LIVE German 2025 Election Results as they come in and analysi on who will be the next German Chancellor.

When are the German Elections?

The Elections are on Sunday the 23rd of Feb 2025

Why are they having a snap election?

The German coalition government failed a no confidence vote

Do Germans vote?

Germans vote in big numbers, usually as high 70+ percent voter turnout

Trump faces diplomatic fallout as Vatican cancels planned visit amid rift

Get you up to speed: Trump faces diplomatic fallout as Vatican cancels planned visit amid rift

Donald Trump expressed a desire to be Pope after the death of Pope Francis, stating, “I’d like to be pope. That would be my No.1 choice.” Following this, American-born Pope Leo XIV now occupies the Chair of St Peter, amid escalating tensions between Washington and the Vatican.

According to a War Department official, the characterisation of the January meeting between Pentagon and Vatican officials as confrontational is “highly exaggerated and distorted.” Pope Leo XIV has reportedly declined an invitation to attend events for the United States’ 250th anniversary and instead plans to visit Lampedusa, a significant entry point for migrants.

The Pope, Leo XIV, has snubbed Donald Trump’s invitation to attend the nation’s 250th anniversary events in favour of visiting Lampedusa on July 4th. Meanwhile, the Vatican is concerned that the ongoing Iran conflict threatens Christians in south Lebanon.

Donald Trump v The Pope: Who will come out on top? | News World

Trump faces diplomatic fallout as Vatican cancels planned visit amid rift
In the blue corner we have America’s first-ever Pope, and in the Red corner America First’s Donald Trump (Picture: Getty)

Donald Trump has tangled himself in an almighty rift with God’s representative on Earth – The Pope.

Upon hearing of the death of Pope Francis, the President told reporters, ‘I’d like to be pope. That would be my No.1 choice.’

Instead, American-born Pope Leo XIV now occupies the Chair of St Peter. Despite this, and amid the Iran war, relations between Washington and the Vatican appear to be reaching a breaking point.

Trump, who also said only his own ‘morality’ can stop him, has still constantly been looking to the Vatican for its approval for his designs on the world.

A fired-up member of Team Trump dredged up a 700-year-old threat to Pope Leo after called the President’s promise to wipe out Iranian civilisation ‘truly unacceptable’.

One Vatican official told The Free Press, that Cardinal Christophe Pierre – Pope Leo XIV’s ambassador to the United States was summoned to a secret meeting at the Pentagon in January.

Sign up for all of the latest stories

President Donald Trump speaks with reporters during a news conference in the James Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House, Monday, April 6, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)
Donald Trump is in a rift with, of all people, the Pope (Picture: AP)

There Under Secretary of War for Policy, Elbridge Colby, delivered to the Cardinal what was described ‘as a lecture’.

Colby and his team told him America has the military power to do whatever it wants in the world. And the Catholic Church had better fall in line.

At the fiery meeting, one US official reportedly invoked the Avignon Papacy, where the French pope fled violence in Rome to take up residency in Côte d’Azur in the 14th Century.

Other nations denigrated the move as the ‘Babylonian Captivity’, damaging the prestige and supposed independence of the papacy.

The move led to the Great Western Schism where three rival Popes vied for power nearly causing the downfall of the Catholic Church.

The fallout of the disastrous meeting led the Vatican to cancel a planned trip to the US on Independence Day.

But the Pope doesn’t seem to have been particularly bothered by the furore and was recently pictured spinning a basketball with the Harlem Globetrotters.

In a move that will infuriate the White House further, Leo urged people to contact their political leaders and congressional representatives to ask them, tell them to work for peace and to reject war.’

This photo taken and handout on April 8, 2026 by The Vatican Media shows Pope Leo XIV meeting with members of the Harlem Globetrotters at the end of the weekly audience in The Vatican. (Photo by Simone Risoluti / VATICAN MEDIA / AFP via Getty Images) / RESTRICTED TO EDITORIAL USE - MANDATORY CREDIT
Pope Leo XIV showing off his God given talents at spinning a basketball
(Picture: AFP)

‘We have a worldwide economic crisis, an energy crisis, (a) situation in the Middle East of great instability, which is only provoking more hatred throughout the world,’ he said.

He said the message to political leaders should be: ‘Come back to the table, let’s talk, let’s look for solutions in a peaceful way and let’s remember especially the innocent children, the elderly, sick, so many people who have already become or will become victims of this continued warfare.’

