine has previously carried out assaults on shadow fleet vessels believed to be carrying Russian oil.

The Caroline Bezengi then passed through the Suez Canal at the end of May, ship-tracking data shows, before sailing through the Red Sea and past Yemen, where the Iran-aligned Houthi fighters have entered a wider regional war between the United States, Israel and Iran and are targeting Saudi Arabia-flagged ships.

What damage could the oil spill cause?

Last week, advocacy group Greenpeace warned that the spill was on the verge of causing an “environmental disaster”.

Christopher D’Elia, a specialist in oil spills and a professor emeritus at Louisiana State University in the United States, told Al Jazeera the estimated 800,000 barrels of crude on board the Caroline Bezengi would amount to a “fairly large spill”.

“This spill raises a lot of issues,” D’Elia told Al Jazeera.

“These illegal tankers don’t comply with the ‘polluter pays’ principle that is the basis for how the US and other developed nations regulate spills,” D’Elia said.

“The ‘responsible party’ must finance the cleanup in the US. In this case, there is no responsible party.”

Meanwhile, Iranian media reported on Wednesday that a separate oil spill in the Strait of Hormuz had reached the island of Qeshm, affecting beaches and an environmentally sensitive mangrove forest.

State-run news agency IRNA said the slick had affected areas on Qeshm’s southern coast, as well as parts of the smaller neighbouring island of Hengam.

Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said pollution had been observed at three locations and on the sea surface, adding that its source seemed to be a “foreign bulk carrier”, without specifying the name of the ship.

The risk of oil spills in the Gulf has risen sharply because of strikes on tankers during the five-month US-Iran war. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has reported 65 incidents in the Strait of Hormuz and across the Middle East since the beginning of March.

“Any party that benefits from commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz is legally and morally obligated to take action to compensate for and remedy the environmental damage caused to the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman,” he said.

Iran continues to deny claims by the United States that it controls the Strait of Hormuz as talks aimed at negotiating a peace deal between the two sides falter.

US President Donald Trump repeated his claim that the US is in “total control” of the critical waterway on Wednesday, but was met with angry denials from Iran, which has stated that it will not reopen the strait until demands regarding US aggression, reparations and sanctions are met.

“Claims and repeated posts by US officials that the Strait of Hormuz is no longer blocked do not change the reality,” Iran’s Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA) posted on X on Wednesday.

“The Strait of Hormuz remains blocked and will not be reopened until Iran’s conditions are accepted,” it added.

Here’s what we know about the latest developments in the strait, through which one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies are shipped during peacetime, and the prospects for ongoing talks.

What’s the latest on the US-Iran standoff?

Iranian forces are currently preventing ships that do not have its express approval from navigating through the narrow strait, which passes through territorial waters of Iran and Oman.

Despite Trump’s claim that the US has control over the strait, shipping traffic through the key waterway has dropped to a one-week low as a result of Iran’s blockade.

Meanwhile, the US is operating a naval blockade on Iranian ports both in and around the strait. On Tuesday, US forces targeted a Panama-flagged vessel they said was headed for an Iranian port, in the Gulf of Oman, and which they alleged had failed to respond to warnings.

On Thursday, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the US “has long miscalculated due to intelligence failures”, including when launching its war on Iran, which it did alongside Israel with strikes on Tehran on February 28.

In a post on X, Araghchi said Washington’s actions in the Strait of Hormuz were “an even bigger miscalculation”.

“Worse than fake news is fake intelligence,” he said.

Hojjatoleslam Hossein Taeb, the commander of the paramilitary Basij Organisation – an affiliate of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) – reiterated that the strait is “under Iran’s control and management”.

“Today you see that the Strait of Hormuz is under the management and control of the Islamic Republic, and our country continues on its path in complete security,” Taeb said on Thursday, according to Iran’s semi-official Fars news agency.

“The Americans saw the power of the Islamic revolution,” he added.

What do we know about Iran-Oman talks?

Iran says it is not talking directly to the US about the strait. Instead, it says it is holding talks with Oman, which it proposes to share in the future management of the strait.

Following the signing of a memorandum of understanding between Iran and the US on June 17, under which Iran undertook to keep the strait open for 60 days, there were soon disagreements about control of the waterway and the routes that ships should take. Iran fired on some ships it said had not followed its permitted route, leading to a renewal of hostilities with the US.

Iran also disagreed with the US over whether it could charge fees to ships passing through the strait. As a result, the strait – which was fully and freely open to all shipping before the US launched its war on Iran – has become the main obstacle to the progression of wider peace talks.

Now, talks between Iran and Oman are aimed at ironing out these issues.

On Tuesday, Qatar said negotiations between Iran and Oman over the strait had reached “an advanced stage”.

“As mediators, we want the Strait of Hormuz reopened as soon as possible,” Qatari Foreign Ministry spokesman Majed al-Ansari said during a news conference.

Negotiators are trying to reach a compromise that would allow commercial shipping to resume while addressing the security concerns of both Iran and Oman.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman has said talks with Oman are focused on “establishing safe inbound and outbound shipping lanes” that “uphold sovereign rights while also addressing the national security considerations of both Iran and Oman”.

Last week, Iran said it had agreed on the coordinates for these shipping lanes with Oman.

What do we know about broader peace talks between Iran and the US?

