TEHRAN- According to a report by Anadolu News Agency, container freight spot rates have skyrocketed by 80% since the outbreak of the US Israel attack on Iran at the end of February. Trade flows in the Strait of Hormuz remain 90% below normal levels amid ongoing geopolitical uncertainties in West Asia.

Following the start of the war on 28 February, massive disruptions to trade flows through this strategic chokepoint continue to drive up freight rates in the spot market. At the same time, rising bunker fuel costs and associated fuel surcharges are adding further upward pressure on freight rates.

The rerouting of maritime trade in the Red Sea – a direct consequence of the conflict – is extending transit and delivery times worldwide. In response, importers are placing orders earlier than usual to compensate for the latency. Maritime research firm Drewry reported that its benchmark World Container Index (WCI) for a 40‑foot container surged to $3,344 as of 4 June, compared to $1,899 on 26 February – a stark difference. As the 100th day of the conflict draws near, container freight rates are approaching the highest levels of last year, when they reached as high as $3,543 on 12 June 2025.

The rise follows increases in freight rates on Trans‑Pacific and Asia‑Europe trade routes, as well as a reduction in available capacity because container ships remain stranded in the strait. The spot freight rate for a 40‑foot container on the Shanghai‑New York route has risen 98% since the war began, to $5,505. On the Shanghai‑Los Angeles route, prices increased 108% to $4,565 over the same period. Shippers bringing their orders forward ahead of expected US tariffs (scheduled to take effect in July), together with increased cargo demand driven by the 2026 FIFA World Cup, continue to contribute to the upward trend in prices, in addition to the Strait of Hormuz disruptions. The spot freight rate on the Shanghai‑Rotterdam route rose 71% since the start of the war, reaching $3,570. Moreover, some bookings on the Asia‑Europe route have been moved to June ahead of bunker fuel price adjustments expected on 1 July, further pushing up prices.

Global economic consequences of a US‑Israel attack on Iran

A full‑scale US‑Israel attack on Iran would have severe and lasting consequences for the global economy, far beyond the immediate disruption to container freight. Based on the trends reported by Anadolu, the following major impacts can be anticipated:

1. Soaring energy prices – Iran is a major oil and natural gas producer, and the Strait of Hormuz is the transit point for roughly 20% of globally traded oil. A military attack would likely lead to Iran blocking the strait or targeting tanker traffic. Oil prices could spike to 200 per barrel, triggering a global energy crisis. Natural gas prices (already volatile) would follow suit, especially affecting Europe and Asia.

2. Global inflation surge – Higher freight and energy costs would feed directly into consumer prices. The 80–108% increases in shipping rates already observed would multiply into higher costs for manufactured goods, electronics, clothing, and food. Many economies, still recovering from previous inflationary episodes, would face renewed double‑digit inflation, forcing central banks to raise interest rates further and slowing growth.

3. Supply chain disintegration – The Red Sea rerouting and near‑closure of the Strait of Hormuz would fragment global supply chains. Automotive, semiconductor, and pharmaceutical industries – heavily reliant on just‑in‑time delivery – would face production stoppages. Extended lead times (from 30–40 days to 60–90 days) would force companies to hold larger inventories, tying up capital and reducing efficiency.

4. Recession risks in Europe and Asia – The Europe‑Asia trade lane is the world’s busiest. With 90% of normal flows through Hormuz halted, European manufacturers would struggle to receive components from China, South Korea, and Japan. Germany’s export‑driven economy, already fragile, could slip into a deep recession. Similarly, Japan and South Korea, which import almost all their oil via the strait, would face energy shortages and trade deficits.

5. US economic fallout – While the US is less directly dependent on Hormuz for oil, higher global energy prices would still raise gasoline and heating costs for American consumers. The US is also a major exporter of agricultural and industrial goods; disruptions to global shipping would hurt American farmers and manufacturers. Additionally, the expected July tariffs mentioned in the Anadolu report would compound these pressures, making imports from Asia even more expensive.

6. Financial market turmoil – Geopolitical shocks of this magnitude would trigger a flight to safety. Stock markets would fall sharply, while gold, the Swiss franc, and US Treasuries would rally. The dollar could strengthen further, causing emerging market currencies to collapse, especially in countries that rely on food and fuel imports (e.g., Egypt, Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh).

7. Food security risks – Iran, Iraq, and Persian Gulf states are major importers of wheat, rice, and vegetable oils. With shipping insurance premiums skyrocketing (or coverage disappearing) for vessels entering the Persian Gulf, food imports would become prohibitively expensive or simply unavailable. This could lead to hunger and social unrest across West Asia and parts of East Africa.

8. Long‑term restructuring of trade – The crisis would accelerate efforts to find alternative trade routes, such as the International North‑South Transport Corridor (via Central Asia and the Caucasus) or Arctic shipping lanes. It would also boost investment in regional manufacturing hubs (e.g., Vietnam, India, Turkey) to bypass the strait. However, such shifts take years, meaning near‑term pain is inevitable.

In summary, the Anadolu News Agency’s report on freight rate spikes is only the first symptom of a much larger economic storm. A US‑Israel attack on Iran would not only raise shipping costs but also trigger energy shocks, global inflation, supply chain breakdowns, recessionary pressures, and financial instability. Policymakers worldwide should prepare contingency measures, including releasing strategic petroleum reserves, accelerating diversification of trade corridors, and pursuing diplomatic de‑escalation in West Asia.