Iran Halts US Talks, Threatens to Close Bab el-Mandeb Strait

Iran suspended all communications with mediators carrying messages between Tehran and Washington and threatened to close the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, the narrow passage connecting the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden, Middle East Eye reported. The announcement, published by Iran’s semi-official Tasnim News Agency, marks a shift from the diplomatic freeze Tehran imposed earlier Sunday to an explicit threat of military action on a second critical shipping chokepoint.

The move goes beyond the halt in message exchanges that followed Israeli strikes on Lebanon. That suspension froze the diplomatic channel. This one threatens to blockade it — not at the Strait of Hormuz, where Iran’s IRGC Navy has already been restricting transit since March, but at the 20-mile-wide chokepoint at the southern end of the Red Sea through which roughly 12 percent of global seaborne trade passes daily.

Two Chokepoints, One Strategy

The Bab el-Mandeb and the Strait of Hormuz are separated by 1,500 miles of water, but Iran’s threat to close both simultaneously would create a pincer on the maritime routes that carry the bulk of Middle Eastern energy exports to global markets. Hormuz controls the exit from the Persian Gulf; Bab el-Mandeb controls the southern entrance to the Red Sea and, by extension, access to the Suez Canal.

Iran does not have the same direct naval presence at Bab el-Mandeb that it maintains at Hormuz. But its Houthi allies in Yemen have demonstrated the capacity to disrupt shipping in and around the strait repeatedly since 2023, using anti-ship missiles, drones, and sea mines to target commercial vessels. A coordinated Iranian-Houthi closure effort would not require Iran to deploy its own navy to Yemeni waters — it would require Tehran to authorize and supply an escalation by forces already positioned there.

The threat also complicates the US Navy’s posture. American carrier strike groups and destroyer escorts are concentrated in the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea to manage the Hormuz situation. A simultaneous Bab el-Mandeb threat would stretch those assets across two theaters separated by the full length of the Arabian Peninsula.

Rystad: Oil Could Hit $180 by August

The prospect of a two-chokepoint disruption arrives as energy analysts are already modeling worst-case scenarios for crude prices. Rystad Energy projected that oil could reach $180 per barrel by August under a prolonged Strait of Hormuz blockade combined with re-escalation between the US and Iran, OilPrice reported.

Rystad’s model was based on a single-chokepoint scenario — Hormuz alone. A simultaneous Bab el-Mandeb closure was not included in the baseline projection, meaning the $180 figure may understate the price impact of the strategy Iran is now signaling. If both straits were disrupted, the combined effect would remove not only Persian Gulf crude from easy transit but also Red Sea shipping lanes used by tankers carrying Saudi, Iraqi, and Emirati oil to European and Mediterranean markets.

Brent crude rose 4.7 percent on Sunday, and the S&P 500 fell 0.1 percent as Treasury yields moved higher, according to Middle East Eye. Those moves preceded the Bab el-Mandeb threat. When Asian markets open Monday, traders will be pricing not just the existing Hormuz risk but the possibility that a second waterway is about to become contested.

Trump: “We’ll Keep the Blockade”

President Trump told NBC that Iran had not notified Washington of any suspension of negotiations, saying “We’ll keep the blockade,” Middle East Eye reported. The statement suggests the administration either had not yet received word of the Tasnim announcement or was choosing to dismiss it as posturing rather than a formal diplomatic communication.

The disconnect highlights a problem that has recurred throughout the crisis: the two sides are not operating on the same information timeline or through the same channels. Iran communicates major policy shifts through its semi-official news agencies before or instead of notifying mediators. Washington learns of Iranian decisions the same way the rest of the world does — from Tasnim and Fars. The result is a negotiation in which neither side can be confident it knows the other’s current position.

Trump’s pledge to maintain the blockade — presumably the naval enforcement posture around Hormuz — also signals that Washington does not intend to offer concessions in response to the Bab el-Mandeb threat. The administration appears to view the threat as leverage to be countered rather than a red line to be accommodated.