Iran says it is not speaking directly to the US because it has violated the June 17 MoU by restarting strikes on Iran in July.

Now, Pakistan is making efforts to mediate peace talks. It said on Tuesday it was working to bring the US and Iran “to the negotiating table”, as Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi held talks with senior Iranian officials in Tehran.

In April, the US and Iran held face-to-face negotiations, with US Vice President JD Vance and Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf attending talks in Islamabad. On June 17, the two sides remotely signed the MoU, which was supposed to kick-start a 60-day negotiation process. However, various disagreements prevented that process from getting off the ground, and talks have stalled since then.

Alan Eyre, a distinguished diplomatic fellow with the Middle East Institute in Washington, DC, told Al Jazeera earlier this month that the only important negotiations taking place right now are Iran-Oman talks over the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran says it is not worth talking directly because it “can’t count on anything the US says”, Eyre said.

Commenting on the possibility of future talks between the longtime foes, Negar Mortazavi, senior fellow at the US-based Center for International Policy, said the key question is whether the escalatory rhetoric from both sides is “opening negotiating positions or actual red lines”.

“If both sides are prepared to compromise, there is still a path towards ending the conflict and reopening the strait,” Mortazavi told Al Jazeera on Wednesday.

“If they are not, Hormuz could remain restricted, and the confrontation risks becoming another prolonged, open-ended conflict in the Middle East.”

What are the latest demands from Iran and the US?

At the end of last week, Iran’s Supreme National Security Council set out new conditions it says the US must meet before the Strait of Hormuz can fully reopen.

The six conditions include an end to US threats against Iran and insults to what Zolghadr described as the country’s national and religious values; a permanent end to attacks against Iran and its allies in Lebanon, Palestine, Yemen and Iraq; the lifting of the US naval blockade and withdrawal of naval and air forces from around Iran; compensation for damage from what he called two “imposed wars”; the lifting of sanctions; and the unconditional release of frozen Iranian assets.

Trump told reporters at the White House on Monday that his administration was going to seek payment for “50 years” of damage caused by Iran, framing the move as a direct response to Tehran’s claims.

The payments, he said, would cover deaths among US forces in the region as well as civilian protesters in Iran, claiming that 52,000 people have been killed in Iran in the past four months. Tehran says some 3,117 people died in antigovernment protests that swept the country in January, prior to the launch of the US-Israel war. In February, the US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA) reported about 7,000 deaths, including 6,500 protesters.

On Thursday, Al Jazeera’s Tohid Assidi reported, citing observers, that Iran is focused on two primary issues.

“First was the security assurances Iran sought, ensuring that a reached deal could pave the way for a period of stability in the country,” Assidi said.

“Second were economic concerns, primarily articulated in demands for the US naval blockade to be removed and sanctions frozen, which represented the key demands coming from the Iranian side,” he added.

Despite the rhetoric from Trump, analysts have told Al Jazeera that the US may have to concede to some of Iran’s demands as it faces growing pressure domestically to avoid another escalation.

The US media have reported that concerns over dwindling defensive munitions have contributed to Trump’s decision not to carry out his threatened large-scale strikes against Iran.

Shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz fell to its lowest level in a week on Tuesday as vessel operators continued to avoid the strategically vital waterway amid ongoing hostilities in the Middle East.

Kpler data showed that only eight vessels were tracked in the strait on Tuesday, below the 10-day average of around 12 and the lowest daily total since August 5. Of those vessels, only one, a coal carrier, had exited the strait, while the remaining ships were still making their way through.Seven vessels entered the waterway, all using the Iranian route, highlighting the limited movement through the strait as uncertainty over its security continues to weigh on shipping activity.

Separate data from LSEG recorded 11 vessel transits on Tuesday, down from 14 the previous day, also pointing to a slowdown in traffic through the crucial maritime passage.

The decline comes as the United States and Yemen’s Iran-aligned Houthis reported separate attacks, while prospects for an end to the Iran war appeared to weaken. Tehran has said the Strait of Hormuz will remain closed unless Washington accepts its conditions.

Hormuz Traffic Plummets

The scale of the disruption is stark compared with normal shipping activity. Around 130 to 140 vessels typically passed through the Strait of Hormuz before Iran closed the waterway following the start of U.S.-Israeli attacks on February 28.

The sharp reduction in traffic underscores the growing risks facing international shipping and energy markets as vessels avoid one of the world’s most important maritime chokepoints.

The strait is particularly important for global energy supplies, meaning prolonged restrictions could increase pressure on oil markets and raise transportation and insurance costs for vessels operating in the region.

Red Sea Traffic Holds Up

Shipping activity through the Bab al-Mandab Strait at the southern end of the Red Sea showed a different trend.

Kpler data recorded 30 vessels crossing the waterway on Tuesday, above its 10-day average of 25.

The contrasting figures suggest that while some shipping activity continues through alternative routes, the Strait of Hormuz remains heavily affected by the ongoing hostilities and uncertainty surrounding its reopening.

With information from Reuters.

The deaths on board the Egyptian-owned Tihamah mark first shipping deaths linked to Houthis since the US-Israel war on Iran began.

Yemen’s internationally recognised government has accused the Houthi rebel group of killing at least six people and wounding 10 others in a double-tap strike on a cargo vessel in the Bab al-Mandeb strait.

