Indian markets are set for a shortened trading week, with the NSE and BSE remaining closed on Friday, May 1, for Maharashtra Day. The holiday will pause trading across equity, equity derivatives and related segments.For investors planning trades or settlements, Friday’s closure will be the latest scheduled market break after the April 14 holiday observed for Dr Baba Saheb Ambedkar Jayanti.
Are NSE and BSE open on May 1?
No. Both the National Stock Exchange and BSE will remain shut on Friday, May 1.Normal trading will resume on the next working day after the holiday which is May 4, 2026.
Is MCX open on May 1?
The Multi Commodity Exchange (MCX) will remain closed in the morning session but will reopen for the evening session.The National Commodity & Derivatives Exchange (NCDEX), however, will remain shut for both sessions on Friday.
What is the next stock market holiday after May 1?
After Maharashtra Day, the next scheduled holiday for stock markets is May 28 on account of Bakri Id.
How many market holidays are left in 2026?
A total of 16 stock market holidays are scheduled for 2026. Seven have already passed. After the May 1 break, eight more full market holidays remain this year.The remaining holidays are:
May 28- Bakri Id
June 26 – Muharram
September 14 – Ganesh Chaturthi
October 2 – Gandhi Jayanti
October 20 – Dussehra
November 10 – Diwali Balipratipada
November 24 – Guru Nanak Jayanti
December 25 – Christmas
Which holidays fall on weekends?
Some major holidays in 2026 fall on weekends and therefore do not lead to exchange closures:
Mahashivratri – February 15
Eid-Ul-Fitr – March 21
Independence Day – August 15
Diwali Laxmi Pujan – November 8
Will there be Muhurat Trading?
Yes, Diwali Laxmi Pujan falls on a Sunday this year, and exchanges are expected to hold the customary Muhurat Trading session on November 8.The timing for the one-hour special session will be announced closer to the date.
African football has given its backing to Gianni Infantino to run again in 2027 as head of the global governing body.
Published On 30 Apr 202630 Apr 2026
FIFA President Gianni Infantino’s hopes of securing re-election as the head of world football received a massive boost after pledges of support from the African and Asian regional confederations.
The Confederation of African Football (CAF) and Asian Football Confederation (AFC) both said on Thursday they will back Infantino if, as expected, he stands for a fourth term as FIFA supremo in 2027.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
In a brief statement following a meeting ahead of the FIFA Congress in Vancouver on Thursday, CAF said it had “unanimously agreed” to support Infantino when the FIFA chief stands for re-election in 2027.
The Asian Football Confederation also vowed to support Infantino.
“FIFA is in its best position ever and we offer our continued and full support to (Infantino) as a candidate for FIFA President for the term 2027-2031, just as the AFC and Asian football has always supported him since his election in 2016,” AFC President Sheikh Salman bin Ebrahim Al Khalifa said in a statement.
The African and Asian confederations account for 101 votes in FIFA’s presidential election out of a total of 211.
Infantino has already secured support for re-election from South American football’s ruling body CONMEBOL, which is worth a further 10 votes.
Infantino took over as head of FIFA in 2016 in the wake of the corruption scandal that led to the downfall of predecessor Sepp Blatter.
He was subsequently re-elected to the post in 2019 and 2023.
Although FIFA statues limit FIFA presidents to three terms in office, Infantino is allowed to run for re-election next year after the body ruled that his first, partial term from 2016-2019 following Blatter’s ouster did not count towards the total.
Infantino has faced controversy during his reign over his close ties to US President Donald Trump, who was awarded the inaugural FIFA Peace Prize during last year’s World Cup draw.
That led to a formal complaint being lodged with FIFA’s ethics committee by advocacy group FairSquare last year, who alleged that the award breached FIFA’s rules concerning political neutrality.
Infantino has also faced criticism for initiatives during his reign which have included expanding the World Cup to 48 teams and the launch of the revamped 32-team FIFA Club World Cup last year.
The Swiss official though has presided over record revenues during his tenure, with this year’s World Cup expected to rake in an estimated $13 billion.
FIFA under Infantino has also dramatically increased funding distributed to FIFA’s 211 member associations via its FIFA Forward Program. In the cycle from 2027-2030, FIFA has pledged to distribute some $2.7 billion to members, an eight-fold increase compared to 10 years ago.
