Iran’s Missile Threat in the Strait of Hormuz Poses New Military Pressure on Israel and the US
Iran’s use of solid-fuel missiles (Sejil missiles) and ballistic missiles has introduced a new level of military pressure on Israel, forcing many Israeli residents to spend much of their time in shelters. Despite widespread censorship of reports concerning Iranian missile strikes on US and Israeli targets, the scale of destruction is so extensive that these two countries cannot prevent the dissemination of all missile impact videos.
US bases in Arab Gulf states have suffered significant damages, and American aircraft carriers have demonstrated their inability to accept the security risks associated with entering the Strait of Hormuz. However, these are only part of the problems that the US and Israel have imposed on themselves by attacking Iran.
The Strait of Hormuz remains America’s Achilles’ heel, and the US’s attempt to form a global coalition to attack the strait has failed. The world understands well that Iran can easily maintain a prolonged closure of the Strait of Hormuz. The consequences would go beyond rising energy prices and economic recession in energy-dependent countries.
Although halting oil production and export through the Strait of Hormuz would drastically increase global prices, the strait is also a vital export route for other essential products, such as urea and petrochemicals. With the arrival of spring and the start of the agricultural season, a halt in urea exports—which is crucial for chemical fertilizer production—could disrupt the cultivation of a large portion of agricultural products in the coming year.
While the market may attempt to find alternative producers if the Strait of Hormuz remains closed, given the limited time, this effort is unlikely to succeed. As a result, in the near future, significant crises in food and crop production are expected.
Another concern for the world is that major global companies, especially in technology, have invested hundreds of billions of dollars in countries bordering the Gulf. Examples include data centers, AI projects, and smart city initiatives in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, which represent just a fraction of these investments.
Continued instability in the region not only severely reduces the oil revenues of the Arab Gulf states but is also likely to cause significant problems, up to the brink of bankruptcy, for many large Western corporations—a scenario the Western economy would struggle to endure.
Western and Arab countries do have an alternative route to address the Strait of Hormuz crisis: transporting their essential goods overland to western Saudi Arabia and then using the Red Sea towards the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait—which Yemen’s Houthi forces can heavily influence security-wise—or the Suez Canal.
However, the problem is that, even if transporting such volumes via this route were possible, the Suez Canal does not have the capacity, and like the Strait of Hormuz, the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait remains insecure due to Houthi actions against Iran’s enemies and Yemen.
In such a situation where an energy crisis, agricultural crisis, and investment crisis converge to choke the West, the most logical course of action is for Western countries to negotiate with Iran—rather than aligning with the hardline stances of Trump and Netanyahu.
It will undoubtedly be difficult for them to concede to Iran demands they have pressured the country to avoid for years, but this situation is the consequence of folly inflicted on them and the world by the US and Israel.
Europe will certainly not enter a war if America and Israel are not the victors. A shift by Europe and Asian countries towards Iran and compliance with Iran’s demands under continued pressure would significantly strengthen Iran’s bargaining position—potentially turning Iran into a global power.