The Vatican also fears that the Iran conflict has spread to south Lebanon, threatening Christians who are an important protector of the church in the Middle East.

Trump’s team have been desperate for a visit from America’s first Pope, but he has now reportedly snubbed his invitation to attend the nation’s 250th anniversary events.

Instead of spending July 4th in his homeland, the Pope will visit Lampedusa, a small Mediterranean island that has become an entry point for African migrants attempting to reach Europe.

When contacted, the War Department sought to downplay reports of the rift.

‘The Free Press’s characterisation of the meeting is highly exaggerated and distorted. The meeting between Pentagon and Vatican officials was a respectful and reasonable discussion.

‘We have nothing but the highest regard and welcome continued dialogue with the Holy See,’ a War Department official said.

But the Vatican could hand Donald Trump another bloody nose by meeting with Barack Obama – who recently was giddy on a podcast, insisting the only person he would like to meet on Planet Earth is Pope Leo, without hesitation.

And with the Pope’s term in office usually only ending in death, and Trump’s calls for a third term, so far, denied – there can only be one winner on the international stage.

Comment now

Comments

Add WTX as a Preferred Source on Google

Add as preferred source

US vice-president JD Vance endorses Viktor Orbán ahead of Hungarian elections

US vice-president JD Vance endorses Viktor Orbán ahead of Hungarian elections

Vance’s Endorsement
US Vice-President JD Vance visited Hungary to endorse Viktor Orbán ahead of elections and accused the EU of undermining the country’s economy through frozen funding.
Funding Implications
Frozen EU funds amount to at least €17 billion, equivalent to roughly 8% of Hungary’s GDP, influencing the political landscape ahead of key elections.
Commission Response
“In Europe, elections are the sole choice of citizens,” stated Thomas Regnier, spokesperson for the European Commission, emphasising the importance of mitigating risks to protect democracies.

Key developments

US Vice-President JD Vance endorsed Viktor Orbán ahead of Hungary’s elections, alleging that the EU is “trying to destroy” Hungary’s economy and pushing for election interference.

Vance’s claims about the EU’s influence coincide with a freeze of €17 billion in EU funds, linked to Hungary’s failure to implement necessary reforms against corruption and judicial independence.

Opposition parties in Hungary are campaigning to unlock these funds, as their release hinges on meeting the agreed reform conditions, a situation comparable to Poland’s prior funding issues over judicial reforms.

Fact-checking JD Vance’s claims that Brussels is ‘harming Hungary’

US vice-president JD Vance endorses Viktor Orbán ahead of Hungarian elections

A handful of days before Hungarians vote in elections that pit long-time leader Viktor Orbán against pro-European opposition candidate Péter Magyar, US Vice-President JD Vance travelled to Hungary to endorse Orbán and critique the EU.

Vance, giving a press conference beside Orbán, made a number of claims about the European Union, accusing it of “trying to destroy” Hungary’s economy, sabotaging the country’s energy independence and “driving up costs for Hungarian consumers”.

He didn’t hold back as he accused the EU of “one of the worst examples of election interference I have ever seen or ever even read about” during his trip to Budapest.

But several of Vance’s claims are misleading. EU News’ fact-checking team, The Cube, looked at the three biggest ones.

Is the EU trying to ‘destroy’ Hungary’s economy?

According to Vance, Brussels is “trying to destroy the economy of Hungary”.

But there is no evidence that the European Union is deliberately targeting Hungary’s economy, which remains a beneficiary of EU funding and integrated in the European single market.

What Vance may have been referring to is the fact that, as of early 2026, Brussels has frozen at least €17 billion worth of funds allocated to Hungary as part of the EU budget, over Budapest’s failure to implement sufficient reforms to combat long-standing rule of law breaches and misuse of public funds.

Some of these reforms include stemming corruption, improving judicial independence and public procurement processes.

The frozen funds are a central issue in Hungary’s election, with opposition parties pledging to unlock the money, which is estimated to be the equivalent of roughly 8% of Hungary’s GDP.

The conditions applied to Hungary are agreed by all member states and are designed to protect the EU budget, rather than punish specific economies.

It is also not permanent, and the funds can be released if Hungary meets the agreed reform conditions. Previously, Poland saw billions in EU recovery funds delayed over concerns about judicial reforms, although this money was eventually unlocked.

Is Brussels trying to make Hungary ‘less energy independent’?

