Iranians will not rush to remove (Hormuz) mines, because it will only weaken the control they have gained, two diplomats tell i24's Stein

Sourcing of this kind, two unnamed diplomats relaying Iranian intent via a regional correspondent, sits at the softer end of the spectrum and has historically been as much signal-sending as reporting; the audience is often Washington and the Gulf states as much as the press. The substantive read is that mine clearance around Hormuz has never been a quick technical exercise in past Gulf episodes: even after hostilities paused, sweeping operations have historically taken weeks to months and required international coordination, while the threat of mines rather than their confirmed presence has been enough to keep war-risk premia elevated and some tonnage rerouted or idle. The transmission channel is freight and insurance first, crude second: tanker rates and hull war-risk cover reprice before physical flows are demonstrably disrupted, and that premia historically decays slowly even after the all-clear because underwriters lag the headline. The distinction worth drawing is between mines as a laid field and mines as latent capability; the former implies a bounded clearance timeline, the latter an open-ended premium. Tells to follow are any confirmation or denial from Tehran, insurance market notices, tanker traffic data through the strait, and whether the US or others raise escort or minesweeping assets in the area, since that sequencing has marked previous de-escalations.