Iran vows to keep Strait of Hormuz closed as the country’s new supreme leader delivered his first public statement since assuming power, signaling that Tehran is prepared to maintain pressure on global energy routes while continuing its confrontation with the United States and Israel.
In remarks broadcast on state television, Mojtaba Khamenei said the strategic waterway should remain shut as long as the conflict persists. His statement marks the first major indication of how Iran’s new leadership intends to manage the war that erupted following the assassination of his father.
The message came only days after the death of former supreme leader Ali Khamenei, who was killed during the opening phase of the US-Israeli military campaign against Iran. Mojtaba Khamenei was swiftly appointed as his successor, a move that consolidated power within Iran’s clerical establishment during a moment of extreme geopolitical tension.
In the statement read by a news presenter on state television, the new leader said the closure of the Strait of Hormuz should remain part of Iran’s wartime strategy.
“The lever of closing the Strait of Hormuz must certainly continue to be used,” the statement said.
The comments underline how central the waterway has become to Tehran’s strategic calculations. Control over the strait provides Iran with one of the most powerful economic pressure points in the global energy system.
The Strait of Hormuz is widely regarded as the most important maritime oil corridor in the world. The narrow passage connects the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and serves as the main export route for several major energy producers.
Every day, millions of barrels of crude oil pass through the strait, transported by tankers bound for markets in Asia, Europe and beyond.
Countries such as Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Iraq rely heavily on the waterway to ship oil and natural gas to international buyers.
When Iran vows to keep Strait of Hormuz closed, the implications extend far beyond regional politics. Any sustained disruption to shipping in the strait can ripple through global markets, driving up energy prices and increasing economic uncertainty.
The latest warning from Tehran has therefore drawn close attention from governments and financial markets worldwide.
Energy markets have already begun responding to the possibility that the conflict could disrupt supplies from the Persian Gulf.
On Thursday afternoon in London, the global benchmark Brent crude traded just below the psychologically important level of $100 per barrel.
The price surge reflects fears that tankers may face growing risks in the region if the waterway remains closed or if attacks against shipping intensify.
Higher oil prices have the potential to fuel inflation across the global economy. Transportation costs rise, industrial production becomes more expensive and consumer prices often follow.
Economists warn that prolonged instability around the Strait of Hormuz could force central banks to reconsider monetary policy decisions, particularly if inflation begins accelerating again.
For this reason, the statement that Iran vows to keep Strait of Hormuz closed is not only a geopolitical message but also an economic signal with global consequences.
Beyond the issue of shipping, Mojtaba Khamenei also suggested that Iran could broaden the scope of the conflict if the war continues.
In the same statement, he said Iranian authorities had been studying the possibility of opening new fronts against their adversaries.
According to the statement, Iranian planners are examining areas where their opponents might be particularly vulnerable.
“Studies have been conducted on opening other fronts where the enemy has little experience and would be highly vulnerable,” the message said.
The statement did not specify where those additional fronts might emerge, but analysts say Iran has multiple options across the region.
Iran maintains influence through allied groups and military networks in several countries across the Middle East.
Missile and drone strikes linked to Tehran have already targeted sites in Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates since the war began.
These attacks have included both ballistic missiles and long-range drones aimed at energy infrastructure and military facilities.
Although many of those weapons have been intercepted by regional air defense systems, the continuing strikes have added to instability across the region.
While military tensions continue to rise, diplomatic channels have been quietly working to prevent the situation from deteriorating further.
Several countries have attempted to mediate between Iran and its adversaries in hopes of reopening the Strait of Hormuz and reducing the risk of broader escalation.
Among the most active mediators have been Oman and Turkey, with support from European governments.
Saudi Arabia has also played a role in the diplomatic efforts, despite being directly affected by Iranian missile attacks during the conflict.
However, people familiar with the negotiations say progress has been limited.
Back-channel discussions in recent days have not produced any concrete agreement to reopen the waterway.
Diplomatic momentum was further complicated after Iranian strikes repeatedly targeted infrastructure in Qatar. Following those attacks, Doha reportedly stepped back from its involvement in the mediation process.
The stalled negotiations underscore how difficult it has become to find a path toward de-escalation.
If Iran vows to keep Strait of Hormuz closed for an extended period, the economic consequences could be substantial.
Shipping disruptions in the region are already affecting global bond markets and raising fears of renewed inflation.
Higher energy prices often spread quickly through the global economy, increasing costs for businesses and households alike.
Economists warn that persistent supply disruptions could prompt central banks to tighten monetary policy in response to rising inflation.
Such measures could slow economic growth in several major economies.
The situation also poses challenges for countries that rely heavily on imported energy.
Many Asian economies, including Japan and South Korea, depend on oil shipments that pass through the Strait of Hormuz.
Any sustained closure would force them to seek alternative supply routes, potentially at higher costs.
US response focuses on security concerns
The United States has continued to emphasize security objectives in its response to the crisis.
US President Donald Trump said that preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons remains the primary goal of American policy.
Shortly before Khamenei’s statement was broadcast, Trump addressed the issue in a message posted on social media.
He said the strategic objective of stopping Iran from becoming a nuclear power outweighed concerns about rising oil prices.
“Stopping Iran from having nuclear weapons and being a threat is of far greater interest and importance to me,” he wrote.
Trump also pointed out that the United States has become one of the world’s largest energy producers, suggesting that higher oil prices could benefit the American economy.
“The United States is the largest oil producer in the world,” he wrote. “When oil prices go up, we make a lot of money.”
The statement from Mojtaba Khamenei suggests that Iran’s new leadership intends to maintain a confrontational approach during the conflict.
Rather than signaling a willingness to compromise, the message emphasized resilience and strategic pressure against Iran’s adversaries.
For analysts watching the region, the declaration that Iran vows to keep Strait of Hormuz closed represents a significant signal about the direction of the war.
It indicates that Tehran believes it can use its geographic and military advantages to impose economic costs on its opponents.
Whether that strategy succeeds will depend on many factors, including the resilience of global energy markets and the effectiveness of international diplomacy.
What remains clear is that the Strait of Hormuz has once again become one of the most critical flashpoints in global geopolitics.
As the conflict continues to evolve, developments around the narrow waterway will likely remain at the center of both military planning and economic debate worldwide.