Vance claimed the EU is undermining Hungary’s energy independence and increasing consumer costs, but the reality is more complex.

The remarks appear to refer to the EU’s push to diversify away from Russian crude oil, an endeavour that began after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and that Hungary seems hesitant to undertake.

It also appears to refer to a dispute around the Druzhba pipeline — a key supplier of Russian oil to Hungary — which has been damaged since early 2026.

The damage has sparked a dispute between Hungary and Slovakia on one side and Ukraine on the other, with Budapest alleging Ukrainian sabotage and Kyiv blaming a Russian airstrike.

The European Union has sent an independent “fact-finding mission” to ascertain the cause of the damage.

Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the EU has sanctioned Russian energy, including a ban on seaborne oil. However, Hungary — along with Slovakia and Bulgaria — has been granted exemptions to continue pipeline imports.

Hungary remains highly dependent on Russian oil, which accounted for around 90% of its imports by 2025, according to the Center for the Study of Democracy (CSD), an independent think-tank based in Bulgaria.

In contrast, as part of long-term sanctions against Russia, European Union countries have all sought to diversify their fuel sources to wean EU economies off Russian oil.

But Hungary’s continued reliance on Russian crude is complex and controversial. Orbán argues that switching away from the Druzhba pipeline would raise costs, but critics argue that Hungary has been slow to diversify despite having viable alternative routes that could supply the country with non-Russian crude.

Whilst Russian crude is indeed roughly 20% cheaper than alternatives, the CSD’s analysis shows that this did not necessarily translate to lower prices for consumers, especially compared to neighbours in the Czech Republic, which reduced its imports of Russian crude.

Despite repeated claims that Russian imports would ensure low prices and energy security in Hungary, recent disruptions to the Druzhba pipeline, alongside turmoil in the Middle East, suggest the country has not benefited from its reliance on discounted Russian crude. Fuel prices in Hungary have risen in line with the rest of Europe amid global market instability.

Is Brussels dictating social media content for Hungarian voters?

Finally, Vance suggested that Brussels was directing social media content shown to Hungarian voters, implying EU interference in elections.

The vice president appeared to be targeting the Digital Services Act (DSA), in force since November 2022. The law is based on the principle that “what is illegal offline is also illegal online”.

It aims to curb the spread of illegal or harmful content and goods, including racist abuse, child sexual abuse material, disinformation, and the sale of drugs or counterfeit products.

In November 2025, the DSA led to a €120 million fine against X over advertising transparency, contributing to tensions between the EU and Washington.

The administration of President Donald Trump has formally opposed the DSA and has targeted EU officials over it. For example, on 23 December 2025, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that former European Commissioner Thierry Breton — seen by the administration as the architect of the law — would be barred from entering the United States for allegedly forcing US social platforms to censor users.

Thomas Regnier, spokesperson for the European Commission, told The Cube that the DSA addresses risks linked to online platforms, recalling that “in Europe, elections are the sole choice of citizens”.

“Online platforms can be used to spread disinformation and manipulate citizens,” he said. “Because of our Digital Services Act, online platforms have to mitigate risks to protect our democracies. In Europe, elections are not the choice of Big Tech and their algorithms.”

Ahead of Hungary’s elections, accounts supporting Fidesz have also accused Meta of censoring Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. Fidesz official Balázs Orbán claimed users were “unable to like Fidesz-related content”.

A spokesperson for the US tech company has hit back at these claims, telling The Cube there were “no restrictions on the [Hungarian] Prime Minister’s accounts” and that none of his posts had been removed.

Meta’s community standards, which determine whether content has a limited reach or is removed, are based on factors such as whether content is “hateful” or targets people for their race or sexual orientation, for example.

These, according to a Meta spokesperson, “apply equally to everybody”.

US and Iran declare fragile ceasefire amid ongoing tensions and strikes

Get you up to speed: US and Iran declare fragile ceasefire amid ongoing tensions and strikes

The US and Iran reached a fragile ceasefire, with both nations claiming victory despite ongoing strikes. However, key issues remain unresolved, including Iran’s rights to nuclear enrichment and access to the Strait of Hormuz.

The fragile ceasefire is facing significant challenges, with key issues unresolved, including Iran’s rights to nuclear enrichment, as highlighted by Dr Katayoun Shahandeh from SOAS, University of London. Furthermore, Dr Bamo Nouri from the University of West London noted that if the ceasefire breaks, the US is likely to escalate military pressure and restore deterrence, which could lead to renewed strikes.

