The Strait of Hormuz once again at the center of the global crisis
Tensions in the Middle East have once again broken across one of the most sensitive points of global trade and energy. The Strait of Hormuz, the narrow sea passage between Iran and Oman through which a huge share of the world’s oil and liquefied gas passes, has in recent days once again become a symbol of the danger that a regional war could grow into a disruption with global consequences. The latest wave of escalation has been further intensified after U.S. strikes on Iranian military targets linked to Kharg Island, a strategically important hub of Iranian oil exports. In this way, the security crisis has gained an even stronger energy dimension, and every new threat to navigation through Hormuz is currently echoing through markets, diplomatic circles, and assessments of the possible spread of the conflict.
According to available information, U.S. President Donald Trump confirmed that American forces carried out attacks on military facilities on Kharg Island, including air defense systems and naval installations, with the message that Iranian oil infrastructure could become a target if Tehran continues to disrupt maritime traffic through Hormuz. The very fact that Kharg came into focus says enough about the seriousness of the moment. That island is important not only in a military sense, but above all as the key point through which most Iranian crude oil exports pass. When military attacks, Kharg, and the Strait of Hormuz are mentioned in the same sentence, it is a scenario that immediately goes beyond regional frameworks.
Why the Strait of Hormuz is so important
The Strait of Hormuz has for decades been considered one of the most important global energy chokepoints. The U.S. Energy Information Administration states that flows through Hormuz in 2024 and the first quarter of 2025 accounted for more than a quarter of total global seaborne oil trade and around one fifth of global consumption of oil and petroleum products. About one fifth of global trade in liquefied natural gas is also transported through the same passage, primarily from Qatar. In other words, this is a maritime corridor whose security affects not only the Gulf states, but also directly Europe, Asia, and global prices of energy, transport, and industrial production.
Particular weight is also given by the fact that the largest share of these shipments is directed toward Asian economies. China, India, Japan, and South Korea are among those most dependent on stable traffic through Hormuz, but the consequences of disruptions do not stop at destination ports. Any more serious narrowing of navigation, rise in ship insurance, delay in deliveries, or military incident in the strait immediately raises the price of a barrel of oil and increases uncertainty in financial markets. That is why Hormuz is not only a regional security problem, but also a global economic indicator.
Kharg as a sensitive point of Iranian energy power
Kharg Island occupies a special place in Iranian oil infrastructure. According to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, most Iranian crude oil exports take place precisely via Kharg, where the main terminal and maritime export infrastructure are located. In practical terms, that island represents the artery through which Iran turns its energy resources into state revenues. That is why any attack on military installations linked to Kharg, even if it does not formally hit the oil terminals, inevitably carries a strong message about the vulnerability of the Iranian export system.
It is precisely that symbolism that explains why markets react almost reflexively. If the conflict were to cross the line of limited strikes and hit the energy infrastructure itself, the consequences would not be reflected only in Iranian revenues, but also in supply chains around the world. History shows that even a few days of a serious blockade or stronger attacks on tankers are enough for energy prices to jump sharply and for political pressure on major powers to rise further. In the current situation, what is decisive is not only what has been hit, but also what all actors are signaling could be hit.
A conflict that has outgrown local borders
The crisis around Hormuz is not developing in isolation, but as part of the broader conflict between the United States, Israel, and Iran which, according to the United Nations, began with U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran on February 28, 2026, and has meanwhile spread to several countries in the region. The United Nations warned that such a dynamic threatens a wider war in an already fragile Middle East. In the same context, Iranian retaliatory strikes on American targets and regional allies, missile and drone attacks, and the danger that maritime traffic could become a means of pressure and retaliation are also mentioned.
That also changes the nature of the crisis itself. It is no longer only about interstate rivalry or limited operations, but about a series of interconnected military, energy, and diplomatic moves that can spill over from the Persian Gulf toward Iraq, the Levant, and the wider area of the Arabian Peninsula. In such an environment, the Strait of Hormuz becomes more than a waterway: it is at the same time a logistical lifeline, a political lever, and a potential red line for international intervention.
Attacks on commercial ships and an alarm for maritime security
One of the reasons why the situation is particularly serious is the fact that the threat is no longer only theoretical. At the beginning of March, the International Maritime Organization warned about deaths and injuries among seafarers in attacks on commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz and emphasized that attacks on civilian shipping are not justified under any circumstances. That message is not a diplomatic formality, but a direct confirmation that the consequences of the escalation have already hit international civilian traffic, crews, and the security of supply routes.
When civilian ships and crews become targets or collateral victims, the crisis becomes even more internationalized. Tanker companies, insurers, and trading houses then do not wait for a formal declaration of a blockade, but react to risk. Insurance becomes more expensive, routes change, port calls are delayed, and some carriers reduce exposure to the area. The consequence is that even without a full official blockade, an effect of serious trade slowdown can be created, which is often enough for the market to trigger a wave of price growth and speculation about a new energy shock.