The attack on the Egyptian-owned Tihamah on Tuesday marks the first shipping deaths linked to the Iran-aligned Houthis since the United States and Israel launched the war on Iran on February 28.

Yemen’s Transport Ministry said three Pakistani nationals and one Indonesian national were killed after the Houthis fired three ballistic missiles at the commercial ship, sparking a fire and causing “significant damage” to the vessel.

Yemen’s coastguard said in a separate statement that the Houthis fired another missile at the ship as rescue personnel were evacuating the dead and wounded.

“The attack struck the site of the rescue operation and resulted in deaths and injuries among the forces participating in the response operation,” the coastguard said.

At least two troops were killed in the second strike.

Ten people were wounded in total, including seven crew members, it added.

Houthi-Saudi truce unravels

Yemen’s Foreign Ministry condemned the attack and called on the international community “to move from condemnation to effective and decisive action” against the Houthis.

There was no official comment from the Houthis.

But the Houthi-run news agency Saba reported that the ‌group had attacked a Saudi ship carrying military equipment in Bab al-Mandeb. It did not name the ship, and there was no immediate Saudi response to the report.

In a separate incident on Tuesday, the US military said it fired on a ship attempting to break its blockade of Iranian ports in the Gulf of Oman. The US Central Command said a Navy helicopter fired two Hellfire missiles at the Panama-flagged Vela Nova cargo vessel, but did not say if any crew members were wounded.

The escalation in Yemen follows the collapse of a years-long truce in the country’s civil war between the Houthis and the Saudi-backed, internationally recognised government.

The breakdown of the United Nations-backed 2022 truce followed a Saudi air strike on the runway of Sanaa airport on July 13, preventing the landing of an Iranian flight carrying a high-ranking Houthi delegation.

The Houthis then attacked the Abha airport in southwestern Saudi Arabia and announced a blockade on Saudi shipping in the Red Sea. They have also attacked Saudi vessels as well as oil facilities in the kingdom, adding further disruption to the global economy.

The Saudi-led coalition, in turn, has struck Houthi-controlled Hodeidah and Kamaran, Yemen’s largest island in the Red Sea.

The Houthis have also launched attacks on government-held areas in Yemen, including the port city of al-Makha (Mocha) on the Red Sea and the central city of Marib, killing dozens of troops and civilians.

Yemen’s internationally recognised government on Tuesday said the Houthis launched 10 missiles and four drones during a series of further attacks on sites on the country’s western coast.

The Houthis said they had launched ballistic missile and drone attacks “targeting Saudi military buildups, weapons depots and command posts” in al-Makha and the central Marib province.

The UN has called for restraint, saying the renewed hostilities risk “drawing the country into a broader regional confrontation, with devastating consequences for its people”.

The Saudi, Pakistan, Turkiye defence pact faces mixed reactions, with some Iranian officials doubting its security guarantees. Iran and Oman agree on a Hormuz framework, while fighting in Yemen escalates between government forces and Houthis.
Al Jazeera’s @Mohammadfff_ reports.

Rear Admiral Abdullah bin Salem Al-Shehri will lead the multinational coalition’s naval defence to protect trade, energy routes.

Saudi Arabia has announced the appointment of a commander for a multinational maritime defence alliance to protect freedom of navigation through the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden.

The Saudi Ministry of Defence said in a statement on Thursday that Rear Admiral Abdullah bin Salem Al-Shehri has been appointed commander of the coalition a week after its establishment.

Al-Shehri will oversee joint naval defence, coordinate with member states and other maritime coalitions, and carry out missions under the coalition’s charter, it added on X.

Bahrain, Bangladesh, the Comoros, Djibouti, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Turkiye and Yemen announced the formation of the coalition on July 30.

More countries are completing the procedures to join the coalition with some having already signed the joint declaration and others preparing to sign the declaration and charter before their formal accession as founding members, the Saudi statement said.

The ministry described the coalition as “an open international coalition that welcomes the accession of all countries that align with its goals and principles”, adding that it continues to receive new membership applications.

The coalition will hold a planning meeting August 12-13 to finalise its institutional framework and pave the way for more countries to join, according to the ministry.

The 14 countries that announced the formation of the Multinational Maritime Defence Coalition declared their intent to protect freedom of navigation and secure international trade routes and energy supply routes in the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, which form a strategic maritime corridor linking the Indian Ocean to the Mediterranean.

This comes as the United States-Israel war on Iran has become focused on the Strait of Hormuz. The virtual closure of the route, through which about 20 percent of global oil and gas supplies transited before the conflict, is weighing heavily on the global economy.

Eight of the world’s largest shipping associations have urged the United Nations to oppose tolls in the Strait of Hormuz amid reports that Iran and Oman are nearing a deal to manage the critical waterway.

In a letter to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and International Maritime Organization Secretary-General Arsenio Dominguez, the group said that allowing authorities to charge vessels to transit the strait would violate international norms and harm the global economy.

“Introducing compulsory charges for transit, or service fees that are a toll in all but name, through the Strait of Hormuz would represent a significant departure from established international practice,” the groups representing shipowners and operators said in the letter, which was sent to the UN on Monday but made public on Wednesday.

“Beyond the immediate financial implications for global trade, it would establish a precedent that could undermine the internationally recognised legal framework governing straits used for international navigation and transit passage.”