Iran claims to have retained control over the Strait of Hormuz, which remains outside the normal operational capacity despite claims of reopening. Dr Nouri emphasises that for the ceasefire to endure, clear written terms must be established, encompassing geographical coverage, definitions of violation, and compliance verification mechanisms.

How strong is the US-Iran ceasefire – and has it already fallen apart? | News World

US and Iran declare fragile ceasefire amid ongoing tensions and strikesDonald Trump, Mojtaba Khamenei and Benjamin Netanyahu imposed over images of wreckage from strikes.” decoding=”sync”/>
The ceasefire between the US, Israel and Iran is in a tough spot (Pictures: Getty/Reuters/AP)

The US and Iran both claimed victory after reaching a fragile ceasefire, even as more drones and missiles hit Iran and Gulf Arab countries yesterday.

The US president said he would suspend his threats to end an ‘entire civilisation’ if Iran agreed to reopen the critical Strait of Hormuz waterway, and a tentative ceasefire was then reached.

Yet, the agreement is already hitting roadblocks. Iran appears to have closed the Strait of Hormuz, after US leaders claimed it had been reopened as part of the ceasefire.

Key issues for both nations remain unresolved, including the scope of the truce, Iran’s rights to nuclear enrichment and ballistic missiles, as well as access to the Strait of Hormuz.

Dr Katayoun Shahandeh, of SOAS, University of London, told WTX the ceasefire is more fragile than it is secure.

‘It may hold in the very short term because all sides have reasons to pause, but it is not yet a stable settlement,’ she said.

Sign up for all of the latest stories

Why did Israel attack Lebanon, and is it a breach of the ceasefire?

A picture taken on April 9, 2026 shows a man walking at the site of the previous day's Israeli airstrikes that targeted southern Beirut's al-Mazraa neighbourhood. The Israeli military said it struck a Hezbollah commander in Beirut on April 8, after Lebanese state media reported that Israel had targeted a residential neighbourhood in the capital. (Photo by AFP via Getty Images)
182 people were killed yesterday in Lebanon by Israeli strikes (Picture: AFP)

The elephant in the room is the continued Israeli strikes into Lebanon.

Israel has intensified attacks in Lebanon, killing at least 182 people in the highest single-day death toll in the Israel-Hezbollah war, according to Lebanon’s health ministry.

‘There seem to be conflicting messages over whether Lebanon is covered, which is exactly the kind of ambiguity that can unravel a deal fast. There is also a growing divergence between U.S. and Israeli objectives,’ Dr Shahandeh said.

Washington has declared the ceasefire as a ‘victory’, Dr Shahandeh said, but Israel’s current posture points towards a continued military campaign, rather than a diplomatic resolution.

‘There is a real fear that this is not peace so much as a pause, as it is a chance for Washington and its allies to regroup and, if talks fail, strike harder. That may not be the stated intention, but it is one plausible reading of a ceasefire whose terms remain contested and whose basic points of agreement still seem very far apart,’ she said.

‘Already, it does not look as though all sides are fully adhering to it.’

What happens if the ceasefire conditions are broken?

OMAN - APRIL 08: A view of the vessels passing through Strait of Hormuz following the two-week temporary ceasefire reached between the United States and Iran on the condition that the strait be reopened, seen in Oman on April 08, 2026. (Photo by Shadi J. H. Alassar/Anadolu via Getty Images)
Only two vessels have travelled through the Strait (Picture: Getty)

If the ceasefire is broken, Trump would have a few options – but would likely begin with escalation in strikes and potentially putting US troops on the ground in Iran.

‘Trump has said U.S. military ships and aircraft will remain around Iran and that if Tehran does not comply, the “shootin’ starts” again,’ Dr Shahandeh explained.

‘The most likely U.S. response would be renewed strikes, more coercive pressure over Hormuz, and an attempt to force Iran into harsher terms from a position of overwhelming military superiority. But that would deepen the bind he is already in: walking away risks looking weak, while escalating further risks a more unpopular and expensive war.’

Dr Bamo Nouri, senior lecturer in International Relations at the University of West London, told WTX: ‘If it breaks, Trump has already signalled a return to coercive escalation – maintaining US forces in the region, increasing military pressure, and potentially authorising further strikes to restore deterrence.

