United States Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told the G20 that the Strait of Hormuz could become a “worthless piece of water” within two years as Washington pursues an economic campaign aimed at pressuring Iran. The comment, reported on 2 September 2026, framed the move as anchored by a surge in US energy production.
Bessent’s statement marked a stark assessment of a waterway long described as the world’s most critical maritime oil chokepoint. At the G20 he set an explicit timeline, saying the strait’s strategic value could be sharply diminished within two years if the measures he outlined proceed as planned.
What was announced at the G20
According to the report, the Treasury secretary described an aggressive campaign intended to economically strangle Iran. Central to that approach was the projection that expanded US energy output would alter global energy flows and lessen Tehran’s leverage over maritime transit through the strait.
Sources published the account on 2 September 2026, conveying the essence of Bessent’s remarks without offering additional operational detail. The reporting underlines the political intent behind the remarks rather than specifying discrete policy steps or timelines beyond the two-year horizon mentioned by the secretary.
The phrase used by Bessent was emphatic and designed to signal a strategic aim: to reduce the strait’s importance to such an extent that it no longer serves as a significant point of pressure. The source summary explicitly links that aim to the broader US effort to use economic measures to isolate Iran.
Potential shipping implications
If the scenario outlined by Bessent materialises, the balance of maritime oil transit and the relative importance of chokepoints could shift. The source did not offer evidence or data in support of a rapid reconfiguration of flows, nor did it describe the mechanisms by which the projected increases in US energy output would be translated into changed maritime patterns.
Shipowners, charterers and insurers will likely watch any policy moves closely, although the published account does not report direct industry reaction. The G20 remarks themselves serve as a political signal that may influence market expectations, trading strategies and the decisions of energy producers and buyers as they assess security and supply risk.
Washington’s stated objective, as recorded by the report, is economic pressure rather than direct military action; the emphasis was on reducing Iran’s capacity to use the strait as leverage. That framing places the discussion squarely in the realm of geopolitical contest and market adjustment instead of naval confrontation, at least in the language reported.
Observers will look for follow-up measures and concrete policy steps that translate the G20 rhetoric into action. The source account does not list such measures, so the timeline and the practical path to the two-year outcome remain speculative on the basis of the published summary.
The shipping community depends on stable, predictable passages and will assess any shifting risk calculus that might affect routing, costs and insurance. The statement reported is likely to prompt closer scrutiny of energy markets and security assessments as stakeholders gauge the plausibility of a rapid decline in the strait’s strategic value.
For now the most verifiable elements are the public remarks attributed to the US Treasury secretary and the date of the report. Bessent’s comments at the G20, as conveyed by the source on 2 September 2026, offer a clear political objective but leave open many questions about implementation and consequence for maritime trade.