Hormuz and the Fragility of the Global Order

Tuesday, May 12, 2026

The Middle East is currently experiencing one of its most volatile and unpredictable periods. Following a brief period of "détente" (before October 7th, 2023) in which the region seemed to be moving toward stability, the current situation is reconfiguring the lines of geopolitical fracture.

At the center of this perfect storm, the Strait of Hormuz emerges not merely as a 33-kilometer-wide geographical feature, but as the jugular vein of the world economy. If oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) are the blood that feeds global industry and consumption, Hormuz is the vital artery that, if obstructed, could lead the financial system to an unprecedented infarct.

The concept of a "choke point" is not a modern invention. In the 16th century, during the Portuguese expansion into the East, the strategic vision of Afonso de Albuquerque identified that dominance over trade did not depend on controlling vast territories, but on critical points of passage. By fortifying and controlling the straits of Bab-el-Mandeb, Malacca, and Hormuz, Portugal managed to dictate the rules of the spice trade and Indian Ocean navigation for decades. Today, technology has changed, but the geographical logic remains implacable: those who control the straits hold an authentic veto power over global prosperity.

The situation reveals itself as a complex shadow game where Iran uses its geographical position as a negotiating lever—or a tool for retaliation—in the face of Western sanctions and rising tensions with Israel and the Sunni monarchies of the Gulf. Closing the Strait is a kind of "nuclear option" within a conventional war scenario.

For Tehran, control of the channel allows it to balance the scales against the military superiority of the United States. Through asymmetric warfare—utilizing naval mines, speedboats, and missiles—Iran can paralyze the passage of tankers. For the rest of the world, a closure represents the specter of a supply crisis that no strategic reserve has the capacity to mitigate in the medium or long term.

The numbers defining Hormuz are eloquent: approximately one-fifth of the world's oil production and nearly one-third of Liquefied Natural Gas pass through here. A prolonged blockade will not merely result in a gradual rise in prices; it will cause a "thermal shock" to financial markets. Similarly, economies such as China, Japan, and South Korea are even more critically dependent on Gulf crude, facing risks of massive industrial shutdowns. It could very well be the definitive test of globalization's resilience.

The latent crisis in Hormuz serves as a reminder that, despite the rhetoric surrounding the energy transition, the world remains anchored to fossil fuels and, consequently, to a dependence on one of the most unstable regions on the planet. The cost of miscalculations is measured not only in military losses but in the potential paralysis of a civilization that has not yet learned to function without the flow that crosses that narrow strip of water.

The Sorcerer's Apprentices

​

Operation “Epic Fury” was envisioned as a “lightning strike” intended to subdue the Iranian regime. Instead, it has turned into a perilous stalemate.

Tehran’s reaction did more than just stall the offensive; it exposed the overconfidence of American and Israeli leaders. ​The strategy was built on the conviction that Iran was a “house of cards” ready to collapse under military pressure and a subsequent—yet illusory—popular uprising. However, current reality reveals the opposite: the global cost of the conflict is skyrocketing, while the regime appears steadfast. ​

Similarly, Washington and Tel Aviv base their strategies on distinct and even contradictory assumptions. While Israel seems to tolerate chaos and fragmentation in Iran as a security advantage, the US requires a functional Iran to prevent a global economic collapse and an unprecedented refugee crisis. ​

The recent history of the Middle East and North Africa demonstrates that it is far easier to destroy a state than to rebuild one. Iraq, Syria, and Libya serve as recent and striking examples of the consequences of power vacuums. The risk of turning Iran into a “Libya on steroids” represents the greatest threat to Western interests, primarily due to economic and migratory implications. ​

Equally uncomfortable is the position of neighboring Arab countries. With Iranian drones and missiles hitting oil and gas infrastructures across the Gulf, countries like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, and even Qatar are unsuccessfully trying to distance themselves from the American offensive to avoid becoming direct targets, even as they privately long for the end of the Iranian regime. ​

As Fareed Zakaria observed on CNN’s “GPS,” President Trump’s leadership resembles that of a “jazz musician”: he acts on instinct and tactical improvisation, but without a sheet music (strategy) for the “day after”.

Added to this is the so-called “war of economic attrition,” which favors Iran. The staggering cost difference between Shahed drones and interceptor missiles is a clear example. This “mathematics of destruction” targets more than just a physical objective; it aims primarily at the financial and logistical exhaustion of the adversary. ​

It remains to be seen whether the Trump administration has considered the “day after.” Meanwhile, Russia and China watch closely, assessing whether the US will become bogged down in the Middle East, thereby weakening its protection of Ukraine and Taiwan. ​

From an economic standpoint, with the selective blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, the price of a barrel of oil is reaching levels that threaten the economic stability of Europe and the world. The energy transition itself, once viewed by many as a mere climate goal, has now attained the status of a strategic priority for the West. ​

The pressing question now is: how to exit this conflict without leaving a regional power vacuum or plunging the world into a recession?