Internationally recognised rights of navigation should not be “compromised or used as part of broader political negotiations,” the group said, warning that a permanent de facto “toll booth” would lead to higher energy prices, inflation and economic uncertainty.

“Ultimately, these impacts will carry a human cost, affecting livelihoods around the world. It is vital that we continue supporting the preservation of freedom of navigation as the foundation of international maritime governance,” the group said in the letter.

The letter’s eight signatories are the Asian Shipowners Association, the Baltic and International Maritime Council, the Cruise Lines International Association, the European Shipowners Association, the International Chamber of Shipping, the International Association of Dry Cargo Shipowners, the International Association of Independent Tanker Owners and the World Shipping Council.

Dominguez, the head of the UN’s maritime agency, previously told Al Jazeera that imposing fees in the strait would violate international law and set a “very detrimental” precedent for global shipping.

“Countries do not have the right to introduce tolls or payments or charges on these straits,” Dominguez said in April.

Deborah Elms, the head of trade policy at the Hinrich Foundation in Singapore, said the establishment of a permanent toll system would be felt acutely in Asia, which buys the bulk of the Gulf’s energy exports.

“The cost increases from Hormuz disruption can be seen in Asia, particularly in diesel fuel price increases and shortages, in the skyrocketing cost of fertilisers, and in rising costs and shortages of plastics,” Elms told Al Jazeera.

“Much of the oil currently shipped through Hormuz could be rerouted through pipelines, but natural gas remains a problem. This chokepoint is not a major problem for container shipping, but if tolls were applied to other waterways, containers and bulk carriers would be affected much more,” she said.

Iran established a de facto maritime “toll booth” in the strait shortly after the US and Israel launched their war against the country in late February.

Tehran formalised its fee regime with the establishment of the Persian Gulf Strait Authority in May.

Iran’s ability to launch attacks on commercial vessels in the region has granted Tehran effective control over the waterway, giving it powerful leverage in negotiations on ending the war.

Dozens of attacks have been carried out on vessels since the start of the conflict, most of which have been blamed on Iranian forces.

The IMO has confirmed 64 incidents and 17 deaths in the region since the war began.

Shipping across the Gulf continues to be severely disrupted more than five months into the conflict, with at least 6,000 seafarers still stranded in and around the strait as of late July, according to the IMO and UN Human Rights Chief Volker Turk.

In the latest incident on Wednesday, a tanker reported hearing two explosions while transiting the strait, according to the UK Maritime Trade Operations Centre (UKMTO).

Drew Thompson, a senior fellow at the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore, said the IMO and other international agencies have limited ability to influence any deal involving Iran, Oman and the US despite their concerns.

“Despite clear interests in maintaining freedom of navigation in international straits, neither the UN, international organisations or shipowners have adequate leverage or ability to affect Iran’s calculus,” Thompson told Al Jazeera.

“President Trump has the means to continue to use violence to coerce a stubborn and resilient Iran, but he has thus far been ambivalent about international law and freedom of navigation, so it is uncertain if he would use his political capital or military force to prevent Iran from extracting tolls on shipping in the strait,” Thompson said.

The Houthi rebels of Yemen say they are widening the scope of their attacks on Saudi shipping to the northern Red Sea to prevent transits through the Suez Canal. The expansion of Houthi kinetic activities there comes amid mixed messages about efforts to open up the Strait of Hormuz, largely closed by Iran after it was hit by the U.S. and Israel on Feb. 28.

The Iranian-backed Houthis already struck Saudi ships in the southern part of that body of water and refineries along the northern portion after imposing a blockade on the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, leading several oil tankers in the Red Sea to avoid that route in favor of the Suez Canal. The expansion of the Houthi campaign against Saudi shipping began with an attack off the port of Yanbu on the NCC Wafa, a Saudi oil tanker, the rebel group claimed today.

“By God’s grace, the Yemeni Armed Forces succeeded in striking the Saudi oil vessel Wafa in the northern Red Sea off the area of Yanbu, using a number of ballistic missiles — and the hit was precise, by God’s grace,” Houthi spokesman Yahya Saree claimed on X. “In tightening the naval blockade on the Saudi enemy at Bab al-Mandeb in the southern Red Sea, the Saudi enemy has moved to reroute its oil vessels toward the northern Red Sea. The Yemeni Armed Forces therefore affirm that their operations will continue and escalate in targeting Saudi oil vessels in the northern Red Sea, to close off every route and prevent passage, in order to cement the ‘blockade for blockade’ equation.”

There was no immediate statement issued by the Saudis and TWZ cannot independently verify the Houthis’ claims.

As we have frequently detailed, a Houthi blockade of the BAM threatens to add far greater pressure on oil exports from the Middle East, already drastically affected by the Iranian closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the resumption of the U.S. blockade on Iranian ports. The kingdom has diverted millions of barrels of oil per day through pipelines to its Yanbu port on the Red Sea in an effort to minimize the energy shortages due to the hostilities in the Persian Gulf. As we have noted, the Suez Canal is an important artery in addition to the BAM for ships carrying Saudi energy supplies, though this route drastically increases the cost of exports to Asia given the need to travel around Africa. While tankers carrying Saudi oil through the BAM have been greatly reduced, they are still making their way through the Suez Canal. But that could change if the Houthis start making that route perilous too, which would put a tighter energy squeeze on the west, including Europe, as well as the rest of the globe. They could also continue to attack Saudi oil terminals on the Red Sea, making shipping a moot point if the transfer stations are not operational.

