The UK government has issued a stark condemnation of Iran’s decision to close the Strait of Hormuz, calling it a reckless act that endangers global energy security. The strait, a narrow passageway between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman, handles roughly 20% of the world’s oil shipments. Its closure represents an acute disruption to a system already strained by geopolitical tensions and climate-driven energy demands.
Foreign Secretary David Lammy stated that the move constitutes a “flagrant violation of international maritime law” and a “direct threat to the stability of energy markets.” He emphasised that the UK would work with allies to ensure freedom of navigation, a principle enshrined in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Iran’s government, for its part, justified the closure as a response to “hostile acts” by Western nations, though no specific evidence was provided.
The timing is particularly worrying. Global oil prices have already been volatile due to conflicts in Eastern Europe and the Middle East. A closure of the strait could see prices spike by 20% or more within weeks, according to the International Energy Agency. This would ripple through economies already grappling with inflation and the cost of living crisis. For the UK, which imports a significant portion of its oil from the region, the impact would be immediate.
From a climate perspective, the episode underscores a painful irony. The world’s continued dependence on fossil fuels makes such choke points critical vulnerabilities. Every barrel of oil that passes through Hormuz carries with it the carbon burden of future emissions. We are, in effect, arguing over access to a substance that is steadily destabilising our climate. The planet’s warming trajectory, now at 1.3°C above pre-industrial levels, is driven by the combustion of these very resources.
Yet the solution is not to simply secure the strait and continue as before. The UK’s condemnation must be matched by a accelerated push for energy transition. Every investment in renewables, every grid upgrade, every electric vehicle on the road reduces the leverage of such geopolitical blackmail. The closure threat is a reminder that energy security and climate action are two sides of the same coin.
The UK has committed to net-zero emissions by 2050, but current policies put it on course for only a 70% reduction. The government should treat this crisis as a catalyst for more ambitious targets: a 80% reduction by 2035, for instance. This would entail massive expansion of offshore wind (the North Sea’s capacity is still underexploited), solar installations on every suitable roof, and a fully electrified car fleet by 2030.
Beyond infrastructure, the crisis calls for diplomatic innovation. Britain should champion a “Climate Security Council” at the UN, alongside the existing Security Council, to address energy-related threats. Such a body could mediate the Hormuz situation while pushing for a rapid phase-out of fossil fuels.
The biosphere does not recognise national boundaries. The collapse of ecosystems, from coral reefs to rainforests, is accelerating. Every day of delay in decarbonisation locks in more climate disruption. Iran’s closure of Hormuz is a symptom of a diseased global energy system. Treating the symptom without addressing the disease is futile.
In summary, Britain’s condemnation is correct but insufficient. It must be followed by concrete actions that reduce our vulnerability to such threats. The Strait of Hormuz will not stay closed forever, but the fossil fuel era must end before our climate suffers a closure of its own: a shutdown of livable conditions for much of humanity. The science is clear; the urgency is now.
