They all said Hormuz closure would be brief. What if they were wrong?

onecommentman

Fine article, pearl-clutching tone (the world economies will not collapse if 20% of oil and gas maritime trade is blocked, but many specific industries in specific countries would be very significantly annoyed/impacted in the middle term). But an absolutely absurd title. There is no citation in the article to anyone, much less “they all said”, who said a Hormuz closure would be brief. And I’d expect “brief” to be defined in somewhere in the article, and it isn’t. Expect better from Lloyd’s. Are they this sloppy in their underwriting? This topic doesn’t need click-bait, it’s important enough. This blockade scenario had been identified and studied for several decades by major industrial powers, and contingency plans and stockpiling has been part and parcel of industrial planning by those powers. It’s orders of magnitude less globally impactful than any scenarios involving nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles in that “comic opera/snuff film” the world calls the Middle East.

dzink

Putin’s war ambitions profit most from the scare around Hormuz. His sanctions get removed to provide alternative supply, he can charge exorbitant prices, and he gets leverage. Since he is also providing targeting information for Iran to shoot at, it feels like this is an avatar joystick war for him to distract from his Ukraine disaster.

Animats

It's not a big threat to the US. The US is a net oil exporter, has the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and, if absolutely necessary, Trump could make up with Canada so those oil imports restart. Taiwan, Japan, and Korea, though - totally dependent on imports for oil. Something that most pundits have missed: unlike all other US wars since Korea, the US can't end this war by pulling out. Iran, unlike all US combat opponents from Vietnam to Venezuela, has the demonstrated ability to strike well beyond its borders. This war isn't over until both sides say it's over.

LAC-Tech

My predictions for the end of this war: - The USA eventually declares some arbitrary "victory" condition. - Iran will be left even poorer, and much less able to defend itself conventionally, but will remain under the same regime. Very likely they give up cooperating with atomic energy inspectors and do what North Korea did to a acquire weapons. - Israel's ability to dictate US foreign and military policy will be degraded long term. What many commentators do not see is how anti-Israel younger consevatives trend in the US now. It will be decades or before a serious anti-Israel republican candidate will be fielded, but it is inevitable, and even your typical greatest-ally-wall-kissers will have to moderate themselves. Will be very interesting to see what the mid terms bring. Some on the American right are already talking about voting democrat to protest - MAGA was specifically sold to them as an antidote to necon middle eatern entanglements.

standeven

China’s move toward solar and wind seems more prescient than ever.

zmmmmm

I think the real threat is that if you tip the Iranian conflict over into asymmetrical warfare, then nobody can stop it - ever. It seems to be almost the intent with the US and Israel especially announcing explicit intent to keep removing anybody who attempts to form a system of government. So you'll have a permanently aggrieved population with nothing to lose saturated with know-how and materials for building missiles and drones who will just keep taking pot shots at ships and possibly commercial airliners. They don't have to "close" the straight - just make it hazardous enough that it becomes permanently very risky to sail through there. They can go dormant for 3 months and then send 30 drones at a single ship. I'm not sure who in the strategic planning decided that no system of government for 90 million people was a good idea, but it seems quite insane to me.