LyrArc Insights

Not covered in the media for Hormuz is the combined response of US, China, India, Japan and the European Union to find alternatives to Hormuz making it less or not relevant to oil prices and oil supplies

Iranian response to Memorandum of Understanding shows reality of 2 factions in Iran, the IRGC military faction, and the elected president Pezeshkian plus Turkey /Pakistan/ Egypt and Qatar as the second faction. With IRGC military rejecting the Memorandum on opening Hormuz and rejecting discontinuing nuclear weapons programs. This was true at the time Vance conducted negotiations and the Memorandum appears to have been accepted by IRGC only under great pressure from Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, and Qatar, and the faction under Iranian elected president Pezeshkian. Where IRGC thinking could have been to give  agreement to the Memorandum that they had no intention of keeping, as its policy on nuclear weapons remains unchanged, and its goal is to use Hormuz for leverage and extend its control of Hormuz channel. The cost of sanctions and not being able to export oil, the effect on its economy, on cost of living with rampant inflation, may be of little concern to the people who run the IRGC military who suppressed all dissent and protests in 2026. Protests across different parts of society to the deteriorating economy. How could the US respond? The US used the time of the ceasefire to create a new status quo by using open navigation of the seas as the principle behind opening and protecting the Omani side of the Hormuz for oil shipment. This is a principle accepted by all countries. There is a backup plan of the US, China, India, Japan and other countries and this is to prepare rapidly to do without Hormuz so that the economies of these nations are not affected. The US also supported efforts by Saudis and Kuwait, UAE, to increase oil exports through channels outside of Hormuz, UAE's decision to increase oil supplies and lower prices by leaving OPEC, and US creating alternative supplies for India through Venezuela. Most important is China's decision that it no longer needs the 4 million barrels of oil from Hormuz for its economy to operate using alternative supplies and increasing efficient use of its oil resources. The world is also building up oil supplies and inventories so that Iran cannot threaten a cutoff from Hormuz because all nations have made other arrangements. Attacks by Iran on oil shipping on the Omani side protected by the US breaking the principle of open navigation of the seas, can then be considered Iran disrupting an open seas navigation route which it no longer is allowed to do under international law. This is something the world public opinion would support. The NYT has been critical of the DJT action in Iran, the WSJ and other media had joined in criticism. The situation in July 2026 is that the criticism of the US by NYT and other media, and from Europe and other countries in Asia will now be muted, because the US has tried all the options and is now finding ways to be able to bypass Hormuz altogether, and a backup plan or strategy to minimize the impact on oil prices. So that oil price of $70 may be kept at level around 10-20% higher not much more as Iran's military IRGC continues to disrupt the Hormuz supplies.

Vice President Vance's attempted thaw in relations with Iran (the Memorandum) and the Iranian response in missile strikes to interrupt open navigation in Hormuz on Omani side route breaking ceasefire happens on July 8, 2026. Early on in the US strikes the focus was on Iranian underground nuclear sites with preparations for nuclear weapons. When Iran shut down the Hormuz channel to navigation the US extended this to a naval blockade. As the US bombing of military targets in Iran continued in May and June the WSJ and other media were critical of the US. DJT turned to JD Vance to get the Iranians to negotiate a ceasefire with a Memorandum of points they agreed to included a plan to have talks on nuclear issue, open up and demining the Hormuz channel, lift American naval blockade and lift American sanctions to Iranian oil exports. This WSJ Editorial Board commentary says Iran has not acted on it as it said it would - no talks on nuclear issue are started, and Iran launched missiles against shipping in Hormuz.  This WSJ editorial says Iran does not intend to open Hormuz or discontinue its nuclear weapons efforts. In this situation the only options for the US are to find alternative sources for oil for India and Japan, and China in tacit cooperation with the US to find alternative sources as well as make more efficient use of oil. China is now doing without the 4 million barrels it was getting from Hormuz and has decided to do without these supplies altogether. For the UAE and Saudis to find alternative routes to get most of the oil out, UAE to increase output outside of OPEC to reduce prices. All of these actions are taking place and the ceasefire offered a breather for that to get established creating a new situation where if Hormuz remains unopened the rest of the world will be able to go on as before without being seriously affected. Better management of overall oil supplies is already taking place, inventories are building up, so that at some point Hormuz does not affect oil prices significantly. This is the best and most realistic option and the US, China, India, Japan, the EU, are going ahead with it.

Clause 5 paragraph of the US Iran Memorandum clearly says international laws of freedom of navigation shall be respected by all parties, and the Hormuz demined opened for traffic by Iran. IRGC would not come to the agreement without inserting words that Iran would work with Omani authorites  to open the Hormuz straits shipping. The WSJ sees the additions made by IRGC in the Memorandum  show the interpretation by Iran IRGC so that it could close Hormuz when it wanted to do so. Yet freedom of navigation under international law is unequivocal and clear that no country can block a shipping channel. The US knowing that possibility existed Iran would not be opening the channel, or would disrupt the Omani route, has plan to make Hormuz not a factor in oil prices by using alternative supplies as its backup plan in coordination with China, India, Japan and other countries. Here is paragraph 5 of the Memorandum with Iran- "The traffic of commercial vessels will immediately start, and considering the need for removing the technical and military obstacles, and demining by the Islamic Republic of Iran, will be instated within 30 days." "The Islamic Republic of Iran will conduct dialog with the Sultanate of Oman, to define the future administration and maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz, in discussion with other Persian Gulf Littoral States, in line with applicable international law and the sovereign rights of coastal states of the Strait of Hormuz." This is not a careless error or overlooked by the US, it clearly states "international law and the sovereign rights of coastal states." Hormuz is significant only in the way oil supplies through the channel are supplied to China, India, Japan, and other countries, and in the way it sets oil prices based on supply and demand. The US goal is to create enough alternative supplies for India and Japan, and China for its part in cooperation with the US agreeing to do without the 4 million barrels a day it got through Hormuz. UAE has not used about 0.7 million barrels a day and Saudis not used about 5 million barrels a day in the past of their pipelines that are outside of Hormuz. This gives a total of of China's 4 million barrels a day and on the demand side Saudi UAE combined 5.7 MMbpd for a total of 9 million MMbpd or 9 million barrels a day that reduces dependence on Hormuz. Even if 80% of Hormuz oil of 20 million barrels a day is blocked again, this will mean the offset from China doing without Hormuz and the pipelines providing about half of the Hormuz supplies. Of the remaining 6 million barrels a day needed half could come from increased drilling for oil production (in Venezuela and other places) and half from conservation in the world outside of China- the US, EU, India, Africa, Latin America. With this covering 16 million barrels a day the world could still cope without 80% or most of the Hormuz supplies in the event Iran threatens to shut off Hormuz again. Even the trickle coming out of Hormuz of 4  million barrels a day with disruption could be replaced from the petroleum reserves of the US, EU, Japan, India and other countries. In this way the US policy is to bypass Hormuz completely and use the period of the ceasefire to plan accordingly, knowing the IRGC never wanted to honor the Memorandum for opening Hormuz, it was only pressured to do so and would go back to its original intent. UAE plans new pipelines and overland routes. It would also bring down oil prices after a small surge from $70 a barrel to $80- $85 a barrel, before coming down again as additional supplies are created and demand side addressed through acceleration of renewable energy goals and EV's.