The closing of the BAM to Saudi oil traffic, and now threats to the transit route north to the canal, also raise the specter of the U.S. having to get as involved as it did during the previous Houthi campaign against shipping that ended last September, which could pull resources away from Iranian-focused operations. It’s possible Egypt would have a major problem with such actions too, as it would impact the Canal’s revenue and freedom of movement. This could widen the conflict.

Meanwhile, there are mixed signals about whether the Strait of Hormuz will be fully reopened to traffic and under what conditions.

“The U.S., Iran and Oman are closing in on an interim agreement to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, with the U.S. aiming for a Wednesday announcement,” Axios reported on Wednesday, citing two regional sources and a U.S. official. “According to two regional sources, the deal under discussion sets up a 60-day temporary arrangement between Oman and Iran in the Hormuz strait, which could be extended.”

All inbound traffic of ships through the strait and into the Gulf would go in a northern lane through Iranian waters, the publication noted. All outbound traffic through the strait and into the Arabian Sea would go in a southern lane through Omani waters, in coordination with Iran. In addition, there would be no tolls or fees charged during this interim two-month period and the parties would work to clear the median lane of the Strait of mines within 30 days.

“After the median lane is cleared, it would be used for inbound and outbound traffic under the terms of a permanent arrangement to be negotiated between Oman and Iran,” the outlet added.

The deal described by Axios largely mirrors the Iran-Oman negotiations we reported on yesterday, with the main differences being the involvement of the U.S. and no imposition of fees. As we noted, both Iran and the U.S. are currently following a bifurcated traffic pattern, with the U.S. Navy recommending transits close to the Omani coastline and Iran pushing shipping toward its shores. The middle of the Strait has been deemed too hazardous because of the threat primarily from mines.

Speaking to Fox News Tuesday night, President Donald Trump said negotiations with Iran have been ongoing but that Tehran faces severe consequences if it fails to open up the Strait.

“If they back out again, they are going to get hit really hard,” Trump proclaimed.

The president has insisted that Iran must fully open the vital chokepoint or face new and more intense attacks that would include power plants, other civilian infrastructure and even strikes on leadership.

There are indications from Iran, however, that any deal to open the Strait is between Iran and Oman and that it might not result in a quick resolution.

The official Iranian Press TV stated on X “that any potential bilateral agreement between Tehran and Muscat regarding maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz will not automatically lead to the immediate re-opening of the strategic waterway.”

Reuters on Wednesday concurred that any deal to open the Strait may not be as imminent as Trump has claimed.

“A proposed deal between Iran and Oman would give Tehran control over ships entering the Gulf through the Strait of Hormuz,” the outlet wrote, citing a senior Iranian source and two regional officials. “Despite the apparent step towards yielding to Iranian demands, the sources pushed back against assertions by U.S. President Donald Trump that ‌a deal reopening the strait was imminent, saying important details still had to be agreed.”

Regardless of negotiations, U.S. Central Command stated on X that the Strait of Hormuz southern route along the coast of Oman remains open and that over the past three months, “U.S. forces have assisted more than 1,000 vessels in successfully transiting the strait despite unwarranted Iranian aggression, and these transits continue today.”

Between Houthi actions in the Red Sea region and the ongoing closure of the Strait of Hormuz, commercial traffic in both areas continues to be greatly reduced, though transits through the BAM are spiking upwards, according to MarineTraffic.

The latest “data highlights how headline volumes can obscure underlying maritime risk. Strait of Hormuz crossings fell from 10 to eight on 4 August, with seven vessels exiting the Middle East Gulf and only one entering,” MarineTraffic stated on X. “Five of the eight movements used the Iranian Unilateral Scheme, while no Hormuz Traffic Separation Scheme crossings were recorded.”

Meanwhile, “Bab el-Mandeb traffic rose from 25 to 34, including 18 vessels entering the Red Sea and 16 exiting,” MarineTraffic added. “Yet four dark transits, two sanctioned crossings and six shadow fleet movements indicate that visibility, routing concentration and compliance exposure remain central concerns.”

Amid all this, oil prices have actually fallen, with Brent Crude now trading at slightly over $79 a barrel, down from nearly $85 per barrel yesterday. Still, there are many reasons Trump is pushing a rekindled effort to find a diplomatic off-ramp to a conflict that has killed 18 American troops, wounded hundreds more, drained U.S. weapons stocks and roiled international relations and global financial markets. In addition to the global economic pressures this conflict has created, it is unpopular among the American electorate and crucial mid-term elections will take place in November. Even Fox News, generally supportive of Trump, has released polling data that shows a “majority of voters oppose U.S. military action, and nearly two thirds think the conflict will last at least a year.”

The latest Fox News survey “finds 56% oppose U.S. military action against Iran, including 40% who “strongly” oppose.”

How much these factors will play a role in Trump’s decision-making should become clearer over the next hours and days.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

The Houthis recently declared a naval blockade on Saudi Arabia in the Red Sea, targeting several tankers.

Yemen’s Iran-aligned Houthi group says it has fired ballistic missiles at a Saudi oil tanker, more than a week after imposing a naval blockade on Saudi vessels in the Red Sea.