Two months after the US-Israel war with Iran began on February 28, the human and fiscal costs are already substantial. The death toll in Iran alone is estimated at between 3,000 and 6,000, while the US military campaign has cost about $25 billion so far, according to the Pentagon’s first official estimate. The economic costs, however, have extended far beyond the battlefield, rippling through oil prices, stock markets, bond yields and currencies. Here is a look at the war’s impact so far on global financial markets and the economy.
Vehicles drive past a giant billboard reading ‘The Strait of Hormuz remains closed’ at the Revolution Square in Tehran on April 28, (AFP)
US markets traded mixed on Thursday as strong corporate earnings helped Wall Street stay near record highs despite sharp swings in crude oil prices linked to the Iran war, AP reported.The S&P 500 rose 0.1 per cent and remained just below the all-time high touched earlier this week. The Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 413 points, or 0.8 per cent, while the Nasdaq Composite slipped 0.3 per cent in early trade.Markets drew support from another round of stronger-than-expected quarterly earnings, even as oil prices whipsawed overnight on concerns that the conflict in West Asia could keep global crude supplies disrupted for longer.In the most actively traded Brent crude contract for July delivery, prices climbed as high as $114.70 a barrel overnight before reversing to $109.80, down 0.6 per cent. That still remains far above the roughly $70 level seen before the war began.During the conflict, the peak for the most actively traded Brent contract has been $119.50, reached last month.In the thinner June Brent contract, prices briefly crossed $126 overnight before easing back toward $114.Iran has shut the Strait of Hormuz to oil tankers, trapping vessels in the Persian Gulf, while a US Navy blockade has prevented Iran from exporting its own oil.The easing in crude prices later in the session helped calm broader markets.Alphabet was among the biggest gainers, rising 5.8 per cent after the Google and YouTube parent reported profit that nearly doubled analyst estimates.Investments in artificial intelligence “are lighting up every part of the business,” Chief Executive Sundar Pichai said.Several other stocks rallied after posting better-than-expected earnings.Caterpillar, Eli Lilly, O’Reilly Automotive and Royal Caribbean each rose more than 6 per cent.Meta Platforms, however, fell 9.9 per cent despite beating profit expectations.Investors focused instead on Meta’s higher spending plans for data centres and AI infrastructure, with projected capital expenditure rising to a range of $125 billion to $145 billion this year.Microsoft declined 4.5 per cent after it also raised its forecast for investments and capital spending, though analysts said trends at Azure remained encouraging.Amazon slipped 0.8 per cent after surpassing earnings estimates.US Treasury yields moved lower after oil prices gave up much of their overnight gains.Economic data showed US growth accelerated by less than economists had expected in the first quarter, while inflation in March rose broadly in line with forecasts.A separate report showed fewer Americans filed for unemployment benefits last week, signalling fewer layoffs despite recent job cuts announced by companies.The yield on the 10-year Treasury note eased to 4.38 per cent from 4.42 per cent late Wednesday.European markets were mixed. London’s FTSE 100 rose 1.3 per cent after the Bank of England kept rates unchanged. Germany’s DAX gained 0.7 per cent, while France’s CAC 40 slipped 0.2 per cent after the European Central Bank also left rates steady.In Asia, Hong Kong’s Hang Seng fell 1.3 per cent, while Shanghai stocks added 0.1 per cent after data showed China’s factory activity slowed slightly in April but stayed in expansion territory for a second straight month.
Speaking at a televised Cabinet meeting on March 26, the US secretary of defense boasted of US military successes against Iran in the ongoing war. “Never in recorded history has a nation’s military been so quickly and so effectively neutralised,” he said, seated next to US President Donald Trump.
The very next day, Iran fired missiles and drones that struck a US base in Saudi Arabia, wounding several US soldiers and destroying a radar surveillance plane that cost $700m.
It was no one-off hit. Iran’s missiles and drones, and one devastating instance of so-called friendly fire, have destroyed US military equipment worth between $2.3bn and $2.8bn, the Washington, DC-based Center for Strategic and International Studies has calculated.
The CSIS estimate is the first detailed tabulation by a major international research group of US military losses in the war that began on February 28, and Al Jazeera is the first to report it.
This estimated costing does not include losses incurred at US bases in the region, or any of the specialised equipment or naval assets.
Mark Cancian, a senior adviser with the Defense and Security Department at CSIS, carried out the calculations. He said that he was also looking at damages to bases used by the US in the Gulf. But that exercise has been more challenging. Planet Labs, a global service provider for satellite imagery, has blocked all satellite images for public and media usage at the request of the US government since February 28. Iranian satellite imagery, however, has been available.
