In the early months of 2026, the world witnessed a definitive pivot in contemporary history. The geopolitical landscape of West Asia has undergone a fundamental shift, marked by Iran’s emergence as a proactive global maritime power—a transition that has effectively transformed foreign aggression into a strategic failure for the aggressors.

By exercising sovereignty over its territorial waters and invoking the inherent right of self-defence enshrined in Article 51 of the UN Charter, Iran has demonstrated its leverage over the world's most vital economic artery; the Strait of Hormuz. Crucially, this influence has thus far been manifested solely through a policy of non-provision of security for the waterway. Under international law, Iran maintains full sovereign rights over its territorial seas, possessing both the legal legitimacy and the military capacity to regulate or halt transit through the Strait.

This shift from active security provision to a negative security posture has elevated Iran from a regional player to a pivotal global actor—one capable of dictating the pulse of the world economy at will. In contemporary geopolitical theory, this is defined as “chokepoint power” (Farrell and Newman, 2019), a strategic asset that has proven more decisive in the 21st century than conventional or nuclear arsenals. Iran has underscored a singular reality. Global energy security and Iranian national security are two sides of the same coin. Any infringement upon Iran’s territorial integrity strikes directly at the economic stability of industrialised nations and global governance alike.

The costs imposed on the global economy following Iran’s defensive measures speak for themselves. In less than a month, Brent crude surged from approximately $70 to over $120 per barrel (UNESCAP, 2026). US and European stock markets plummeted by more than 10% (McPoland, 2026), while the United Nations warned that the ensuing disruption has pushed an additional 45 million people to the brink of acute hunger (United24 Media, 2026). These figures reflect the undeniable truth that the global economy can no longer afford to bypass Iran’s strategic interests.

In his inaugural public address, Ayatollah Sayyid Mojtaba Hosseini Khamenei, the Leader of the Islamic Republic, affirmed his commitment to the path of his martyred father. He stated that “the leverage to close the Strait of Hormuz must remain a primary tool for exerting pressure against our enemies” (Tabnak, 2026), reinforcing the centrality of Iranian management of the waterway.

The martyred Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Grand Ayatollah Khamenei (RIP), frequently highlighted the Strait's sensitive geopolitical standing. Throughout his leadership (1989–2025), he maintained that regional and global stability are inextricably linked to the security of Islamic Iran. He warned that any miscalculation by adversaries regarding the Iranian people's defensive capabilities would inevitably lead to a fundamental crisis in global energy security.

The following analysis will examine the geopolitical significance of the Strait of Hormuz, the legal basis for Iran’s management of the waterway, and the catastrophic consequences of instability resulting from illegal aggression by the US and Israeli regimes. Furthermore, it will address the legal and moral accountability of the aggressors for the resulting global turmoil.

The Legal and Strategic Foundations of Iran’s Maritime Power

In the framework of international law, a state’s sovereignty over its territorial waters remains one of the most fundamental principles enshrined in the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The Strait of Hormuz—a strategic artery stretching 90 nautical miles in length and narrowing to just 21 miles at its throat—is divided between the territorial waters of Iran and Oman. What distinguishes this strait from other international waterways is a fact often obscured by misconception: Iran is a signatory to the Convention, having ratified it in 1996 (Better World Campaign, 2025). Consequently, as a coastal state, Iran exercises full sovereign rights over these waters, and all transit through this corridor is subject to the laws and regulations of the Islamic Republic.

Alongside this territorial sovereignty, Article 51 of the UN Charter recognises the “inherent right of individual or collective self-defence” for member states in the event of an “armed attack” (Security Council Report, 2025). The overt military aggression by the American and Israeli regims against Iranian soil in January and March 2026 constitutes a prima facie case of such an attack. These actions not only violated Article 2(4) of the UN Charter but directly targeted Iran’s territorial integrity and national sovereignty. Under customary international law and the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice—notably the landmark ruling in Nicaragua v. United States (1986)—a state victimised by aggression is entitled to take proportionate and necessary countermeasures to halt such incursions and ensure its own security (Respicio, 2024).

Recent shifts in West Asia demonstrate that Iran has transitioned from a passive actor merely reacting to threats into a proactive power capable of reshaping the global economic calculus. The theory of “complex interdependence,” pioneered by Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye, elucidates the reality that in the modern world, dependency is rarely a one-way street (Blackwill, 2025). Just as the Iranian economy relies on oil revenues, the industrialised and emerging economies of the West and East are critically dependent on the safe, unhindered passage of oil, liquefied natural gas (LNG), and manufactured goods through the Strait of Hormuz.