In a post on X, Yahya Saree, the Houthi military spokesman, said the group had “carried out a military operation targeting the Saudi oil tanker (NCC GHAZAL) for violating the maritime navigation ban” that the group had imposed on Saudi vessels.

He added that the group had used several ballistic missiles and forced the vessel to retreat.

The UK Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO), a maritime security monitor, said a tanker reported an explosion while transiting the Red Sea, adding that the crew is safe and no environmental damage was reported.

The Houthis seized the capital Sanaa in 2014 and have fought the internationally recognised Yemeni government, which Saudi Arabia backs, for more than a decade.

On July 20, the Houthis announced their maritime blockade, accusing Saudi leaders of imposing “an unjust and oppressive siege” on Yemen for nearly 12 years, “plundering our resources and imposing a comprehensive blockade”.

It went on to affirm “the right of our great people to respond to the blockade with a blockade”.

Second attack

The Houthis have also claimed an attack on two Saudi oil tankers transiting the Red Sea last week.

“We targeted two Saudi oil tankers, named Encelia and Layla, for their violation of the blockade decision issued by the armed forces,” Houthi military spokesperson Yahya Saree said on July 22.

The Saudi Press Agency reported that the Encelia had been hit, citing an official source at Saudi Arabia’s Transport General Authority who said all crew members were safe.

The Bab al-Mandeb chokepoint connecting the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden is one of the world’s most important shipping routes, including for oil exports.

Between Yemen to the northeast and Djibouti and Eritrea in the Horn of Africa to the southwest, the strait is just 29km (18 miles) at its narrowest point, limiting traffic to two channels for inbound and outbound vessels heading to the Suez Canal.

In 2024, about 4.1 billion barrels of crude oil and refined petroleum products passed through the strait – about 5 percent of the global total.

Oman’s proposal is based on the Strait of Malacca in East Asia, a model whereby ships that use the strait provide voluntary fees.

Iran and Oman have exchanged proposals regarding the future management of the Strait of Hormuz, as points of contention continue to exist between the two nations whose territorial waters border the strategic waterway.

Oman presented a proposal to Iran ⁠for ⁠a joint regional mechanism to manage the Strait of Hormuz with “voluntary fees”, Reuters reported on Tuesday. Under the Omani proposal, which reportedly has regional backing, Iran would not exercise sole control ⁠of the strait, an unnamed Gulf source and Western diplomat ⁠told the news agency.

Oman’s proposal is reportedly based on the Strait of Malacca, which connects the Indian and Pacific Oceans. There, Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore ask ships that use the strait to voluntarily contribute to fund navigation, environmental protection, and ‌search-and-rescue operations.

This proposal aims to contribute to ending the global disruption to trade caused by the strait’s closure in the US-Israeli war on Iran. Tehran, however, says the strait ⁠cannot go back to its pre-war status where shipping flowed freely,

In comments to Iranian state media on Tuesday, Kazem Gharibabadi, the country’s deputy foreign minister for legal and international affairs, said Tehran rejects an Omani proposal for an equal division of transit routes between the two countries, as such a plan does not address Tehran’s security concerns.

Gharibabadi said that Tehran proposed to Oman that Iran would manage shipping through its side of ‌the strait and Muscat would manage part but not all of the opposite lane.

He added that Tehran has “no plans to negotiate with the US”, but affirmed talks are proceeding “step by step” with Oman, warning that Tehran will consider “any action” to maintain control over the strait, including the resumption of war.

“The Omanis are now suggesting three lines for the maritime traffic: one that runs through Iran’s territorial waters, an international one, and one through Omani territorial waters,” said Al Jazeera’s Resul Serdar, reporting from Tehran. “Despite public statements, our sources tell us Iran is demonstrating some flexibility.”

Al Jazeera’s Tohid Asadi, also reporting from Tehran, said there remain many “points of contention” between Oman and Iran on Hormuz. These include the trajectory of the ships, the fees, the question of who will define the arrangements, and mine clearances – which will reportedly be Iran’s responsibility.

Paul Musgrave, a professor at Georgetown University in Qatar, said Oman’s proposal to Iran to get the Strait of Hormuz running again is positive, but it remains to be seen if hardliners in Iran will go for it.

Musgrave noted that under the Strait of Malacca model, voluntary contributions raise about $70m annually, far from the $1m per ship that’s reportedly been proposed by Tehran as a “service fee” in the Strait of Hormuz.

Meanwhile, Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) foreign ministers met via video call on Tuesday to discuss the latest developments in the conflict, including ways to improve cooperation on issues surrounding freedom and navigation through the waterway, a statement from the Qatari Foreign Ministry said.

The United States suspended a nearly two-week-long campaign of air strikes against Iran over the weekend after pressure from regional mediators to find a diplomatic solution and to return to the memorandum of understanding signed in June, which would allow shipping to resume in the Strait of Hormuz. The strait carried one-fifth of global energy supplies before ⁠the February 28 start of the US-Israel war on Iran.

Iran rejected US President Donald Trump’s claim that ships damaged by Iran in the Gulf would be compensated from frozen Iranian funds. IRGC spokesperson Ebrahim Zolfaghari warned that any vessel taking such money will be banned from transiting the Strait of Hormuz.

Tehran summons Ukrainian envoy over the attack, which it says killed one sailor and wounded another.

