Iran states: Safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz is possible if three conditions are met, but shipping companies may not agree.

Iran sent an official letter to the IMO on March 24, announcing that ships not flying U.S. or Israeli flags and not involved in military actions can safely pass through the Strait of Hormuz. The conditions sound reasonable, but data showing 800 stranded oil tankers and empty shipping lanes tell a different story.
(Background: Bitcoin surged to $70,800, with 87,000 traders liquidated for $230 million, marking 46 consecutive days of “extreme fear,” the longest streak since FTX.)
(Additional context: JPMorgan CEO states that Iran conflict could lead to long-term stability in the Middle East, but in the short term, foreign investment may dry up.)

On March 24, Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs formally notified the International Maritime Organization (IMO) that the Strait of Hormuz is reopened to “non-hostile ships,” provided three conditions are met: not participating in or supporting military actions against Iran, not flying U.S. or Israeli flags, and fully complying with Iran’s announced safety regulations.

Kpler analyst Dimitris Ampatzidis bluntly explains the political intent behind this declaration: Iran is signaling to the IMO that it has not officially blockaded the strait. But the precision of diplomatic language is key—“not officially blockading” and “ships can actually pass safely” are two entirely different things.

Who Believes, Who’s Waiting

The New York Times observes that it’s uncertain whether this declaration will persuade major shipping companies to resume transit. The uncertainty is justified: shipping companies face not just diplomatic statements but also insurance underwriters pricing war risk premiums and assessing crew safety.

Currently, only countries with geopolitical interests different from the West are willing to take the first step. India has successfully sent two oil tankers through, becoming the most convincing post-war example. Five European countries plus Japan have expressed willingness to “contribute” to securing the strait, but actual escort operations are still a ways off.

Iran’s three conditions effectively highlight a clear geopolitical divide: Asian countries (China, India, South Korea, etc.)’s tankers theoretically meet the criteria, while Western and Israeli vessels do not.

Numbers Are More Honest Than Declarations

Before the conflict, over 100 ships transited the Strait of Hormuz daily, carrying about 20 million barrels of oil—one-fifth of global oil demand—with annual trade worth around $600 billion.

Since the war began on February 28, these numbers have sharply declined: by March 17, only 21 tankers successfully passed; in the first two weeks of March, about 90 ships, including non-oil vessels, transited. Meanwhile, 17 ships in the Middle East region have been attacked, and 7 crew members have died. About 800 oil tankers remain stranded on either side of the strait, awaiting assessment.

Alternative pipelines are also underwhelming: current capacity of existing alternatives is only 6.85 million barrels per day, less than half of the normal daily flow through the strait. Despite Iran’s fluctuating stance, the persuasive power of a reopening still only exists at the level of a diplomatic letter.