By withdrawing its guarantee of security for the Strait in response to illegal aggression, Iran has demonstrated this interdependence in an unprecedented fashion. This strategic pivot underscored that global economic stability is inextricably linked to respect for Iran’s territorial integrity and national security. In essence, Tehran has proven that global energy security and Iranian national security are two sides of the same coin; any serious threat to Iranian sovereignty will, by extension, directly disrupt the vital supply chains of the world’s major industrial powers (Pant, 2026).

In the 21st century, the concept of “energy choke point power” has emerged as a defining constituent of national strength. Geopolitical theorists from Alfred Mahan to Robert Kaplan have long asserted that command over strategic maritime narrows is tantamount to controlling the very arteries of global commerce (Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada, 2026). The Strait of Hormuz stands as the pre-eminent example of such a flashpoint, facilitating the daily transit of approximately 20% of the world’s crude oil and over 25% of its liquefied natural gas (LNG) (Better World Campaign, 2025). This colossal flow of strategic commodities renders the Strait a vital lifeline for the economies of China, India, Japan, South Korea, and the European Union alike.

What amplifies Iran’s leverage in this arena is the stark reality that, contrary to popular belief, there is no viable operational alternative to this waterway. Existing pipelines across Saudi Arabia and the UAE can only divert a fraction of the crude oil volume, while for LNG, no alternative route exists whatsoever. Qatar, the world’s leading LNG producer, remains 100% dependent on the Strait of Hormuz for its exports (Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada, 2026). This geopolitical fact grants Iran the agency to influence not only the flow of energy but the fundamental economic stability of the world’s major industrial powers.

From the perspective of international law, the primary responsibility for the current crisis rests with the American and Israeli regims. Their unlawful military incursions into Iranian territory provided the legal grounds for Iran to exercise its right to legitimate countermeasures. The aggressions of January to April 2026 did not merely violate the UN Charter; they jeopardised regional security and global economic equilibrium. Under the Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, countermeasures are deemed lawful when taken in response to a prior wrongful act and maintained within the bounds of proportionality. Iran’s decision to withdraw security guarantees for a waterway situated within its own territorial waters is, therefore, a calibrated and lawful response to the assault on its territorial integrity.

Furthermore, the international community—and energy-consuming nations in particular—cannot absolve themselves of responsibility. As analysts at the Observer Research Foundation have noted, many states, including European NATO members and Asian powers, have pointedly declined to join US-led military coalitions despite their heavy reliance on the Strait. This reticence signals a tacit international acknowledgment of the legitimacy of Iran’s position and the inherent illegality of the initial American and Israeli aggression.

A Looming Humanitarian Catastrophe of Instability in the Strait of Hormuz

As instability in the Strait of Hormuz persists, exacerbated by continued military aggression against Iran, the world faces a humanitarian disaster of unprecedented proportions. The World Food Programme (WFP) has issued a stark warning: should the conflict endure through mid-2026 and oil prices remain above $100 per barrel, an additional 45 million people globally will be pushed into acute food insecurity—joining the 318 million already struggling to survive (WFP, 2026). This 14% surge in those facing severe hunger represents a crisis comparable in scale to the humanitarian fallout of the Covid-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine (Rti, 2026).

The impact of this crisis is profoundly asymmetric. According to WFP analysis, Africa and Asia are set to bear the heaviest burden. Projections suggest that if current conditions persist, the population facing food insecurity will rise by 21% in West and Central Africa, 17% in East and Southern Africa, and 24% in Asia (Wen Wei Po, 2026). Nations such as Sudan, which relies on imports for 80% of its wheat, and Somalia, already ravaged by severe drought, are on the front lines. Reports indicate that since the onset of this crisis, the price of essential commodities in Somalia has jumped by at least 20%.

On a more granular level, the WFP reports that approximately 70,000 tonnes of food supplies—including canned goods, split peas, and specialised nutritional supplements—are currently stranded at sea due to the Hormuz crisis. Vessels destined for Sudan and Yemen have been forced to divert around the Cape of Good Hope, adding 25 days to transit times and exponentially increasing logistical costs.