Tehran has accused Ukraine of attacking an Iranian commercial vessel in the Caspian Sea, causing an explosion that killed one sailor and injured another.

Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned Ukraine’s chargé d’affaires in Tehran to protest what it described as a “hostile and criminal” attack on Saturday, state news agency IRNA reported.

The ministry claimed the attack had been acknowledged by the Ukrainian leadership and said it reflected Kyiv’s continued “irrational and hostile approach” towards Iran. It warned Iran would defend its national interests.

It also described the incident as a violation of Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter and said it could further inflame and expand the Russia-Ukraine war.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi also discussed the matter in a phone call with the European Union’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs Kaja Kallas, his office said in a statement.

Araghchi strongly condemned Ukraine’s military attack on the vessel in the Caspian Sea, and reportedly “called for a firm response from the United Nations Security Council, the European Union, and the international community, and for the perpetrators and supporters of this criminal act to be held accountable”, according to the statement shared on Telegram.

‘Pressure’

“The Iranians are not really happy with [the attack], while they’re also dealing with a US blockade on the southern coast,” said Al Jazeera’s Tohid Asadi, reporting from Tehran.

He explained that the attacks on Iran’s northern coast are “putting extra pressure” on Iran’s maritime trade.

In its condemnation, Iran’s Foreign Ministry reiterated that Tehran has never intervened in the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

The incident came as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy announced in a post on X that Kyiv had achieved “very strong results” with long-range strikes in the Caspian Sea, hitting “vessels used in military cargo shipments involving Iran, as well as a warship.” He did not identify the commercial vessel named by Tehran as a target.

Zelenskyy separately alleged that Russia had been passing satellite imagery of Gulf states and US military sites to Iran. He said surveillance on July 19 and 20 covered airbases in Bahrain, Jordan and Kuwait.

Iran and Ukraine have been at odds since 2022, when Iran sold Russia the Shahed drones that Moscow has since adapted and launched in their thousands at Ukrainian cities.

Kyiv says it has shot down more than 44,000 of the Iranian-designed drones since Russia’s invasion.

Ukraine has also offered its drone interceptors and expertise to governments in the Gulf that have come under Iranian attack during the US-Iran war, deploying anti-drone specialists to Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

EDITOR’S ANALYSIS

Houthi blockade for now is shaping who moves Saudi crude, not whether it moves, analysts say, even as oil prices soar.

As oil prices hit $100 a barrel on Thursday, experts say they are watching to see which vessels Yemen’s Houthis allow to pass through in the Red Sea as that will indicate how the crude market trends.

Brent futures rose $6.58 or 6.96 percent, to $100.65 a barrel, exceeding $100 for the first time since late May.

That was on the back of the Iran-aligned Houthis saying they were cutting off the passage Riyadh had been using to ship parts of its crude oil once Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz to retaliate against United States and Israel attacks.

On Monday, the Yemeni group declared a naval blockade on shipments from Saudi Arabia and said they would target Saudi, Israeli, and United States-linked tankers in the Bab el-Mandeb, which links the Red sea to the Indian Ocean.

On Thursday, the Houthis attacked two Saudi Arabian oil tankers, the group said, with a Saudi news agency later confirming that one of the two vessels was set ablaze.

It is not clear if the second one was also hit, according to marine analysis firm, Windward.

“The Houthis are quite mercurial and there is no complete clarity on what the blockade means,” said Michelle Bockmann, a senior maritime intelligence analyst at Windward.

“We’re watching now the ability of Chinese-owned tankers at [Saudi port] Yanbu if they are allowed to go through Bab el-Mandeb. Two have gone through but those had been loaded before the blockade was announced.”

The Houthis have previously relied on China for help, including for drone components, and “the Chinese have previously had a free pass”, said Bockmann, including between 2023 and 2025 when the Houthis attacked cargo ships aligned with Israel and the US in the Red Sea in the wake of the war on Gaza.

Windward tracking shows the cargo that moved through the Bab el-Mandeb chokepoint on July 20 was Saudi in origin but Chinese in crew and destination, and it drew no interdiction. The two vessels passed through the same corridor that Western- and Saudi-linked operators were being warned to avoid.

The enforcement is calibrated to affiliation rather than cargo and the blockade is shaping who moves Saudi crude, not whether it moves, Windward said.

“No one has ever been able to predict their actions… but they know you don’t have to do a lot to get the oil markets to react,” said Bockmann referring to the rise in benchmark oil prices on Thursday.

Rachel Ziemba, adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, underscored that the standoff in Bab el-Mandeb is happening while crude buffers have nor been replenished after the peak of the Hormuz crisis earlier this year.

“The multiple chokepoints are new and an example of littoral states looking to use their leverage,” Ziemba said.

Diesel also impacted

For now, both the Houthi threats and the continued closure of the Strait of Hormuz through which nearly one-fifth of the world’s oil transited before the US-Israel war on Iran, has sent prices soaring, including at the pump in the US reaching the national average of $4.09 per gallon (3.4 liter).

“Today’s rise in oil prices could cause $0.10 to $0.20 rise over the next week or two per gallon average price in US,” said Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy.

But De Haan is looking beyond the two straits and says he’s watching the availability of diesel as price per gallon averages $5.34.

“Diesel prices are being impacted more significantly,” he told Al Jazeera.

