The geopolitical volatility surrounding the Iran-US conflict has ignited a significant debate within energy markets, particularly regarding why previous forecasts of $200-per-barrel oil failed to manifest. Despite the intensity of the “hot war,” the prominent voices who once aggressively peddled these high-price predictions have remained notably silent or have pivoted to spreading revisionist narratives. These observers are currently propagating two specific “urban legends” designed to explain away their inaccurate forecasts: that the Strait of Hormuz remained functional throughout the crisis and that China single-handedly suppressed global oil prices through strategic import reductions.
The first of these myths—that the Strait of Hormuz never actually closed—is being dismantled by emerging empirical data. Proponents of this theory claim that international oil transit continued unabated; however, official export statistics from Persian Gulf nations provide a starkly different reality. Data from March and April 2026 clearly indicate that oil tanker transits through the region experienced a nearly total cessation. Whether observed through specific export volumes from Iraq or the collapse in the export values of liquefied natural gas and oil from Qatar, the evidence definitively confirms that the essential maritime choke point was indeed effectively blocked, rendering claims of “business as usual” entirely false.
The second narrative, which credits China with single-handedly capping oil price spikes by slashing its imports, is characterized by analysts as a gross misrepresentation of global market mechanics. The reality is that the decision to draw down national stockpiles was a broad economic response across all major Asian economies, not an act of unique Chinese market manipulation. Japan and South Korea, which possess significant strategic inventory, followed the exact same economic logic as China during the peak of the price surge. India served as the only notable outlier in this pattern, as its lack of large-scale stockpiles forced it to continue importing—an option it only maintained through specific US sanctions waivers on Russian oil.
This revisionist discourse is not merely a trivial academic disagreement; it is increasingly viewed as a dangerous distortion of energy market fundamentals. By muddying the waters with misinformation, market participants are obscuring the fact that the actual peak of oil prices—centered around $125 per barrel—aligned almost perfectly with established academic models regarding the price elasticity of demand under the conditions of a total Strait closure. The insistence on these “conspiracy theories” serves only to distract from the straightforward, supply-demand reality that successfully explained the price ceiling without the need for convoluted excuses regarding foreign intervention.
Furthermore, these narratives are often accompanied by intense criticism of the current US naval blockade against Iran, a strategy frequently dismissed by market critics as ineffective or strategically flawed. However, evidence suggests that “Blockade 2.0” is significantly more aggressive and effective than its predecessor. By actively disabling empty Iranian tankers that previously served as floating storage and neutralizing critical port and storage infrastructure, the US has fundamentally altered the conflict’s geometry. The result is a more rapid and severe economic impact on Iran than previously anticipated, with domestic import volumes showing a precipitous decline as early as March 2026.
Ultimately, the goal of this misinformation campaign seems to be the protection of credibility for forecasters who failed to read the geopolitical situation accurately. By fabricating stories of open shipping lanes and secret Chinese altruism, these analysts attempt to sidestep the reality that the blockade is effectively crippling the Iranian economy, leading to both severe goods shortages and runaway hyperinflation. As the blockade tightens its grip, the persistent rhetoric regarding Iran’s “asymmetric advantages” appears increasingly detached from the observable, data-driven reality occurring on the ground in the Persian Gulf.
