Straight from the Strait of Hormuz
*Bassey
Nnimmo Bassey
No matter the cause of warfare, the environment and innocent people inevitably bear the brunt of the destruction. This reality is clearly illustrated by the many ongoing smouldering and open conflicts that have led to this period being described as one of endless violence. Many of these conflicts have crude oil footprints, suggesting an underlying link between energy resource grabbing and war. The most glaring examples are the situations involving Venezuela and Iran.
In all these conflicts, the war waged by the United States and Israel on Iran raises several critical concerns. First, the shifting explanations as to why the initial strikes were launched suggest to some observers that crude oil and gas are major motivations. In Venezuela, crude oil, rather than any professed drive for democracy, appears to have been the primary trigger for external interference. In Iran’s case, the justification is that it must not develop an atomic bomb. While no nation should possess nuclear weapons, the reality is that there are already about 13,400 such weapons globally, with a combined explosive yield more than 360,000 times that of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima during the Second World War.
Second, it is far easier to secure funding for destruction than for development. This helps explain why global military expenditure approaches $3 trillion annually, while funding for development, climate action and biodiversity protection remains in the billions.
At a time when the world should be investing in climate adaptation and mitigation, vast resources are being consumed by the arms industry and oil interests. Rather than discussing how to restore our shared humanity, global discourse is dominated by concerns over dwindling stocks of missiles, suicide drones and other weapons of mass destruction. Civilian infrastructure, chemical plants, hospitals and schools—continues to be targeted. Ecocide is being planned, executed, and even celebrated without consequence.
One troubling characteristic of warmongers is their ability to start wars, but their inability to end them. This may be because they are rarely in the line of fire, except in the court of public opinion.
The strategic pressure applied by Iran at the Strait of Hormuz should send a clear message to all nations: we exist within a deeply interconnected global ecosystem. When the Strait is disrupted, the entire world feels the shock immediately. While missiles fly and suffering engulfs innocent populations, oil companies and players in the military-industrial complex reap enormous profits. It is estimated that U.S. oil companies could generate up to $63 billion in excess profits this year due to price surges linked to the Iran conflict. Additionally, the United States may earn approximately $600 million daily in federal revenue from its crude oil output of 20 million barrels per day. Yet, with a war that could cost an estimated $200 billion, can oil revenues truly offset the human and environmental toll?
Nigeria faces a paradox. Rising global oil prices do not necessarily translate into improved public welfare. Due to limited domestic refining capacity, the country remains heavily dependent on imported refined products, leaving it highly vulnerable to global oil shocks. The privately owned Dangote Refinery, which could mitigate these pressures, has been forced to import crude due to insufficient local supply, and production remains below the country’s OPEC quota. Furthermore, reports indicate that about 400,000 barrels of Nigeria’s daily crude production of 1.5 million barrels are used to service debts owed to international oil companies, banks and traders. Consequently, rising fuel prices are driving inflation across an already strained and inefficient economic system.
Compounding this economic challenge is the long-standing environmental devastation in the Niger Delta caused by crude oil extraction and refining. The region has experienced oil spills equivalent to the Exxon Valdez disaster almost annually for nearly 70 years, an ongoing, undeclared war against both people and the environment.
Back in the Middle East, the deployment of artificial intelligence-guided missiles underscores the increasingly impersonal nature of modern warfare—conflicts fought without conscience or accountability. This is a troubling era marked by a descent into barbarism. Power does not equate to justice, and even stealth cannot always conceal the consequences.
The disruption of the Strait of Hormuz, and potentially other critical routes, should serve as a wake-up call for the urgent need to phase out fossil fuels and invest in sustainable energy alternatives. While the release of strategic oil reserves by members of the International Energy Agency may offer temporary relief, rising prices persist. What happens when those reserves are depleted?
Experts warn that the energy instability triggered by the conflict with Iran will endure long after the last missile is fired. This is due to the massive reconstruction required, as well as the need to rebuild trust in fractured geopolitical alliances and energy markets.
The so-called “invisible hand” of the market has been laid bare by the apparent manipulation of oil prices through political statements, often made via social media. This highlights the urgent need for energy democracy and a decisive move away from resources that fuel conflict, economic instability and environmental destruction.
The world must urgently transition away from fossil fuels, not deepen its dependence on them or fight over their control. That is the stark lesson emerging straight from the Strait of Hormuz.
