Hormuz war is ours

Straits Under Tension: “Their” Toll, Our Global Crisis

An invisible balance holding the world together

Claiming that what is happening in the Strait of Hormuz is not “our war” reflects a lack of lucidity and courage among leaders who refuse to face reality. Nothing has been done to neutralize this regime for 47 years, and the day the United States intervenes, a tantrum follows. Not only have we remained passive, but because we were not informed, we look the other way. It has become a habit when one does not want—or is unable—to assume responsibility.

Empty words

Pretending to consolidate peace and stability after the United States might have succeeded in securing peace borders on fantasy. France had its moment of glory, trying to be holier than thou. We see where that has led today: coffers emptier than empty. It will be too late. The time is now. Claiming there is no need to intervene is a serious mistake. What follows offers a glimpse of the price to be paid if and when the guns fall silent.

In case our memory fails us

The previous century also experienced a crisis of courage and lucidity. When Daladier and Chamberlain returned from Munich after meeting the Führer on September 29, 1938, they were welcomed as heroes. They had saved peace. We know what came next: war was declared on September 3, 1939.

How it works

Global trade operates on a principle as simple as it is essential: freedom of maritime navigation. This principle is enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, signed in Montego Bay in 1982, which establishes that in straits used for international navigation, passage must be free, continuous, and unobstructed.

The legal framework

This legal framework is not an abstraction. It is the very condition of contemporary globalization. More than 80% of global trade by volume moves by sea. Yet these flows do not travel across an open and homogeneous ocean: they pass through a series of choke points—straits—that concentrate the bulk of strategic routes.

In other words, a few dozen miles of water are enough to sustain—or destabilize—the entire global economic system.

Straits: vital and concentrated passage points

About twenty major straits structure global flows. They connect major maritime basins and constitute unavoidable passages.

Middle East and Africa

• Strait of Hormuz → Iran, Oman
• Bab el-Mandeb → Yemen, Djibouti, Eritrea
• Strait of Tiran → Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Israel

Europe and the Mediterranean

• Strait of Gibraltar → Spain, Morocco, United Kingdom
• Strait of Dover → France, United Kingdom
• Bosphorus → Turkey
• Dardanelles → Turkey
• Danish Straits (Øresund, Great Belt, Little Belt) → Denmark, Sweden

Asia – the heart of global trade

• Strait of Malacca → Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand
• Singapore Strait → Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia
• Sunda Strait → Indonesia
• Lombok Strait → Indonesia
• Makassar Strait → Indonesia
• Taiwan Strait → China, Taiwan
• Korea Strait (Tsushima) → Japan, South Korea
• La Pérouse (Soya) Strait → Russia, Japan

Americas and polar regions

• Florida Strait → United States, Cuba
• Strait of Magellan → Chile
• Arctic straits (Davis, Nares) → Canada, Denmark (Greenland)

???? In total:

• 20 major strategic straits
• more than 35 states directly concerned

The hypothesis: the temptation of tolls

Let us imagine, for a moment, a rupture of the current framework.

Each coastal state would consider:
“This strait borders my territory; it is a national resource. I control access and set the price.”

This reasoning would introduce a major transformation:
maritime passage would no longer be a right, but a priced service.

A chain and cumulative taxation

In this scenario, each vessel would successively cross several toll straits.

Let us take a conservative assumption:

• $50,000 per passage

A vessel crossing:

• Hormuz
• Bab el-Mandeb
• Malacca

???? Additional cost:
at least $150,000 per trip

In multi-state straits (Malacca, Bab el-Mandeb), taxes could accumulate:

• Indonesia
• Malaysia
• Singapore
• Thailand

???? A single passage could generate 3 or 4 separate tolls

Immediate global inflation

The consequences would be mechanical:

Maritime transport

• 5 to 15% increase in costs

Energy

• rising oil and gas prices
• increased volatility

Consumer goods

• imported inflation
• rising food and industrial prices

???? Maritime tolls become a diffuse global tax

Legal and political chaos

In shared straits, a simple question becomes unsolvable:

• Who sets the price?
• Who controls flows?
• Who arbitrates disputes?

???? Result:

• rivalry between states
• diplomatic tensions
• legal conflicts

The strait ceases to be a neutral passage.
It becomes a permanent arena of confrontation.

The domino effect: the end of a maritime order

The major risk lies in contagion.

If one state imposes a toll:

• others follow
• the principle of freedom is weakened
• international law recedes

???? We move from a coherent global system to fragmented maritime routes

The energy and strategic shock

Some straits are irreplaceable:

• Hormuz → Gulf oil and gas
• Malacca → energy flows to Asia

Any disruption, even limited, would trigger:

• sharp price increases
• market instability
• tensions among major powers

???? Energy becomes an indirect lever of pressure

The forgotten players: landlocked countries

There are 44 landlocked states in the world.

These countries depend on:

• neighbors to access a port
• maritime routes to trade
• straits to connect their flows to the world

International law recognizes their right of access to the sea. But this right depends on one essential condition:
effective freedom of maritime routes.

A structural double penalty

In a world of toll straits:

For a coastal country:

• rising costs

For a landlocked country:

• accumulation of constraints

It must:

• cross several states
• pay for land infrastructure
• bear maritime tolls

???? Result:

• loss of competitiveness
• economic marginalization
• increased dependency

Some countries could simply be excluded from global trade.

The worst-case scenario

1. Initial decision
   A state imposes a strategic toll.
2. Chain reaction
   Other states follow to avoid losing revenue.
3. Global inflation
   Transport, energy, and raw materials rise.
4. Logistical disruption

• massive rerouting
• longer routes
• port congestion

1. Militarization

• naval escorts
• tensions at sea
• incidents between powers

1. Fragmentation

• each strait becomes a negotiation
• each route an uncertainty

1. Systemic crisis

• lasting inflation
• shortages
• global political instability

A global fragmentation bomb

This phenomenon would function like:
an economic and geopolitical fragmentation bomb

Each strait would become:

• a pressure point
• a lever of power
• a factor of imbalance

The effects would be:

• diffuse
• cumulative
• uncontrollable

A logic of global contagion

The comparison with a pandemic is illuminating.

Like an epidemic:

• a local starting point
• rapid spread
• global effects

Trade routes would become vectors for spreading the crisis.

???? Globalization, designed to facilitate exchanges, would become an accelerator of disorder.

Conclusion – An illusion of sovereignty

Turning straits into toll systems may appear as an act of sovereignty.

In reality, it would be:

• a disruption of global trade
• increased pressure on fragile economies
• militarization of flows
• fragmentation of the international system

Straits are not local resources.
They are global infrastructures.

The day they cease to be open, the world ceases to be fluid.

And the nature of the question changes:
Hormuz, Malacca, Gibraltar are no longer regional issues.

They become a global crisis.

On that day, there would be no more “local problem.”
There would be only one reality:
it would be everyone’s problem.

But far too late. Instead of a single focal point of conflict, it would have become generalized chaos.