The world's most critical shipping chokepoint is becoming a geopolitical battleground — and Russia may be the unlikely winner.
It did not take long for the fallout from the US and Israeli attack on Iran to spill beyond the battlefield.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
On Wednesday, Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps declared what it called "full control" of the 39km waterway, warning it would attack any vessel attempting to pass.
US President Donald Trump swiftly pledged to deploy the Navy to escort tankers through the strait — a move that would put American forces on a direct collision course with Iranian forces in one of the world's most strategically vital waters.
And in the eye of the storm, one country is likely watching events unfold with quiet satisfaction: Russia.
Could Moscow be the biggest winner?
"China's need to continue buying crude now mostly relies on Russia among the main suppliers, as both Iran and Venezuela are unable to meet that demand anymore," Andrei Covatariu, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council's Global Energy Center, told Euronews.
The crisis also threatens to revive European dependence on Russian gas at precisely the moment Brussels had been trying to phase it out.
"We might see some EU member states advocating for delays or exemptions from Russian gas imports," he continued, "as Europe needs natural gas to replenish its strategic stocks."
For the Kremlin, the calculus runs deeper still.
By holding its crude discounts rather than cashing in, Moscow could use the moment to deepen its leverage over Beijing.
"That could be a geopolitical move from the Kremlin — keeping discounts and increasing geopolitical leverage over China," Covatariu said, describing a scenario in which Russia turns an energy crisis it did nothing to start into a strategic asset.
Troubled waters
The Strait of Hormuz is the world's most critical oil, gas and shipping chokepoint, handling roughly 20% of global oil shipments and around 30% of the world's LNG supply.
Around 20 million barrels of oil would typically pass through each day.
Shipping trackers now show hundreds of tankers hovering idle on either side, caught between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman, as insurers and operators wait to see whether the threat is real.
For Asian importers, the pain is already tangible.
For QatarEnergy alone, 82% of sales go to China, South Korea and India — and on March 4, the company declared force majeure, a legal mechanism that releases a party from contractual obligations under extraordinary circumstances.
"This is a clear indication of the disruptions and the risks in the region," Covatariu explained, "both in terms of production, storage and shipping, but it is also a logical commercial step, as contracts protect parties in such situations."
Is it even legal?
Closing the Strait of Hormuz would violate international law, which guarantees free navigation through strategic waterways — but legality, analysts say, may be beside the point.
"Of course, legally, closing the Strait of Hormuz conflicts with international law," Covatariu says.
"But it is a question about capacity to disrupt, partially or totally, or at least inflict fear about disruptions. That alone is enough for shipping and insurance premiums to stay high."
Iran's capacity to sustain that threat, he adds, is directly proportional to its ability to launch and maintain attacks.
"When these capacities decrease, the probability of disruption in the Strait of Hormuz will decrease."
In the very short term, Covatariu notes, global strategic stocks remain at relatively comfortable levels.
But if disruption at Hormuz extends beyond a few weeks, the consequences sharpen quickly: spiking prices, rising retail costs, and eventually demand destruction as consumers and industries are forced to cut back.
"If the scale of these attacks and the physical disruption is confirmed at a larger scale, along with the blocking of the Strait of Hormuz, and it takes more than a few weeks," he warns, "we can really discuss prices spiking, retail prices increasing and, eventually, demand destruction."
The bottom line, he says, is simple: "Duration is key."
