IRGC reiterates that the Strait of Hormuz will reopen when US honours its commitments under Islamabad MoU, Press TV reports

Conditional statements of this kind are standard fare in Gulf maritime standoffs: the reopening is framed not as unilateral de-escalation but as contingent on the counterparty's compliance, which keeps leverage intact while signalling that a negotiated track exists. The operative channel is crude and products transit through Hormuz, where even the threat of closure has historically shown up first in war-risk insurance premia, VLCC freight rates and the front of the crude curve via time spreads, rather than in outright flat price, since physical flows have on past occasions continued even amid hostile rhetoric. The distinction worth drawing is between a statement of conditions, which this is, and an actual resumption of unimpeded transit, confirmed by tanker tracking and the withdrawal of naval or IRGC escort posture; the former has tended to fade as a market input unless followed by the latter. The reference to a named understanding between the parties suggests an existing diplomatic framework, and prior episodes of this kind have played out as extended sequences of reciprocal claims and counter-claims, with each headline retraced once the absence of follow-through became clear. The tells are whether Washington acknowledges the same conditions, whether any timeline is attached, and whether insurers and charterers begin to normalise Gulf transits. As an IRGC line carried by state-affiliated media, it reflects the negotiating position of one side rather than a settled outcome.