Reopening the strait does not mean making it safe. The key of the analysis is direct. The strait can be declared open, but that does not imply that it is navigable under normal conditions.
Donald Trump has publicly pressured Iran to allow passage without threats. The Iranian response has been to warn of the possible placement of naval mines in the Persian Gulf. According to the analysis, U.S. intelligence services consider the presence of this type of devices in the area probable.
The problem is not political. It is physical. A strait with mines cannot be used normally until it is cleared. And that process is not immediate.
The precedent of Suez: a year to clean what had been opened in days
The closest case is the Suez Canal after the conflicts between Egypt and Israel.
Egypt decided to reopen it, but the effective reopening required an international deployment led by the United States, with specialized ships, helicopters and deactivation teams. The process lasted approximately one year.
The difference between political decision and real operability is that.
The Strait of Hormuz presents a comparable scenario if the presence of mines is confirmed.
Why naval mines change the entire scenario
The mines are not a visible nor immediate weapon. They do not generate media impact, but they have a high strategic effectiveness.
They are devices that remain on the seabed or anchored, awaiting contact. They do not distinguish targets and do not require control once deployed.
Its main effect is not only the direct damage. It is the uncertainty.
A single impact on an oil tanker can cause sinking or serious damage below the waterline, with significant economic and environmental consequences. But even without impact, the risk is sufficient to slow down traffic.
Shipping companies do not operate if there are no security guarantees.
The real risk: the blockade without formal closure
The analysis points to a key element. It is not necessary to officially close the strait to block it.
It is enough that the possibility of mines exists for traffic to reduce or stop.
This turns the strait into an economic pressure point without the need for a direct confrontation.
The capacity to clear mines is limited and slow
Eliminating mines is a complex task. Traditionally it has required specialized ships and manual operations with divers.
Today unmanned systems capable of detecting and neutralizing devices are used, but the process remains slow. Water hinders visibility and locating small objects on the seabed is technically demanding.
The analysis further underlines an additional problem. The United States and its allies have fewer resources dedicated to this task than in the past.
After World War II, the U.S. Navy had hundreds of mine-clearing ships. Currently it has a much more reduced capacity.
New technology, efficacy yet unproven
Part of the current response is based on unmanned platforms and on new naval warfare systems.
The problem is that many of these technologies have not been tested in real combat.
The analysis mentions the littoral combat ships (LCS) as an example of this transition. These ships have been designed to integrate mine countermeasures capabilities, but have accumulated technical problems and operational limitations.
This reduces the effective capacity in a scenario like that of the Gulf.
A moment of operational weakness for the West
The context is not favorable. Western navies are in a process of technological transition, with fewer traditional units and new systems still in development. This coincides with a more unstable geopolitical scenario.
The result is a lower immediate response capability to a threat such as naval mining.
Europe as a necessary actor in an eventual cleansing
Historically, mine clearance has been a specialty more developed in Europe than in the United States.
Countries like the United Kingdom, France, the Netherlands, or Belgium have maintained specific capabilities in this area, although they have also reduced their means in recent years.
The analysis suggests that any operation in Hormuz would have to be international, with European participation.