Iran’s options if the ceasefire is broken are different. Despite sustaining heavy damage, the country has retained power over the Strait of Hormuz and could easily resume missile and drone attacks and pressure on global shipping.

Smoke following an Israeli strike in Bint Jbeil, southern Lebanon, as seen from the Israeli side of the border, April 8, 2026. REUTERS/Ayal Margolin ISRAEL OUT. NO COMMERCIAL OR EDITORIAL SALES IN ISRAEL
Israeli strikes have continued to pummel Lebanon and raised questions of whether Israel violated the truce (Picture: Reuters)

As for Israel, the option is to continue its air strikes in both Iran and Lebanon if it believes the ceasefire to be broken.

‘Israel, for its part, is likely to be the least patient actor, having already signalled readiness to resume high-intensity operations if it judges the ceasefire to be constraining its strategic objectives,’ Dr Nouri said.

Despite agreeing to suspend its bombing campaign in Iran, the US and Israel differ on their positions as to whether the ceasefire stretches to Lebanon, where Israel argues it is striking Iranian-backed Hezbollah groups.

‘Israel agreed to suspend its bombing campaign on Iran, but that U.S. and Israeli positions differ sharply from Iran’s (and Pakistan who brokered the deal) over whether Lebanon is part of the ceasefire framework.

‘That means Israel could become the most immediate trigger for collapse if it continues treating other theatres as separate while Iran treats them as linked,’ Dr Shahandeh said.

What happens next?

WASHINGTON, D.C., UNITED STATES - APRIL 6: President of the United States Donald J. Trump during the 2026 Easter Egg Roll at the White House, Washington, D.C., US, on April 6, 2026. (Photo by Kyle Mazza/Anadolu via Getty Images)
The most likely U.S. response to breaking the ceasefire would be renewed strikes (Picture: Getty)

It’s hard to say. Iran, Israel and the United States are not operating from a shared understanding of what’s been agreed in the ceasefire agreement.

Dr Nouri explained: ‘The US frames it around limiting Iran’s nuclear activity and securing maritime stability in the Strait of Hormuz, while Iran insists on its enrichment rights and links the deal to broader regional conditions, including Israeli operations in Lebanon.’

In order for the ceasefire to hold, the three countries must quickly clarify terms to stop any misunderstandings.

‘Without a quickly accepted framework, this ceasefire becomes a short-lived bargaining interval rather than a stable resolution, with all sides already preparing for renewed escalation,’ Dr Nouri said.

Dr Shahandeh believes three things need to happen for the ceasefire to hold.

‘The parties need clear written terms, not just public declarations: what is covered geographically, what counts as a violation, and who verifies compliance,’ she said.

‘Second, there has to be a practical de-escalation mechanism around Hormuz, because Reuters reports there is still little sign that the Strait is operating normally, and Iran is still asserting control there.

‘Third, the ceasefire must become a political process, not just a pause in bombing. The ceasefire can hold, but only as a bridge to a more detailed agreement. If it remains vague, it is unlikely to last.’

Comment now

Comments

Add WTX as a Preferred Source on Google

Add as preferred source

European Commission rejects Iran and US plans to charge Hormuz transit fees

European Commission rejects Iran and US plans to charge Hormuz transit fees

Commission Stance
The European Commission has rejected attempts by Iran or the United States to impose charges on vessels crossing the Strait of Hormuz, citing international law’s guarantee of freedom of navigation.
Shipping Disruption
Approximately 2,000 ships and 20,000 seafarers remain trapped in the Persian Gulf due to escalating tensions, significantly affecting global supply chains and energy prices.
Commission’s Stance
“International law provides for the freedom of navigation, which means no payment or toll whatsoever,” stated a European Commission spokesperson, emphasising the Strait of Hormuz as a public good for all humanity.

Key developments

The European Commission has strongly opposed any fee imposition on vessels crossing the Strait of Hormuz, stating that international law guarantees freedom of navigation without tolls.

Amidst ongoing tensions, traffic data shows few vessels have passed through Hormuz recently, with around 2,000 ships and 20,000 seafarers remaining trapped in the Persian Gulf.

EU rejects Trump’s ‘joint venture’ with Iran to charge ships through Strait of Hormuz

European Commission rejects Iran and US plans to charge Hormuz transit fees

Published on Updated

The European Commission has firmly rejected any attempt, by Iran or the United States, to charge vessels for crossing the Strait of Hormuz, while admitting the final decision on whether to pay a fee is entirely at the discretion of affected companies.