Beyond direct food supplies, a critical link in the global agricultural chain has been severed in the supply of chemical fertilisers. Data from the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) shows that the Persian Gulf region accounts for roughly 13% of global nitrogen exports and 9% of phosphate exports (UNCTAD, 2026). As a vital hub for both production and transit, the region is indispensable for import-dependent agricultural sectors.

The price of urea fertiliser has climbed by approximately $80 per tonne since the conflict began, rising from $470 to over $550 (Bobo Net, 2026). This price hike hits a global market already strained by Chinese export restrictions and reduced European production caused by high natural gas costs.

India, the world’s second-largest fertiliser importer, is particularly vulnerable. Some 70% of India’s urea imports originate from Persian Gulf nations, including Oman, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE. Furthermore, 42% of its diammonium phosphate (DAP) imports come from Saudi Arabia (UNCTAD, 2026). Disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz have led to severe shipment delays. Additionally, the reduction in LNG exports from Qatar—the world’s largest producer—has starved Indian fertiliser plants of essential feedstock, stifling domestic production.

The economic ramifications are equally dire. In its January 2026 Global Economic Prospects, the World Bank warned that disruptions to strategic maritime routes could seriously jeopardise global growth. While that report was published prior to the latest escalation, it predicted global growth would slow to 2.6% in 2026—the lowest rate since the 1960s (World Bank, 2026a). With the Strait now imperilled, analysts believe these forecasts must be radically revised, with a further contraction of 3% to 5% against the baseline scenario now a distinct and harrowing possibility.

The World Bank has issued a sobering assessment, revealing that approximately a quarter of developing nations remain poorer than they were in the pre-pandemic era. As the current crisis escalates, the income gap between these struggling economies and the developed world is set to widen further (World Bank, 2026a). Per capita income in developing countries is projected to grow by a mere 3% in 2026—roughly one percentage point below the average recorded between 2000 and 2019.

This energy crisis, precipitated by instability in the Strait of Hormuz, now threatens to shutter energy-intensive industries across Europe and East Asia. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), European natural gas reserves plummeted to just 35% of capacity in January 2026—the lowest level since records began (IEA, 2026). Should imports from the Persian Gulf be severed, Europe faces a deficit of 130 additional LNG cargoes required to replenish stocks before the 2026-2027 winter. Such a shortfall would leave the continent’s steel, aluminium, and fertiliser industries—all heavily reliant on stable energy inputs—facing widespread collapse.

The environmental and systemic risks are equally acute. In its February 2026 report, the IEA warned that heightened tensions in West Asia and disrupted energy supplies could trigger massive blackouts and heating or cooling crises across multiple continents. Global oil supply saw an unexpected contraction of 1.2 million barrels per day in the first quarter of 2026, a direct consequence of conflict-related disruptions in the Persian Gulf (IEA, 2026).

Furthermore, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) has cautioned that attacks on oil infrastructure in West Asia carry grave environmental risks, including the contamination of water sources and severe public health implications (Bernama, 2026). Stéphane Dujarric, spokesperson for the UN Secretary-General, noted that with oil prices surging past $100 per barrel following American and Israeli strikes on Iran, “everything, including UN humanitarian operations, will be impacted.” He added that spiralling energy costs are inflating the World Bank’s logistical overheads, specifically the cost of humanitarian food aid and the fertilisers essential for its production.

The World Food Programme (WFP) has echoed these concerns, stating that its capacity to deliver life-saving aid to millions will be drastically curtailed by rising transport and fuel costs (WFP, 2026). With 3.18 billion people globally currently grappling with food insecurity, any erosion of the humanitarian response could precipitate a catastrophe of unprecedented magnitude. The legal and moral responsibility for this unfolding disaster rests squarely with the aggressor states whose unlawful strikes against Iran triggered this global emergency.

Conclusion: International Responsibility and Legal Imperatives

The contemporary world is now confronted with the undeniable reality that global economic stability constitutes a 'red line' for the Islamic Republic of Iran. Any threat to Iran’s national security is, by extension, a threat to the energy security and economic prosperity of every nation. The military aggressions by US and Israeli forces in January and March 2026 proved that hegemonic powers still seek to tilt the balance of power through martial means. However, Iran’s robust response in withdrawing security guarantees for the Strait of Hormuz demonstrated that independent nations now possess 21st-century instruments capable of curbing such incursions. Tehran has shown it wields influence far beyond its regional borders, possessing the legal and strategic agency to redefine the global economic calculus.