“We can see from the overhead photographs, you know, what, what buildings were struck,” said Cancian, of the bases used by the US. “It’s hard to know what was in the building.”
What were the losses?
Some of the losses were the result of “friendly fire”. Three F-15 jets were shot down in one such incident in Kuwait in early March.
But most of the US aircraft and radar destroyed in the war were targeted by Iran. Two instances, in particular, stand out. On March 1, the US lost at least one powerful missile defence radar that uses the THAAD system to detect missiles and some hypersonic threats, and feeds targeting data to other defence systems. Some reports suggest two radars were destroyed. The total bill: Between $485m and $970m. The location has not been specified. The US armed forces are hosted by several Gulf nations where THAAD systems were implemented.
And on March 27, the attack on Prince Sultan airbase in eastern Saudi Arabia, fewer than 24 hours after Hegseth’s boast, destroyed the $700m E-3 AWACS/E7 radar detection aircraft. Essentially an airborne command centre, it can detect aircraft and missiles hundreds of kilometres away, and coordinate battles in the sky.
[Al Jazeera]
Omar Ashour, professor of security and military studies and founder of the Security Studies Programmes at the Doha Institute for Graduate Studies, said that while the US has disclosed some figures, it cannot afford full transparency for political reasons.
“At this point, I don’t think the Trump administration would want to be looking like losing equipment [and] personnel,” Ashour told Al Jazeera, adding that there might be a “price” to pay “at the [midterm] elections in November“.
The US, he said, had a history of achieving operational victories in conflicts around the world — only to then fail strategically.
“In Vietnam, they did a series of operational victories. In Afghanistan, they did. But then [they suffered] the strategic loss in the end. Because the operational victories did not serve the strategic ends,” he said.
“In this case, the strategic ends are very political,” Ashour added, referring to the proclaimed goals of regime change and denuclearising Iran.
He emphasised that at the moment, the US troops deployed to the region do not constitute even a 10th of the force used to invade Iraq in 2003. It also does not have the number of aircraft carriers used against Iraq.
How did Iran retaliate?
Cancian said that he was surprised at Iran’s decision to strike Gulf nations — and not just the US bases they host.
“I think that was a strategic error on their part. They thought that that would split the Gulf states away from the United States, but it drove them closer to the United States,” he argued.
For the US, he said, the failure to keep the Strait of Hormuz open was a humbling reminder of what can happen when a navy is unprepared. Iran enforced restrictions on the passage of most vessels through the strait early in the war, and on April 13, the US launched its own naval blockade of Iranian ports and ships trying to transit through the waterway.
“It’s surprising because we’ve been thinking about this with the United States military for 45 years,” he said, before referring to his own time in the military. Cancian is a retired colonel from the US Marines, and his military career spanned over three decades. He served in multiple roles in Vietnam, the 1991 Gulf War – Desert Storm, and the Iraq war.
Cancian recalled participating in amphibious planning exercises to capture Qeshm Island, where Iran is believed to hold several of its missiles in an underground facility. “So it’s not that this just popped up unexpectedly.”
But when the US launched the current war, he said, “They didn’t have the forces in place.”
“They do now, but they did not initially. And then, you know, apparently for whatever reason, they don’t have the capability or are not willing to take the risk to open it,” he added.
Ashour said that Iran, too, has suffered severe damage to its military. He says the US-Israeli operation in this case has degraded the country’s conventional military architecture, but was unable to wipe out its missiles, munitions and drones.
“That claim that the [Iranian] navy got obliterated,” he said, was “far from the truth”.
“You can still fight in the sea without a conventional or without the blue water navy,” he said. “They were degraded. But it’s far from defeated, and they’re far from down.”
For millions of salaried employees and the organisations that employ them, the proposed increase represents a shift towards social security. (AI image)
India’s social security framework is at an important inflection point. After the labour codes, the government is reportedly considering another major reform: raising the wage ceiling for mandatory Employees’ Provident Fund (EPF) coverage from the current ₹15,000 to ₹25,000 per month. At this stage, the increase in the wage ceiling is under policy consideration, and the final contours would be known only once the change is formally notified.While this may sound like a routine policy adjustment, the impact could be far reaching. A higher wage ceiling would bring many more employees under mandatory social security coverage, enhance pension and insurance protection, and increase both employer contributions and employee deductions. For employees, this could mean a lower monthly take home salary in the short term, but stronger financial security over the long term.Why does the EPF wage ceiling matter?The EPF wage ceiling determines who must be compulsorily covered under India’s key social security schemes: the Employees’ Provident Fund (EPF), the Employees’ Pension Scheme (EPS), and the Employees’ Deposit Linked Insurance (EDLI) Scheme.At present, EPF coverage broadly works as follows:
Employees earning wages up to ₹15,000 per month must be enrolled under the EPF.
