Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson says Strait of Hormuz security cannot be guaranteed while US aggression and the naval blockade continue, Tehran Times reports

Conditional threats of this kind from Iranian officials over the Strait of Hormuz have recurred across multiple cycles of US-Iran tension, and the established pattern is that rhetoric alone reprices crude modestly while any actual interference with tanker traffic is what moves the market durably, since a large share of seaborne oil and LNG transits the strait and there is limited spare pipeline bypass capacity. The mechanism is freight, insurance and prompt physical differentials rather than outright supply loss: in past episodes of elevated tension, war-risk premiums and tanker rates have risen first, with dated Brent and front-month spreads reacting before flat price. The wording here is conditional and attributed to a ministry spokesperson rather than the IRGC naval command, and precedent suggests statements from the operational arm of the state carry more weight than diplomatic framing. What distinguishes noise from signal in this kind of sequence is whether rhetoric is followed by vessel seizures, harassment incidents, or guidance to shippers, each of which has historically been the trigger for sustained repricing. The relevant follow-ons are any change in tanker insurance terms for Gulf loadings, shipping company routing decisions, and whether other Gulf producers or the US naval presence in the region adjust posture.