The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most vital maritime chokepoints, serving as a critical route for approximately 20% of the world’s crude oil and 33% of global liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports from the Gulf states to international markets. Connecting the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and the Indian Ocean, this narrow waterway — just 33 kilometers wide at its narrowest point, with only 3 kilometers of navigable lanes in each direction — has long been at the heart of regional and international tensions due to its immense strategic significance.
The Strait of Hormuz is a crucial maritime chokepoint, handling 20% of global oil and 33% of LNG exports, making it vital to global energy markets.
Recent escalations between Iran and Israel, combined with military movements by U.S. naval forces, have heightened concerns over the security of this vital maritime corridor. Any disruption to shipping through the Strait could have profound economic and geopolitical consequences, both regionally and globally. The vulnerability of the Strait has re-entered the spotlight as the possibility of its closure — either deliberately or as a consequence of conflict — threatens to destabilize global oil markets. If such a scenario materializes, experts warn that oil prices could surge to $300 per Barrel, triggering global inflation, a shock to energy markets, and widespread supply disruptions.
The Gulf’s oil-producing states, particularly Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE stand to suffer the most severe economic damage, while Iran, with its access to alternative export routes, would be relatively less affected. Importantly, the roots of insecurity in the Strait lie in provocative actions by the United States and Israel, whose expanded military presence and potential attacks on oil tankers have drawn the region closer to instability. To prevent further escalation, Israel and its Western backers must cease their destabilizing maneuvers — otherwise, the resulting crisis may disproportionately impact Western economies and Israel’s regional allies.
Since Friday, June 13, military tensions in the Persian Gulf have sharply intensified following mutual missile and drone strikes between Iran and Israel, coupled with U.S. military deployments in the region. International media outlets have increasingly speculated that Iran might use the closure of the Strait of Hormuz as a strategic pressure point against Israel’s allies. While Iran has not officially endorsed such a stance, Israeli attacks on Iranian targets and Iran’s retaliatory strikes have sparked concerns among stakeholders over the Strait’s security.
Escalating conflict between Iran and Israel, along with U.S. military deployments, has raised fears of a blockade or disruption in the Strait.
Reports of three oil tankers catching fire in the Gulf have fueled suspicions that Israel may be expanding the scope of the conflict to draw the U.S. into direct intervention by false flag operations. The deployment of the USS Nimitz aircraft carrier and its strike group to the Middle East — reportedly to defend Israel against Iranian ballistic missile threats — has further raised regional tensions. NBC News has reported that at least two U.S. aircraft carriers are expected to remain stationed in the area for at least a month.
Iran, with its extensive coastline along the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz, has long played a critical role in securing maritime traffic. However, the growing military presence of the U.S. and its allies — including warships and F-35 and F-16 fighter jets — is widely perceived as provocative, inviting possible retaliation and increasing the risk of direct confrontation.
Reuters has described any disruption to oil flow through Hormuz as a worst-case scenario, with oil prices potentially skyrocketing beyond $100 per Barrel. Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein has warned that serious interruptions in the Strait could push oil prices to $200–$300 per Barrel, causing a significant shock to the global economy. Even countries that do not import oil directly from the Gulf would feel the impact due to tight global supply.
A closure could spike oil prices to $300–$400 per barrel, causing global inflation, energy shortages, and economic instability, especially for Gulf oil exporters.
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), roughly 20 million barrels of crude oil and petroleum products pass through the Strait daily, representing one-fifth of global oil consumption. Any disruption could severely destabilize global markets. Countries such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, and Iraq are heavily reliant on the Strait for their oil and gas exports. Iraqi media estimate that Iraq exports 5 million barrels of oil per day via the Gulf. Any disruption could paralyze its economy. By contrast, Iran, with alternative export options via pipelines to the Caspian Sea and the Gulf of Oman, would likely be less affected — a strategic advantage amid regional turmoil.
A prolonged crisis in Hormuz would not only spark global energy inflation but also pressure European countries that are highly reliant on imported energy. Rising costs could reduce economic growth, increase living expenses, and spark social unrest in Western economies. Fears of expanded conflict in the Gulf following Israel’s recent attacks have already pushed Brent crude prices up 13% to $74 per Barrel. Some analysts warn that if tensions escalate further, prices could soar to $400 per Barrel, bringing the global economy to its knees.
The geopolitical fallout of maritime insecurity in Hormuz could also be severe. Israel, which relies heavily on support from Western and Arab Gulf states, may find itself isolated if regional trade routes collapse. Arab states maintaining commercial and political ties with Israel would struggle to support it under maritime blockade conditions. Moreover, the expanded U.S. naval presence — including aircraft carriers like the USS Nimitz and missile-equipped destroyers — is perceived as a potential trigger for Iranian retaliation.
Unlike other Gulf states, Iran has alternative export routes, making it less vulnerable to Strait disruptions and giving it strategic leverage
The Washington Institute has warned that Iran may respond, as it has in the past, by seizing commercial vessels or launching limited military operations. Such a cycle of action and reaction could compromise maritime safety and potentially escalate into wider conflict. Nonetheless, the principal drivers of insecurity remain foreign provocations, particularly by the U.S. and Israel, whose military maneuvers and threats of attacks on tankers continue to push the region toward instability.
The core of the Hormuz crisis lies in U.S. and Israeli provocations — including carrier group deployments, warplane patrols, and the looming threat of tanker attacks — all of which create distrust and volatility. These actions not only undermine maritime safety but threaten to cripple the economies of both the region and the world. Western nations — especially Israel’s principal backers such as the U.S. and Europe — would suffer severe political and economic repercussions if tensions escalate. Iran, meanwhile, with its strategic leverage and alternative export routes, is better positioned to withstand such crises.
Nonetheless, Iran has consistently emphasized that it seeks to maintain the Strait’s security and views any disruption as a consequence of external provocations. George Saravelos, Head of FX Research at Deutsche Bank, has warned that the closure of the Strait of Hormuz would constitute the worst-case scenario. He argues that a complete disruption in Iranian oil exports could push prices above $120 per Barrel. However, due to the catastrophic global consequences, Saravelos believes such a scenario is unlikely unless all diplomatic avenues are exhausted.
U.S. and Israeli military actions are seen as provoking instability; experts warn that any major disruption could trigger a global crisis unless diplomatic solutions prevail.
He wrote:
“Given the enormous global ramifications of a closure, we believe such a step would only be considered by Iran as a last resort — and only in the most extreme circumstances.”
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.