Employees earning more than ₹15,000 per month can opt out of EPF at the time of joining, provided they were not members of EPF in earlier employment.
When the wage ceiling was fixed at ₹15,000 more than a decade ago, it reflected wage levels and compensation structures prevalent at that time. Since then, entry level salaries and average wages have increased sharply across sectors such as services, retail, logistics, and manufacturing.As a result, a large section of today’s workforce earns more than ₹15,000 but remains outside compulsory social security coverage. Raising the EPF wage ceiling seeks to bridge this gap by aligning statutory coverage with present day wage realities.How would a higher wage ceiling impact EPF coverage?If the wage ceiling is increased from ₹15,000 to ₹25,000, the most immediate impact would be on mandatory EPF enrolment.Employees earning between ₹15,000 and ₹25,000 would no longer be able to opt out of EPF, even if they are first time job entrants with no prior provident fund account.For instance, today a new employee joining with a basic wage of ₹18,000 can legally avoid EPF enrolment if he / she has never been an EPF member earlier. Under the proposed ceiling, the same employee would be compulsorily enrolled under EPF from the first day of employment.Employees earning more than ₹25,000 would still remain outside mandatory EPF coverage, similar to how those earning above ₹15,000 are treated today.This change could lead to a meaningful expansion of social security coverage, especially in labour intensive sectors where a large proportion of employees fall in the ₹15,000 to ₹25,000 wage range.
How would EPF contributions and take home salary be affected?Under the EPF framework, both employers and employees contribute 12 percent of an employee’s wages. However, for employees earning more than ₹15,000, contributions are often restricted to the ceiling amount, unless higher contributions are agreed voluntarily.If the wage ceiling is raised to ₹25,000, statutory EPF contributions would need to be calculated on wages up to the new limit.To understand the impact, consider an employee earning ₹20,000 per month. Today, EPF may be calculated only at ₹15,000, resulting in a contribution of ₹1,800 each from the employer and employee. Under the revised ceiling, contributions would be calculated on ₹20,000, increasing the monthly contribution to ₹2,400 each.For employees, a higher wage ceiling would translate into higher EPF deductions every month, which would reduce take home salary in the short term. However, these higher contributions would also help build a larger retirement corpus over time, supported by a statutory saving framework.For employers, the change would lead to higher payroll costs, since employer contributions would need to be matched on a higher wage base. This would increase recurring statutory outflows, particularly for organisations with a significant number of employees earning between ₹15,000 and ₹25,000.While the immediate impact would be reflected in monthly payslips and payroll costs, the longer term outcome would be stronger retirement savings and broader social security coverage.How would the change affect EPS coverage and contribution allocation?The Employees’ Pension Scheme operates alongside EPF and is funded entirely from the employer’s contribution. Presently, 8.33 percent of the employer’s EPF contribution is diverted to EPS, but only for employees whose wages do not exceed ₹15,000.Employees who became eligible for EPF membership after 1 September 2014 and earn more than ₹15,000, even if they contribute to EPF, do not receive EPS benefits. In such cases, the employer’s entire contribution flows into EPF.If the wage ceiling is increased to ₹25,000, employees earning up to this level would become mandatory members of EPS. Employers would be required to divert 8.33 percent of wages, within the statutory framework, towards EPS for this expanded group of employees.For example, an employee earning ₹22,000 today may be covered under EPF but not EPS. After the proposed change, the same employee would start accumulating pension eligibility, which was earlier unavailable.This would significantly widen pension coverage and provide long term income security to a larger segment of the organised workforce. Over a full working career, this expanded EPS coverage can translate into a meaningful monthly pension after retirement for employees who were earlier outside the pension net.
