On February 28, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps of Iran warned ships in the Gulf waters via very high frequency (VHF) radio that "no ships are allowed to pass through the Strait of Hormuz," according to an official from the European Union naval escort mission "Aspides." The official stated that Iran has not yet officially confirmed this ban, but regional tensions have already triggered rapid pricing in the shipping and energy markets.
Reuters reported on February 28, citing industry sources, that after the United States and Israel conducted strikes on Iran, various oil and gas companies, traders, and tanker operators have suspended or delayed crude oil, refined oil, and liquefied natural gas (LNG) shipments through the Strait of Hormuz. Satellite images show some vessels waiting near the waters of Fujairah in the UAE. On the same day, the British Navy stated that the warning issued by Iran via radio is not legally binding, but advised ships to "proceed cautiously"; the U.S. Navy said it could not guarantee the safety of navigation in the Gulf region.
Strait Disturbance Amplifies "Channel-Type Shock"
The Strait of Hormuz connects the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman and is a crucial passage for Gulf oil-producing countries' exports. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), oil flow through this strait averaged about 20 million barrels per day in 2024, with about 20% of global LNG trade also transported through this passage in the same year. Market analysts believe that the core risk this time lies not in the supply gap of a single oil-producing country, but in the synchronized compression of shipping, insurance, financing, and shipping scheduling due to "channel-type shock," which temporarily raises the liquidity premium of crude oil and transmits through the spot premium and monthly structures to end product oil and chemical prices.
Oil Prices Rise with Risk Premium, Brent Approaches $80
Price expectations have been adjusted. On February 27, the settlement price of April Brent contracts was $72.48 per barrel, up 2.45% on the day; WTI settlement price was $67.02 per barrel, up 2.78%. On March 1, Reuters reported that due to expectations of escalating conflict and transportation disruptions, oil prices once surged by about 10% with Brent approaching $80 per barrel in over-the-counter trading, and some institutions raised target ranges under extreme scenarios.
Barclays noted in a report in late February that if there is a substantial supply disruption, Brent could reach near $80 per barrel; the bank also warned that if tensions do not lead to actual "supply cutoffs," the risk premium of about $3-5 per barrel in oil prices could quickly disappear.
Shipping Insurance Costs Rise, Excess Supply Expectations Facing Repricing
Marginal changes in insurance and capacity are also accelerating. Asian media quoted insurance market information stating that war risk quotes for routes related to the Middle East could rise by up to about 50%, meaning that the premium calculated in basis points further expands, weakening the elasticity of immediate shipping capacity supply. People close to the shipping industry say that if premium increases and stricter underwriting continue, shipowners are more inclined to delay entry into sensitive waters, thus amplifying short-term supply chain friction.
In terms of supply and demand fundamentals, some institutions still expected a generally loose global market by 2026 before the escalation of conflict. In its monthly Short-Term Energy Outlook, the EIA expects global crude oil inventory increases to average about 3.1 million barrels per day by 2026. Against this backdrop, the current market repricing is more focused on the duration of the "excess supply" narrative being interrupted by channel risks rather than a one-way correction of the long-term equilibrium price.
OPEC+ Slightly Increases Output to Counter Uncertainty
As tensions disrupt transportation, OPEC+ announced on March 1 a slight increase in production by 206,000 barrels per day starting in April. Analysts say this measure is closer to "signal management" for stable expectations, releasing marginal increments to ease supply concerns on the one hand, while retaining policy flexibility to avoid overusing idle capacity during periods of rising uncertainty, thus leaving room for potential valuation recovery and risk premium reduction thereafter.