The international community—particularly energy-consuming nations currently reeling from the heavy costs of inflation, supply chain disruptions, and food insecurity—must heed this lesson. Continued support for, or silence in the face of, such illegal acts of aggression will only serve to prolong the crisis and exacerbate the unfolding human catastrophe.

A sustainable resolution lies in a return to the foundational principles of international law and the UN Charter. These principles unequivocally condemn aggression and, while recognising national sovereignty, emphasise the peaceful settlement of disputes. Iran’s position is anchored in these very tenets. It is now incumbent upon the global community to explicitly condemn the aggressors and compel an immediate cessation of military hostilities. This is a fundamental prerequisite for restoring regional stability and safeguarding the world’s energy and economic corridors. The international order must accept that Iranian national security and global economic stability are inextricably linked; to imperil one is to destabilise the other.

Furthermore, any impartial analysis must acknowledge that the genesis of this humanitarian and economic disaster was the illegal military violation of Iran’s territorial integrity by the American and Israeli regimes in early 2026. As Fu Cong, China’s Permanent Representative to the UN, rightly asserted: “The current crisis in the Middle East did not begin with Iranian retaliation, but with the joint military strikes by the US and Israel[i regimes] against the country, conducted without Security Council authorization” (China Daily, 2026). These strikes, launched in flagrant violation of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, have jeopardised a strategic region with global consequences that are both unpredictable and increasingly unmanageable.

While the international response has occasionally been marked by double standards, there have been significant signals of condemnation for these unlawful acts. The Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated explicitly that the strikes on Iran were “a violation of international law,” noting that “pre-emptive strikes require the existence of an imminent threat,” which was absent in this instance (Deutsche Welle, 2026). Russia described the attacks as “premeditated and unjustified armed aggression against a sovereign UN member state,” warning that the move has pushed the region to the “precipice of a humanitarian, economic, and even nuclear disaster.” China has also reiterated that “Iran's national sovereignty, security, and territorial integrity must be respected,” calling for an “immediate cessation of all military actions.”

Conversely, on 11 March 2026, the UN Security Council adopted a resolution supported by 13 members which focused exclusively on condemning Iran’s actions, while pointedly omitting any reference to the role of the American and Israeli regims as the original aggressors. China and Russia, both veto-wielding permanent members, abstained from the vote, stating unequivocally that the resolution “failed to reflect the root causes or provide a balanced picture of the conflict” (EU News, 2026). This stance underscores that even within an international architecture often dominated by US hegemony, the legitimacy of Iran’s position and the illegality of American and Israeli incursions remain undeniable to major global powers.

The requirements for global convergence to resolve the current crisis in the Strait of Hormuz can be distilled into three primary pillars. Firstly, the UN Security Council must return to its core mandate of the prevention of war. Under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, this body is charged with the maintenance of international peace and security. It cannot afford a selective approach that condemns one party while shielding the primary aggressors. The Security Council must issue a balanced resolution that condemns the initial strikes against Iran and insists upon the immediate cessation of all military hostilities.

Secondly, major energy-consuming nations—including China, India, and European states—have a duty to engage in active mediation and cease any support for the aggressors. European nations, currently witnessing a 68% surge in natural gas prices at the Dutch hub and a return to 2.5% inflation across the Eurozone, cannot remain indifferent to the escalating humanitarian and economic fallout. These states must utilise their diplomatic channels to exert necessary pressure on Washington and Tel Aviv to halt their aggression and acknowledge Iran’s legitimate security requirements.

Thirdly, there is a pressing need for a new legal framework that recognises the security of international waterways as inseparable from the political stability of West Asia. The current crisis has demonstrated that the world can no longer leave global energy security and economic stability hostage to the unilateral decisions of a hegemonic power. A new mechanism, grounded in the Convention on the Law of the Sea and acknowledging Iran’s sovereign rights as the territorial custodian of this waterway, is now a necessity.

Dr. Saied Reza Ameli is Prof. of Communications and Global Studies – Faculty of World Studies- University of Tehran and Member of Academy of Sciences – Islamic Republic of Iran

References

Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada. (2026, March 13). The Revenge of Geography: Canada as a Solution to Asia’s Structural Vulnerabilities in Oil and LNG. https://www.asiapacific.ca/publication/canada-solution-to-asias-structural-energy-security-crisis.