Reactions of the United Nations and international diplomacy
In recent days, the United Nations has been trying to maintain at least a minimal political framework for de-escalation. The UN Secretary-General warned the Security Council that there are reports of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz to international navigation and that further escalation may have enormous consequences for regional and global security. At the same time, on March 11, 2026, the Security Council adopted Resolution 2817 condemning Iranian attacks on neighboring states, which shows how quickly the diplomatic debate is moving from warnings to formal political moves.
Alongside the UN, strong messages are also coming from the European-Gulf format. In the joint statement of the ministers of the European Union and the Gulf Cooperation Council of March 5, the importance of protecting freedom of navigation, the security of supply chains, and the stability of the global energy market was once again emphasized, precisely with special emphasis on Hormuz. Such language shows that the current crisis is not seen only as a series of military incidents, but as an event that can directly affect the global economy, inflation, and political stability in countries far beyond the region.
Markets react almost instantly
Financial markets in such circumstances react faster than politics. Trading data show that Brent reached around 103.79 dollars per barrel on March 13, with a strong monthly jump, while Financial Times analyses warn that the price of oil has already risen by more than 40 percent since the conflict entered a new phase and that a longer disruption of traffic through Hormuz could open the way for an even more serious energy blow. The rise in prices itself is not only news for stock exchanges and investors. It spills over into the costs of transport, production, heating, air traffic, and food, and thus into inflation in a range of economies.
That is why every signal from Tehran, Washington, or Jerusalem is immediately relevant to the market. Even when there is no full blockade, it is enough for shipping traffic to slow down, for new strikes on tankers to occur, or for war rhetoric to reach oil infrastructure, for expectations about supply to change within a few hours. In such an environment, the market assesses not only the current damage, but also the probability of a scenario that has not yet happened. And it is precisely the scenario of a broader strike on production and exports that investors, governments, and consumers fear the most.
Why the world fears broader intervention
In every major conflict in the Middle East, the Strait of Hormuz also carries an additional danger: it can become the threshold after which major powers assess that this is no longer only a regional war, but a threat to the global order of trade and energy. The United States has traditionally viewed freedom of navigation in that area as a matter of strategic interest, while European states, although less militarily present, very much feel the consequences of disruption through energy prices, inflation, and political shocks on the market. At the same time, the Gulf monarchies are trying to prevent their energy infrastructure and territory from turning into a direct battlefield.
That is why the current crisis is viewed through three parallel layers. The first is military: will the strikes spread to even more sensitive targets and will Iran further resort to pressure on maritime traffic. The second is energy-related: can at least partial flow through the most important oil corridor in the world be maintained. The third is diplomatic: is there still enough room for mediation before the logic of deterrence and retaliation becomes the only language of communication among the actors. As long as there is no convincing answer to all three questions, Hormuz remains a neuralgic point of global politics.
What follows if the pressure continues
At this moment, it is still not clear whether the current escalation will remain limited to a combination of military strikes, threats, and occasional attacks on navigation or whether it will grow into a more lasting disruption of exports from the Persian Gulf. But it is already evident that the world has entered a phase in which maritime security and security of supply can no longer be viewed separately. If tensions persist, energy-importing states will have to strengthen crisis plans, and international organizations and alliances will have to protect civilian shipping and seafarers even more strongly.
For European countries, including those that are not directly dependent on Iranian oil, the problem is broader than the very question of the origin of the energy source. A strike on Hormuz means a rise in risk premiums, more expensive transport, a more unstable market, and a possible new inflationary wave. For Asian states, it is an even more immediate question of supply. And for the Middle East, it is a reminder of how quickly a local war can become a global problem. That is precisely why the Strait of Hormuz is once again at the center of the global crisis: not only because ships and barrels are colliding there, but because today the boundaries between regional conflict and international instability are colliding there.
Sources:- Associated Press – report on U.S. strikes on military targets on Kharg Island and threats to Iranian oil infrastructure (link)- Associated Press – broader overview of the escalation of the conflict and Kharg’s position in the new phase of the war (link)- U.S. Energy Information Administration – analysis of the importance of the Strait of Hormuz for global trade in oil and LNG (link)- U.S. Energy Information Administration – data on Iranian oil infrastructure and the role of Kharg Island in crude oil exports (link)- International Maritime Organization – statement on attacks on commercial ships and the security of civilian navigation in the Strait of Hormuz (link)- United Nations – address by the Secretary-General to the Security Council on the danger of the conflict spreading and reports of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz (link)- United Nations – Resolution 2817 (2026) and the Security Council debate on the escalation of violence in the region (link)- Council of the European Union – joint statement by EU and GCC ministers on freedom of navigation, supply chains, and energy market stability (link)- Financial Times – analysis of market reactions and oil price growth under conditions of disrupted traffic through Hormuz (link)- Trading Economics – market data on Brent oil prices as of March 13, 2026 (link)
Find accommodation nearby
Creation time: 4 hours ago