“International law provides for the freedom of navigation, which means what? It means no payment or toll whatsoever,” a Commission spokesperson said on Thursday afternoon in response to an EU News question.

“The Strait of Hormuz, like any other maritime lane, is a public good for all humanity, which means navigation must be free. Freedom of navigation must be restored.”

The pushback comes a day after US President Donald Trump stirred concern across Europe by suggesting a “joint venture” with Tehran to impose a pay-to-pass system on the waterway, which is vital for the transit of oil, gas and fertiliser supplies.

“It’s a way of securing it, also securing it from lots of other people,” Trump told ABC News. “It’s a beautiful thing.”

Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, later said the idea would “continue to be discussed” but stressed the “immediate priority” was reopening the shipping lane “without any limitations, whether in the form of tolls or otherwise”.

Hormuz has been under Iran’s tight control since the start of the US-Israeli strikes on 28 February, crippling supply chains and sending energy prices soaring worldwide.

According to Trump, the ceasefire deal announced earlier this week would lead to the “safe” reopening of Hormuz. But the narrow passage was closed again on Wednesday after Israel launched massive strikes against Lebanon, which Iran considered to be a violation of its version of the 10-point plan. (The White House has fiercely contested the plan and said Lebanon was excluded from the agreed terms.)

On Thursday, confusion continued to reign over Hormuz, with traffic data showing that only a handful of ships had managed to sail through.

An estimated 2,000 ships and 20,000 seafarers remain trapped in the Persian Gulf.

Iran is reportedly operating a new system that charges each vessel $1 per oil barrel carried on board. The payment can be made either in Chinese yuan or cryptocurrency, two options that bypass Western financial oversight.

For Brussels, neither Trump’s “joint venture” nor Iran’s $1-per-barrel system is acceptable because they contravene the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which strictly forbids charging for simple transit. Fees are only allowed when a specific service, such as port access or maintenance, is provided.

Even though the US and Iran are among the few countries that have not ratified UNCLOS, its rules have become customary law worldwide.

Asked whether European companies should agree to pay or remain stranded in the Persian Gulf, the Commission said the decision should be made by private operators themselves, taking into account their “various interests”.

“It is up to the concerned companies and ship-owners to see whether, despite this, they would still want to pay this fee,” chief spokesperson Paula Pinho told reporters.

Europeans have been mulling plans to help secure Hormuz, but nothing specific has been put on the table. Tehran considers the shipping lane its greatest leverage and is loath to make any concessions unless Washington reciprocates.

US claims Strait of Hormuz is open despite conflicting reports from Iran

Get you up to speed: US claims Strait of Hormuz is open despite conflicting reports from Iran

Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth stated that the Strait of Hormuz had reopened following a ceasefire agreement involving Iran and the US. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) later claimed to have planted underwater explosives in the Strait, asserting it provided a safe corridor for oil tankers.

According to Dr Bamo Nouri, senior lecturer in International Relations at the University of West London, the Strait of Hormuz is “technically ‘open’ but not freely operating,” indicating that while the passage is allowed, it is under conditions that create heightened risks for shipping. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has reportedly released coordinates detailing where it claims to have planted underwater explosives in the Strait.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has released a map indicating the locations of underwater explosives in the Strait of Hormuz, claiming it offers a safe corridor for oil tankers. Additionally, reports suggest that Iran may impose a toll of up to $1 million on each ship passing through the Strait.

Is the Strait of Hormuz open or closed? What to know about the ceasefire | News World

A Satellite relief Map of the Strait of Hormuz and Shipping Lanes.
The fate of the Strait of Hormuz is up in the air (Picture: Alamy)

Iran and the US appear to be at odds as to whether the Strait of Hormuz is actually open again under the ceasefire agreement.

Yesterday, Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth told reporters that the Strait had reopened.

He added: ‘It’s time for the rest of the world to step up and ensure that that stays open, after President Trump and the War Department brought Iran to the place where they are voluntarily opening it right now, as was announced last night.’

Shortly after his remarks, reports from the Gulf showed that several vessels received messages from Iran’s navy saying that the Strait of Hormuz was still shut down.

‘Any vessel trying to travel into the sea … will be targeted and destroyed,’ the message said.

Here’s all we know.

Sign up for all of the latest stories

How does Iran control the Strait of Hormuz?