As illustrated above, employees and employers with wages between ₹15,000 and ₹25,000 are likely to see the most noticeable increase in PF deductions and statutory costs if the ceiling is raised.What does it mean for EDLI contributions and benefits?The Employees’ Deposit Linked Insurance Scheme provides life insurance cover to EPF members. In the event of an employee’s death during service, insurance benefits are paid to their nominee.Currently, EDLI contributions are calculated on wages up to ₹15,000, and the entire contribution is borne by the employer. If the EPF wage ceiling is increased, the EDLI contribution base would also rise to ₹25,000.This would lead to a modest increase in insurance related contributions for employers, while employees would benefit from higher insurance coverage. Although EDLI often receives less attention than EPF and EPS, it plays an important role in protecting employees’ families against financial risk.Key takeaways for employersIf the EPF wage ceiling is revised, employers should prepare for several changes:
Payroll budgets may need reassessment, particularly in organisations with a large workforce earning below ₹25,000.
HR and payroll systems will need updates to reflect new contribution thresholds and EPS allocations.
Clear communication with employees will be important to explain higher deductions and manage expectations.
Wage and compensation structures should be reviewed to ensure continued compliance with social security requirements.
While the change may increase short term costs, it also strengthens the overall social security framework for employees.Key takeaways for employeesFor employees, a higher EPF wage ceiling brings both adjustments and long term advantages:
Monthly take home pay may reduce initially due to higher EPF deductions.
Retirement savings will grow faster because of higher mandatory contributions.
More employees will become eligible for pension benefits under the EPS framework.
Life insurance coverage linked to EPF membership will improve.
For younger employees especially, mandatory participation from early in their careers can significantly improve financial security at retirement.The labour codes marked a significant step towards modernising India’s employment and social security laws. Building on that, raising the EPF wage ceiling to ₹25,000 would be one of the most meaningful expansions of statutory social security coverage in recent years, affecting millions of employees.While employers may face higher contribution costs and employees may see a modest reduction in monthly cash in hand, the long term benefits of larger retirement savings, wider pension coverage, and stronger insurance protection are aligned with the changing wage landscape of a growing economy.As incomes rise and the country becomes more prosperous, social security thresholds too must evolve. For millions of salaried employees and the organisations that employ them, the proposed increase represents a shift towards social security keeping pace with real wage levels and longer working lives.(The author, Puneet Gupta is Partner, People Advisory Services Tax at EY India. Amiya Bhaskar, Senior Manager, EY India also contributed to the article)
“While some improvements in access and aid delivery have been observed in recent weeks, unpredictable access, limited operational crossings, and restrictions on critical humanitarian items termed as ‘dual use’ by Israel continue to constrain UN response,” UN Assistant Secretary General Khaled Khiari told the Security Council.
The US economy grew at an annualised pace of 2 per cent in the January-March quarter recovering from the drag caused by last year’s 43-day federal government shutdown, though the outlook has been clouded by the ongoing Iran war, AP reported.The Commerce Department said on Thursday that gross domestic product (GDP), which measures the nation’s output of goods and services, rebounded from a weak 0.5 per cent expansion in the final three months of 2025.Federal government spending and investment grew at a 9.3 per cent annual rate in the first quarter, contributing more than half a percentage point to overall growth after subtracting 1.16 percentage points in the fourth quarter of 2025.Consumer spending, which accounts for around 70 per cent of US economic activity, slowed to a 1.6 per cent pace in the first quarter from 1.9 per cent in the previous quarter.Business investment, however, rose at an 8.7 per cent rate, with the increase seen as being supported by spending linked to artificial intelligence.The economic outlook has been complicated by the Iran conflict, which has led to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz — a key shipping route through which around a fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas passes.The disruption has pushed energy prices higher, adding to inflation pressures and weighing on consumers.The Federal Reserve, while keeping its benchmark interest rate unchanged on Wednesday, cited “a high level of uncertainty” arising from the conflict.Carl Weinberg, chief economist at High Frequency Economics, said forecasting the first-quarter GDP number had become difficult due to the scale of uncertainty.“The truth is that we do not have any defensible basis for trying to project how these indicators will print,” Weinberg wrote in a commentary on Monday.“President Donald Trump’s war with Iran has led to a total blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. We do not know how to model the impact of that event, as we have never seen anything quite like it,” he added.Thursday’s GDP report was the first of three estimates that will be released by the Commerce Department.
On March 11, the Thai cargo ship Mayuree Naree was struck by two projectiles while crossing the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important waterways located between Iran and Oman. A fire broke out in the engine room, and while 20 sailors were rescued, three remained trapped inside the stricken vessel. Their remains were found weeks later when a specialised rescue team boarded the vessel, which had run aground on the shores of Iran’s Qeshm island.