Supply Shocks Spreading Beyond Oil

The disruption to Gulf shipping is already generating multi-commodity supply shocks that extend beyond crude oil. Energy, petrochemicals, agricultural commodities, and container shipping are all experiencing cost increases and delivery delays linked to the conflict, OilPrice reported.

Pakistan’s inflation hit 11.7 percent in May, driven substantially by oil and gas import costs inflated by the Iran conflict, according to OilPrice. Pakistan imports the bulk of its energy through Gulf shipping lanes and is among the economies most exposed to a prolonged disruption. The inflation figure illustrates how chokepoint threats translate into domestic price pressure thousands of miles from the contested waterway.

A Bab el-Mandeb closure would compound these effects by disrupting the alternative routing that some shippers have used to avoid Hormuz. Vessels that cannot transit Hormuz can still reach Mediterranean markets via the Suez Canal — but only if Bab el-Mandeb remains open. Close both, and the only remaining route from the Gulf to Europe is the Cape of Good Hope, adding roughly two weeks and significant fuel costs to every voyage.

Iran Links Lebanon, Hormuz, Now Bab el-Mandeb

Iran’s threat to close Bab el-Mandeb follows the same logic that Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi articulated earlier Sunday when he declared that any ceasefire with the United States is “unequivocally a ceasefire on all fronts, including in Lebanon,” according to the BBC. Iran warned that Israeli attacks in Lebanon threaten the ceasefire framework and that Tehran holds both Washington and Tel Aviv responsible for the consequences.

The escalation pattern is now three-layered. First, Iran froze the diplomatic channel over Israeli strikes on Lebanon. Then it linked the freeze to the broader ceasefire framework, declaring that Israeli actions in one theater void the agreement in all theaters. Now it has added a military threat on a second maritime chokepoint, expanding the geographic scope of the crisis from the Persian Gulf to the Red Sea.

Each step raises the cost of continued conflict for all parties while narrowing the diplomatic space available for a resolution. The Bab el-Mandeb threat is particularly significant because it extends Iranian leverage beyond its own territorial waters and into a waterway where the US, European navies, and regional states all have security interests and force commitments.

What To Watch

The critical variable is whether Iran’s Bab el-Mandeb threat is a negotiating signal — designed to bring Washington back to the table on more favorable terms — or an operational decision with Houthi coordination already underway. The distinction will become apparent in the next 48 to 72 hours based on whether commercial shipping in the southern Red Sea reports new targeting, mine-laying activity, or Houthi maritime advisories.

Second, oil market reaction when trading resumes. The Rystad $180 projection was a worst-case estimate under a single-chokepoint scenario. A credible two-chokepoint threat could push spot prices and futures curves beyond that range, particularly if physical traders begin bidding for alternative-route cargoes.

Third, the US naval response. If Central Command repositions assets toward Bab el-Mandeb, it will reduce the force available for Hormuz escort operations — exactly the trade-off Iran’s strategy is designed to impose. If it does not, the Bab el-Mandeb threat goes unanswered and Houthi-allied forces may interpret that as license to act.

Fourth, the cargo vessel struck by a projectile in the Gulf on Sunday has not been attributed. If that attack is linked to Iranian or Iranian-aligned forces, it would suggest the maritime escalation is already operational rather than merely rhetorical.

The conflict that began with the Strait of Hormuz now has a second front at the other end of the Arabian Peninsula. The distance between the two chokepoints is 1,500 miles. The distance between a threat and a blockade, in a crisis moving this fast, may be considerably shorter.

---

For the earlier diplomatic freeze that preceded this threat, see Iran halts US message exchange over Israeli strikes on Lebanon. For the revised deal terms Iran was weighing, see Trump sends Iran deal back for revisions as oil tops $94. For the cargo vessel strike in the Gulf, see Cargo vessel hit by projectile in Gulf near Iraq. For the Hormuz blockade status, see Iran resumes South Pars platforms as Hormuz blockade holds.