Geopolitics of Hormuz
The Strait of Hormuz has long been the world’s most sensitive energy chokepoint, a narrow stretch of water whose strategic importance far exceeds its physical size. Roughly a fifth of the global oil supply and a significant portion of liquefied natural gas pass through this corridor between Iran and Oman each day. Now, after the February 28 U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran and the subsequent escalation in hostilities, Tehran has effectively rendered the strait unsafe for commercial shipping through drones, missiles and naval mines. The result is not merely a regional security crisis but a moment that threatens the stability of the global economy. U.S. President Donald Trump’s demand that allied nations help reopen the waterway reflects the urgency of the situation, yet assembling a coalition fleet will not easily restore normalcy. The Strait of Hormuz is not simply a maritime route that can be cleared by naval power. It is a geopolitical pressure point where military capability, geography and political calculation intersect in ways that make even the strongest coalition cautious.
Iran’s decision to disrupt traffic through the strait must be understood in the context of the broader conflict now unfolding in the region. For decades, Iranian leaders have threatened to close the passage whenever tensions with the West intensified. Those warnings were often dismissed as rhetorical leverage, since Iran itself exports large quantities of oil through the same corridor. Blocking the strait would ordinarily harm Tehran’s own economic interests and invite severe retaliation. Yet the killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader in the recent strikes has transformed the strategic equation. Iranian officials now frame the conflict as existential, and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps appears to be shaping military strategy with a greater sense of urgency and defiance. In such circumstances, the calculus shifts from economic rationality to political survival. When states believe their regime is under existential threat, they are more willing to employ measures that previously seemed too risky or self-destructive. The disruption of the Strait of Hormuz is therefore not merely a tactical move but a signal that Iran is prepared to escalate the conflict in ways that impose global costs.
The consequences of such escalation are already becoming visible. Oil prices have surged in international markets, raising fears of another inflationary shock similar to the one triggered by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Energy prices remain a powerful driver of global economic instability, and sustained disruptions in Gulf exports would quickly ripple through supply chains across continents. The impact would not be confined to fuel alone. Around one-third of the world’s fertilisers—particularly sulphur and ammonia—also move through the Strait of Hormuz, meaning that prolonged instability could affect agricultural production and food prices worldwide. For developing economies already struggling with high inflation and currency pressures, a prolonged energy shock could prove devastating. The last time the world witnessed such disruption on a comparable scale was during the oil crises of the 1970s, when geopolitical tensions in the Middle East triggered economic recessions across much of the industrialised world. Today’s global economy, deeply interconnected and energy dependent, is no less vulnerable to such shocks.
Despite the urgency, reopening the strait is far easier said than done. The geography of the waterway itself heavily favours Iran. Shipping lanes are only about two nautical miles wide in each direction, forcing massive oil tankers to navigate predictable routes close to Iranian territory and islands. This makes them vulnerable to a variety of asymmetric tactics that the Revolutionary Guards have refined over decades. Even though Iran’s conventional navy is relatively limited, it retains an extensive arsenal of tools designed specifically for maritime disruption: fast attack boats, naval mines, mini-submarines and an expanding fleet of drones capable of harassing or striking vessels. These capabilities do not need to sink ships to be effective. Simply making the route appear unsafe can deter shipping companies and insurers from allowing tankers to pass through the area. Escorting commercial vessels with warships may work temporarily, but sustaining such operations for months would require enormous naval resources and constant vigilance against unconventional attacks, including suicide operations by small craft. Recent experience in the Red Sea offers a cautionary precedent. Despite extensive U.S. and European naval patrols, Yemen’s Houthi rebels managed to disrupt shipping routes for over two years, forcing many companies to divert vessels around Africa rather than risk attack. Iran, with far greater resources and technological capacity, would be an even more formidable adversary.
Trump’s call for allied warships reflects the recognition that no single country can manage the security challenge alone. The United States has begun discussing escort operations with several partners and has offered insurance guarantees to shipping companies to encourage continued trade through the Gulf. Britain has signalled willingness to coordinate options with allies, while France has suggested that a broader multinational mission could eventually emerge. Yet the responses of other countries reveal the limits of enthusiasm for direct involvement. Germany has expressed scepticism about expanding naval operations, while Japan and Australia have indicated they are unlikely to deploy warships. Even the European Union’s existing maritime mission in the Red Sea remains limited in scope. These hesitant reactions underline a difficult reality: while many countries depend heavily on Gulf energy supplies, few are eager to be drawn into a direct military confrontation with Iran.
Ultimately, the crisis surrounding the Strait of Hormuz illustrates the fragile architecture of global energy security. The world economy continues to rely heavily on a handful of geographic chokepoints whose stability depends on political conditions in volatile regions. Naval coalitions may temporarily restore shipping flows, but they cannot eliminate the deeper strategic tensions that repeatedly threaten these routes. Long-term stability will require not only diplomatic engagement to reduce regional conflict but also broader efforts to diversify energy supply chains and reduce dependence on vulnerable transit corridors. For now, however, the world faces a more immediate challenge. If the Strait of Hormuz remains blocked for an extended period, the consequences will extend far beyond the Gulf. Energy markets will tighten, food prices could rise, and global economic uncertainty will deepen. The narrow waterway between Iran and Oman has once again reminded the world how easily geopolitical conflict can disrupt the arteries of the global economy.
