US CENTCOM rejects IRGC claims that the Strait of Hormuz is closed and that Iran has full control over it, while it stated that traffic is flowing through the strait carrying commercial goods and energy supplies including 20mln bbls of crude

Claims of closure or control over the Strait of Hormuz surface periodically from Iranian military sources, most often during episodes of elevated tension, and the established pattern is that official US denials accompanied by evidence of continued traffic have tended to deflate the risk premium faster than the original claim built it. The distinction that matters is between rhetorical assertion and physical interdiction: a closure claim alone historically produces a brief spike in crude and in freight and insurance costs for Gulf transits, while actual disruption to tanker movement is what sustains repricing, and the headline here points to the former. Roughly a fifth of globally traded crude transits the strait, so even unverified claims carry an outsized initial bid, which is why the pace and specificity of the rebuttal, including confirmation that cargoes are moving, is itself part of the story. Actors on both sides have prior form: Iranian elements have issued similar statements in past standoffs without following through, and US military communications have generally erred toward downplaying disruption. Worth watching are tanker tracking data, war risk insurance premia on Gulf loadings, and any change in naval escort posture, since those are the channels through which rhetoric has historically either faded or hardened into a supply story.