Bernama. (2026, March 13). European stocks close weak again amid rising West Asia tensions. https://www.bernama.com/en/world/news.php?id=2533951.

Better World Campaign. (2025, June 23). UNCLOS, the Strait of Hormuz and Iran’s big gamble on the high seas. https://betterworldcampaign.org/peace-and-security/unclos-the-strait-of-hormuz-and-irans-big-gamble-on-the-high-seas.

Blackwell, S. (2025, October 1). The international law of the sea, the Straits of Hormuz and regional security. Rsdi. https://rsdi.ae/en/publications/the-international-law-of-the-sea-the-straits-of-hormuz-and-regional-security.

China Daily. (2026, March 12). UN Security Council obliged to rediscover original role: to prevent wars. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202603/12/WS69b2bb9ca310d6866eb3d876.html.

DW. (2026, February 28). What are the reactions of various countries after the US-Israel joint attack on Iran? https://shorturl.at/mATE3.

Farrell, H; Newman, A L. (2019).  Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion. International Security. 44 (1): 42–79. doi:10.1162/ISEC_a_00351.

International Energy Agency. (2026, March). Oil Market Report – March 2026. https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/a25ddf53-cd6c-4910-ac90-16bfd28399e7/-12MAR2026_OilMarketReport.pdf.

Khamenei, Grand Ayatollah Sayyid Ali. (1989-2026). Persian Gulf Files: Collected Statements on the Strait of Hormuz. Retrieved from [https://farsi.khamenei.ir/newspart-index?tid=1291].

McPoland, B. (2026, March 30). Stock market crash? 1 Nasdaq share I’m keeping an eye on. Yahoo Finance UK.

Pant, H. V. (2026, March 16). The Hormuz challenge facing Trump. Observer Research Foundation. https://www.orfonline.org/research/the-hormuz-challenge-facing-trump.

Pobo.net. (2026, March 6). The Middle East wars have disrupted global fertilizer supplies, posing a risk of shortages during the Asian spring planting season. http://webnewsdx3.pobo.net.cn/Data/FARMING/6610323.HTML.

Respicio & Co. (2024, October 5). Use of force short of war | Judicial and arbitral settlement | Public international law. https://www.respicio.ph/bar/2025/tag/Use+of+Force+Short+of+War.

Rti. (2026, March 23). The Middle East war has paralyzed the supply of goods; UN wars fear 45 million more people worldwide will face hunger. https://www.rti.org.tw/news?uid=3&pid=198739.

Security Council Report. (2025, October). In hindsight: The increasing use of Article 51 of the UN Charter and the Security Council. https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/monthly-forecast/2025-10/in-hindsight-the-increasing-use-of-article-51-of-the-un-charter-and-the-security-council.php.

Tabnak. (2026, March 11). The First Message of the Supreme Leader. Retrieved from https://shorturl.at/oU7cV.

UN News. (2026, March 11). Security Council adopts [Persian] Gulf-backed resolution condemning Iran attacks; Russia bid fails. https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/03/1167119.

UNCTAD. (2026, March 31). Fertiliser shock looms as Strait of Hormuz shipping disruption ripples through supply chains. Down To Earth. https://www.downtoearth.org.in/food/fertiliser-shock-looms-as-strait-of-hormuz-shipping-disruption-ripples-through-supply-chains-warns-unctad.

United Nations ESCAP. (2026, March 31). Present conflict in the Middle East: Risks and opportunities for South Asia. https://www.unescap.org/blog/present-conflict-middle-east-risks-and-opportunities-south-asia.

United24 Media. (2026, March 17). UN warns war in Iran could push 45 million more people into acute hunger. https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/03/1167147.

Wen Wei Po. (2026, March 26). United Nations: 45 million people pushed into famine. http://www.wenweipo.com/a/202603/26/AP69c449ffe4b0b49ad1b3f1eb.html.

World Bank. (2026a, January 13). Global economy holds up despite trade tensions, but developing world still lags. https://www.cnbctv18.com/world/global-economy-holds-up-despite-trade-tensions-but-developing-world-still-lags-world-bank-19820323.htm.

World Food Programme. (2026, March 13). How the Middle East conflict is fuelling hunger as WFP scales up assistance. https://www.wfp.org/stories/how-middle-east-conflict-fuelling-hunger-wfp-scales-assistance