At about the same time, a “shadow fleet” of tankers continued to navigate the very same waters safely. Operating with fake flags, disabled signals and unspecified destinations, this covert armada survived because it operates outside the traditional rules of maritime trade.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
Iran threatened to block “enemy” ships passing through the Strait of Hormuz – a crucial chokepoint for a fifth of the world’s oil – in the wake of the United States-Israeli war launched on February 28. Soon, navigation through the strait was disrupted amid fears of attacks.
Following a temporary ceasefire on April 8, the United States imposed a full naval blockade on Iranian ports on April 13. Theoretically, traffic through the strait should have come to a complete halt.
However, tracking data reveals a remarkably different reality.
(Al Jazeera)
An exclusive Al Jazeera open-source investigation tracked 202 voyages made by 185 vessels through the strait between March 1 and April 15, navigating both under fire and across blockade lines.
The numbers behind the shadows
To understand how the strait operated under extreme pressure, Al Jazeera’s Digital Investigative Unit monitored the waterway daily, cross-referencing vessel International Maritime Organization (IMO) numbers with international sanction lists from the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), the European Union, the United Kingdom and the United Nations. An IMO number is a unique seven-digit figure assigned to commercial ships.
Of the tracked voyages, 77 (38.5 percent) were directly or indirectly linked to Iran. Notably, 61 of the ships transiting the strait were explicitly listed on international sanctions lists.
(Al Jazeera)
The investigation divided the conflict into three distinct phases to map the fleet’s behaviour:
Phase 1: Open War (March 1 – April 6): 126 ships crossed the strait, peaking at 30 vessels on March 1. Among these, 46 were linked to Iran.
Phase 2: The Truce (April 7 – 13): 49 ships crossed during this fragile pause. More than 40 percent of these vessels were tied to Iran, including the US-sanctioned, Iranian-flagged Roshak, which successfully exited the Gulf.
Phase 3: The US Blockade (April 13 – 15): Despite the explicit naval blockade, 25 ships crossed the strait.
Breaking the blockade
When the US blockade took effect, the shadow fleet adapted immediately.
The Iranian cargo ship “13448” successfully broke the blockade. Because it is a smaller vessel operating in coastal waters, it lacks an official IMO number, allowing it to evade traditional sanction-monitoring tools. The vessel departed Iran’s Al Hamriya port and reached Karachi, Pakistan.
Similarly, the Panama-flagged Manali broke the blockade, crossing on April 14 and penetrating the cordon again on April 17 en route to Mumbai, India.
The investigation uncovered widespread manipulation of Automatic Identification System (AIS) trackers. Vessels such as the US-sanctioned Flora, Genoa and Skywave deliberately disabled or jammed their signals to hide their identities and destinations.
Fake flags and shell companies
To obscure ultimate ownership, the shadow fleet heavily relies on a complex web of “false flags” and shell companies. The investigation identified 16 ships operating under fake flags, including registries from landlocked nations like Botswana and San Marino, as well as others from Madagascar, Guinea, Haiti and Comoros.
(Al Jazeera)(Al Jazeera)
The operational network managing these ships spans the globe. Operating firms were primarily based in Iran (15.7 percent), China (13 percent), Greece (more than 11 percent) and the United Arab Emirates (9.7 percent). Notably, the operators of nearly 19 percent of the observed vessels remain unknown.
The toll of a parallel system
Despite the intense military pressure, energy carriers dominated the traffic, with 68 ships (36.2 percent) transporting crude oil, petroleum products and gas. Ten of these tankers were directly linked to Iran. Non-oil trade also persisted, with 57 bulk and general cargo ships crossing during the open war phase, 41 of which were tied to Tehran.
(Al Jazeera)
Before the war, at least 100 ships crossed the Strait of Hormuz daily. Today, a staggering 20,000 sailors are trapped on 2,000 ships across the Gulf – a crisis the International Maritime Organization described as unprecedented since World War II.
A shadow Iranian fleet, meanwhile, has been navigating seamlessly as part of a parallel maritime system born from 47 years of US sanctions on Tehran. Washington slapped sanctions on Tehran following the 1979 Islamic revolution that toppled the pro-Washington ruler Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. The two countries have had no diplomatic ties since 1980.
