60-Day Ceasefire at Hormuz: Structural Game Between Crude Transport Costs and Geopolitical Volatility

The partial restoration of transit through the Strait of Hormuz has not eased the global shipping industry. As of June 23, 162 fully loaded crude oil tankers with AIS signals were stranded in the strait and surrounding waters, carrying approximately 120 million barrels of crude. If 'dark ships' with disabled positioning signals are included, the actual backlog is larger. Current daily vessel transits remain below 60% of pre-conflict levels, with shipowners adopting cautious re-entry strategies, creating a congestion stalemate where vessels 'can go but dare not, want to go but have to queue.'

Event Background: Fragile Balance Behind the Ceasefire

The 60-day US-Iran temporary ceasefire took effect in late June, gradually restoring vessel traffic through the Hormuz Strait. As the global energy transport chokepoint, the strait handles nearly 20% of global crude oil seaborne trade. International crude prices fell sharply, with WTI closing at $73.21/barrel and Brent at $76.85/barrel, both down about 1% on the day; the two crude benchmarks fell nearly 16% cumulatively in June, rapidly eroding the geopolitical risk premium built up since the conflict began.

However, multiple institutional analysts caution that the current price correction is more short-term sentiment release than a fundamental reversal. Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Lee Klaskow noted that the 60-day temporary ceasefire agreement is extremely fragile, with deep disagreements among Middle Eastern parties unresolved, and the geopolitical situation could deteriorate at any time.

Industry Impact: Dual Constraints of Insurance Costs and Operational Strategies

High war risk insurance premiums are the core obstacle preventing shipowners from fully returning to the Strait of Hormuz. Current war risk insurance rates along the strait, while down from conflict peaks, remain at around 1% of vessel hull value—10 times the pre-conflict rate of 0.1%. For a VLCC, a single transit of the strait incurs war risk premiums of up to $2 million, significantly eroding shipping margins.

Shipowner operational strategies have turned conservative. Some smaller operators choose to reroute via the Cape of Good Hope to avoid the strait, increasing voyage distances, fuel, and crew costs. Major shipping companies have deployed only a few vessels on trial runs, reluctant to commit large fleet capacity to the Persian Gulf. As long as war risk premiums fail to return to normal, strait shipping cannot restore pre-conflict efficiency, and global crude transport turnover will remain impaired.

From a pricing perspective, the recent crude price decline has already priced in the short-term transit recovery. If the strait experiences renewed attacks, channel controls, or diplomatic escalation, the pace of accumulated crude outflow will be interrupted again, and risk premiums could rebound sharply. For the textile-chemical fiber supply chain, where PTA and polyester feedstock prices are highly correlated with crude, refineries and traders should not use short-term price drops to judge long-term procurement costs.

Practical Recommendations

For Procurement Managers - Monitor crude futures term structure. If near-month spreads widen in contango, it signals market pricing of short-term oversupply, suggesting increasing spot raw material inventory. If spreads shift to backwardation, be alert to geopolitical risk returning to push up forward costs. - Negotiate short-term floating freight contracts with shipowners experienced in Persian Gulf routes to secure some capacity and avoid demurrage spikes from congestion.

For Foreign Trade Enterprises - In export orders involving Middle Eastern routes, clearly define in contracts the allocation of additional costs such as war risk premiums and demurrage to avoid bearing all risks alone. - Use futures instruments to hedge price volatility of raw materials like PTA and polyester filament, for example by buying call options to protect cost ceilings.