As tensions persist in the Strait of Hormuz, United States President Donald Trump has maintained that his military holds authority over the waterway. Despite Iranian officials insisting the passage is closed to any vessel lacking Tehran’s prior approval, and notwithstanding an active US naval blockade, the President has asserted that the strait remains open for transit. Amid these conflicting claims, the President has also issued threats against Oman, a US ally located on the opposite side of the maritime corridor from Iran.
Determining who truly controls the strait is complicated by the behavior of commercial vessels. Before the current conflict, the waterway was treated as a single passage; however, the war has effectively fractured it into two distinct zones: the northern Iranian route and the southern Omani route, which is favored by Washington. Data from the maritime intelligence firm Kpler provides a clearer picture of how ships are navigating these risks between August 1 and August 19.
During this period, 112 vessels carrying crude oil, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), and liquefied natural gas (LNG) passed through the strait. Of these, only 21 openly utilized the Iranian route, while just two formally followed the Omani route. The vast majority—89 vessels, or more than 80 percent of the oil and gas traffic—opted for “dark” or unclassified routes. This practice involves disabling a vessel’s Automatic Identification System (AIS) to mask its movements, making it difficult to confirm precise routing or determine if these ships are secretly utilizing the Omani path.
When looking at broader maritime traffic, the trend remains consistent. Kpler recorded 236 total transits through the strait between August 1 and August 19. Of these, 83 ships openly used the Iranian route, three used the Omani route, and two followed the traditional pre-war central route. Once again, the bulk of the traffic—148 ships, or more than 60 percent—chose to go dark or use unknown paths. By comparison, only 35 percent of all vessels openly navigated the Iranian route.
The prevalence of dark routing is a direct response to the military risks posed by both Iran and the US. Since the conflict began, both nations have threatened and engaged in strikes against vessels they accuse of violating their respective maritime rules. Last week, Iran fired on a Panama-flagged cargo ship it claimed was attempting to reach Iranian ports without authorization. Similarly, the US has targeted vessels it deemed suspicious; on August 11, a Navy helicopter fired two Hellfire missiles at the Panama-flagged Vela Nova, alleging the ship failed to follow orders to change course. Last month, the US also fired on an oil tanker heading toward Iran’s Kharg Island.
The United Arab Emirates has also reported significant incidents, including an August 8 missile attack on a tanker owned by the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC). ADNOC stated that 15 of its vessels have been struck by drones or missiles since the war’s inception. Beyond avoiding military targeting, experts suggest that many ships go dark to facilitate ship-to-ship cargo transfers away from prying eyes. This tactic allows some Gulf nations, including Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Kuwait, to move shipments while avoiding the scrutiny of the warring powers.
Furthermore, Iranian vessels are reportedly using the Omani route to conduct transfers that help them circumvent international sanctions. By sending shipments to Oman and altering documentation, these vessels can disguise the origin of their exports. Consequently, while the data shows that ships are clearly attempting to avoid detection, it remains difficult to definitively state which power exerts more control. The global economic impact is evident: Brent crude, which traded at $66 a barrel before the conflict, has seen significant volatility, surging past $100 on multiple occasions and reaching $119 in March. As of Thursday morning, the price stood at $92.9 per barrel.
Analysts note that if Tehran’s influence over these shipping flows is perceived to be waning, it could diminish a key source of leverage in its negotiations with the US. Ultimately, the high volume of dark transits indicates that commercial operators are prioritizing risk mitigation over adherence to the directives of either the US or Iran, suggesting that the fear of military consequences is driving maritime behavior more than any single authority’s control. The report also notes that at the same time, Trump has threatened to bomb Oman, a US ally that sits across the Strait of Hormuz from Iran – the waterway lies in the maritime territories of Iran and Oman – in an apparent bid to dissuade Muscat from striking any deal with Tehran to jointly manage the strait. The report also notes that tehran insists on the northern, Iranian route, hugging Iran’s coast near Larak Island and Qeshm Island, and feeding directly into Iranian ports and offshore terminals. The report also notes that that’s more than six out of 10 ships that passed through Hormuz in this period. The report also notes that why are so many vessels switching off their transponders. The report also notes that “Switching off transponders can reduce the visibility of a vessel’s precise location and movements, although it also creates concerns about maritime safety and transparency,” Neil Quilliam, an associate fellow at the Middle East and North Africa Programme at the UK-based think tank Chatham House, told. The report also notes that “Some operators believe the commercial and security benefits outweigh those risks under current conditions.”. The report also notes that in a statement, ADNOC said that since the beginning of the war, 15 of its vessels had been attacked by missiles and drones while transiting the strait, killing one crew member and injuring 20.
Source: Al Jazeera
