Iran is once again threatening to close the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most vital energy arteries. Esmail Kosari, a member of Iran’s parliamentary security committee, said the option is being “seriously considered” in light of recent escalations. The statement, broadcast by Iranian state media, has already sent minor tremors through global oil markets.
To those following Middle Eastern geopolitics, this isn’t new. Tehran has repeatedly dangled the closure of Hormuz as leverage—usually in response to sanctions or military pressure. But the current moment feels different. Tensions with Israel have risen dramatically, and the prospect of energy disruptions is no longer hypothetical.
20% of the world’s oil, hostage to a narrow waterway
Roughly 20 million barrels of oil and a fifth of the world’s liquefied natural gas (LNG) pass through this narrow strait daily. The Strait of Hormuz is not merely a maritime corridor; it is the aorta of the global economy. And Iran, with shoreline control over it, holds a kind of economic trigger few nations possess.
Tehran’s calculus is brutally simple: If its regime is cornered or existentially threatened, why not pressure the very system that empowers its adversaries—the global market?
This is not traditional warfare. It is market warfare. And it comes with fewer casualties but wider collateral damage.
Global hypocrisy sails free
Predictably, the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet is watching closely, and policymakers are already invoking “freedom of navigation” — a concept applied inconsistently across global conflicts. The same international community that tolerates blockades elsewhere finds moral clarity only when the global energy supply is at risk.
Iran’s strategy, while dangerous, exposes a deeper contradiction: When a non-Western state uses its geography to resist economic suffocation, it is called aggression. When a Western state enforces sanctions or blockades, it is “policy.”
Europe’s strategic absence
Europe, ever reliant on Middle Eastern energy and diplomatically absent in the region, is once again reduced to quiet observation. As markets convulse and energy costs soar, the EU offers platitudes. Its foreign policy posture in the Gulf remains little more than a whisper at a fire alarm.
A warning shot to global logistics
Iran doesn’t need to close the Strait to make its point. The mere suggestion is enough to send insurers, traders, and governments into defensive mode. It’s a reminder that in the age of logistics and interdependence, the most potent weapons are often not missiles—but chokepoints.
This isn’t just about oil or Iran. It’s about a world that has become so interconnected, so delicately balanced, that a single corridor of water can send shockwaves through financial markets, supply chains, and political alliances.
The Balkans had Brčko. The world has Hormuz.
For students of history, the situation evokes parallels with smaller, forgotten conflicts — like the battle over the Brčko corridor in Bosnia. A tiny piece of territory with outsize strategic weight. Just like Hormuz.
Israel and the floating cost of deterrence
At the core of this tension is the undeclared war between Israel and Iran. With recent airstrikes on Iranian targets, Israel has reignited a familiar powder keg. But now, it’s no longer just soldiers or militias that are threatened — it’s global oil supplies.
The global energy order is becoming hostage to a regional shadow war.
When threats to international trade routes become a daily feature of regional posturing, the world must confront a new reality: Global stability is no longer safeguarded by institutions, but by geography—and the willingness of one actor to disrupt it.
The Strait of Hormuz may remain open, for now. But markets are already behaving as if a match has been lit. And perhaps, in a way, it has.