A few factors go into how Iran controls the vital waterway, where tankers must sail through Hormuz, a 60-mile-wide part of the Persian Gulf, which has been at the heart of regional tensions for decades.

At its narrowest point, the Strait is just 24 miles across, making it easy for Iran to target vessels passing by without firing from a ship. Instead, they can fire anti-ship missiles from their coastline.

Along with the geography allowing Iran to exert control on the waterway, they also use unique methods of weaponry.

They’ve also laced the water with mines and use cheap drones to attack vessels that pass without permission.

The UN allows countries to exercise control of their territorial seas up to 13.8 miles from their coastlines.

Some portions of the Strait lie entirely in Iran and Oman’s territorial waters, meaning they are allowed to ‘defend’ their countries if needed.

Is the Strait of Hormuz open?

OMAN - APRIL 08: A view of the vessels passing through Strait of Hormuz following the two-week temporary ceasefire reached between the United States and Iran on the condition that the strait be reopened, seen in Oman on April 08, 2026. (Photo by Shadi J. H. Alassar/Anadolu via Getty Images)
Two vessels passed safely before the Strait was apparently shut again (Picture: Getty)

It depends on who you ask.

Dr Bamo Nouri, senior lecturer in International Relations at the University of West London, told WTX that what’s happening with the Strait is contradictory, but both things are true at once.

‘It is technically ‘open’ but not freely operating. The US presents it as open to reassure markets, while Iran is effectively controlling access – allowing passage, but under conditions, monitoring, and implicit threats against non-compliant vessels,’ he explained.

‘That means shipping can move, but with heightened risk, reduced traffic, and rising costs. In practice, Iran doesn’t need to fully close the strait to exert leverage.

‘By making it uncertain, conditional, and potentially expensive, it can still disrupt global energy flows and signal its strategic power, which is why markets remain tense despite the ceasefire.’

How does the ceasefire agreement affect the Strait of Hormuz?

SEI 292412950 0c0aWashington, DC, on April 8, 2026. The United States and Iran agreed to a two-week ceasefire on April 7 barely an hour before President Donald Trump‘s deadline to obliterate the country, triggering global relief alongside apprehension. Tehran has agreed to temporarily reopen the Strait of Hormuz, through which much of the world’s oil, gas and fertiliser passes, easing concerns for the battered global economy. (Photo by Mandel NGAN / AFP via Getty Images)” decoding=”async” loading=”lazy”/>
Pete Hegseth told reporters yesterday that the Strait was reopened (Picture: AFP)

When Iran, Israel and the United States agreed on a two-week ceasefire, one of the conditions all of them agreed on was the opening of the Strait of Hormuz for maritime traffic.

But Iran and the US appear to have differing definitions of what this means.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) released the coordinates of where it indicates it has planted underwater explosives in the Strait of Hormuz.

Tehran claims the map provides a safe corridor for oil tankers using the passage, where normally around 20% of the world’s oil passes every day.

Donald Trump yesterday declared the passage was officially open, but it was closed again after just two tankers made it through.

Though the ceasefire requires the free reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, reports on Wednesday suggested Iran wanted to put a toll of up to $1 million on each ship.

Comment now

Comments

Add WTX as a Preferred Source on Google

Add as preferred source

Ripple effects of Middle East and Ukraine wars divide European citizens

Ripple effects of Middle East and Ukraine wars divide European citizens

European Response
The wars in the Middle East and Ukraine are causing divisions among European citizens regarding their countries’ political and military responses.
Divided Sentiments
European citizens are experiencing significant divisions regarding their nations’ political and military reactions to conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine.
Citizen Division
“The political and military responses to these conflicts have left many citizens feeling uncertain and divided about our future,” remarked a local community leader.

Situation overview

The ongoing wars in the Middle East and Ukraine have sparked widespread debate among European citizens, revealing divisions over national political and military strategies. The discourse reflects deep concerns regarding safety and humanitarian implications.

Public opinion polls show significant differences in support for military aid to Ukraine, with some countries endorsing stronger involvement while others advocate for restraint, highlighting varying national perspectives.

Iran war: How do Europeans' political views shape their opinion of the conflict?

696x392 cmsv2 b6c11a25 1672 501d b303 862ab37ec745 9713305
The ripple effects of the wars in the Middle East and Ukraine are being felt across Europe, with citizens divided over countries’ political and military responses.

LIVE German 2025 Election