One reason behind that is that Ukrainian drone attacks have taken offline some of Russia’s oil refineries. The shortages are being felt domestically leading to Russia banning diesel exports, De Haan said.

“Oil exports are one story, but supplies of diesel gasoline, jet fuel is another story,” he said.

Another unknown in the mix is the role of China which, historically has been a major importer but slashed those imports in the past few months, helping stabilise global prices as some pressure on demand eased.

“It’s been one of the reasons that oil prices haven’t gone up dramatically – that china slashed its imports, and no one predicted that,” De Haan said. “For now, we don’t know if china is using its own strategic reserves or if it will start import again.”

Between those geopolitical plays and the upcoming hurricane season in the US, there is “another wildcard ahead for global refining capacity” and prices, De Haan said.

The United States continued to hit Iran for a 12th consecutive night early on Thursday, and Iran retaliated, striking targets across the Gulf, particularly in Kuwait and Jordan.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said on Thursday that an explosion set a tanker ablaze in the Strait of Hormuz after it attempted to navigate the southern route off the coast of Oman.

Here is a recap of what happened on Wednesday night and Thursday.

Where did the US attack Iran?

US Central Command (CENTCOM) said at 02:30 GMT on Thursday that it concluded the latest round of strikes against Iran.

It targeted Iranian military targets, including maritime capabilities, missile and drone storage facilities, coastal surveillance sites and air defence assets, CENTCOM said, without specifying what areas in Iran were struck.

A local official told the Mehr news agency that US missiles struck the area around a passenger terminal in Shalamcheh, a western city near the Iraqi border. Two people were killed in the attack, the deputy governor of Iran’s Khuzestan province told the state broadcaster IRIB on Thursday. Local media also reported that 11 people were injured.

Al Jazeera’s Tohid Assidi reported from Iranian capital Tehran that overnight strikes targeted at least three cities in the southwestern province of Khuzestan. This included the city of Ramshir, where an asphalt facility was reported to have been targeted.

In Hormozgan province, explosions were heard in the city of Sirik, which overlooks the Strait of Hormuz, Assidi reported.

He added that the governor confirmed an overnight attack in Bushehr on a power substation near the city’s nuclear power plant. This resulted in a few hours of power outage in the city.

IRIB also reported that explosions were heard in Iran’s Jask.

The Tasnim news agency reported that a US missile hit a location on the outskirts of the city of Andimeshk.

Two naval search and rescue vessels were hit and seriously damaged in a US attack on Iran’s Hormozgan, the ISNA news agency reported, citing the province’s Ports and Maritime Administration.

Where did Iran hit back?

Kuwait

The IRGC claimed attacks on US assets in Kuwait on Thursday.

It said it had “attacked and destroyed a large warehouse of military equipment, a Patriot missile defence system, and a hangar of American MQ9 drones” at Ali Al Salem airbase.

Addressing the Kuwaiti people, the IRGC insisted that it was the US, not Iran, that had “violated your territorial integrity and sovereignty”.

It said its attacks were aimed at US bases, territory it described as beyond the control of Kuwait’s own border guards.

“So it is America that has violated your territorial integrity and sovereignty, not us. We are attacking lands occupied by the American army, an army that knows nothing but crime,” the IRGC said.

Jordan

Later on Thursday, the IRGC claimed attacks on US assets in Jordan, saying it had “destroyed a radar of the American THAAD missile defence system with lightning strikes”.

“A Patriot system and a C-RAM radar were also targeted and destroyed, and the fuel tanks of the American base were set on fire,” it said.

The IRGC added that “a large helicopter equipment warehouse and a helicopter repair and maintenance shed were also set on fire and destroyed”.

Addressing the Jordanian people, it insisted that its actions did not violate Jordanian sovereignty, arguing that the US military presence infringes on local authority and that targeting US forces was a legal and necessary response.

What happened in the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea?

The IRGC said an explosion set a tanker on fire in the Strait of Hormuz.

In a statement carried by Iranian media, it said two other vessels quickly turned back following the explosion.

The IRGC claimed the three ships were acting under US orders and had “intended to pass through the mine-laid route south of the Strait of Hormuz”.

“The powerful IRGC Navy emphasises that the Strait of Hormuz is under our control and that as long as America’s evil deeds in the region continue, it is completely closed and no oil tanker will enter or exit [the strait],” it warned.

“Any ship that is deceived by America and intends to pass through without coordination with the Islamic Republic of Iran will suffer the same fate.”

The UK Maritime Trade Operations Centre said a ship was targeted 70 nautical miles (130km) off the Saudi coast, causing a fire on board. There was no mention of casualties among the crew.

The Houthis, meanwhile, claimed a major operation against two Saudi oil tankers in the Red Sea, called the Encelia and the Layla. The Saudi SPA news agency confirmed the Encelia was hit.

The Houthis said they targeted those two tankers with cruise and ballistic missiles as well as drones, causing huge balls of fire and devastation.

The Houthis framed the attack as part of a tit-for-tat campaign against Saudi Arabia. They are calling it a “siege-for-siege”. They said it has been 12 years since Saudi Arabia has been imposing a siege on the Yemeni people, and that it is now time for Yemen and the Houthis to respond in kind. Riyadh has rejected Houthi claims that it had besieged Yemen.