The war in West Asia has exposed a dangerous reality of the modern global economy: a conflict fought in one region can threaten the food security, energy supplies and economic stability of countries thousands of kilometres away. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz, now extending into its ninth month, has disrupted the movement of oil, gas and fertilisers, while the continuing war in Ukraine keeps the Black Sea’s commercial routes under threat. The consequences are being felt from South Asia to Africa and Latin America.
For the Global South, this is no longer a distant geopolitical crisis. It is an economic emergency.
India’s food security under pressure
India’s exposure is particularly significant. The country imports close to 90 per cent of its crude oil requirements, making the security of maritime supply routes a vital national interest. With Hormuz effectively closed to normal commercial traffic since the conflict began in February, India’s energy calculations have become considerably more complicated.
The crisis also demonstrates why food security cannot be separated from energy security. Fertiliser production and transportation depend heavily on natural gas, while the Gulf is a major source and transit region for nitrogen fertilisers. The WTO has documented severe disruption to urea and phosphate fertiliser trade through Hormuz. Urea prices rose from approximately $400 to more than $850 per ton in April before easing. The consequences reach farmers, agricultural yields and food prices well beyond the Gulf.
India must therefore strengthen its strategic reserves, diversify suppliers, expand renewable energy and domestic production, and secure alternative transport arrangements. But it must also pay greater attention to fertiliser availability, agricultural inputs and the affordability of food for vulnerable households.
The Black Sea: a corridor requires reciprocity
India’s proposal to restore grain shipments through the Black Sea is equally important. Russia and Ukraine are major agricultural exporters, and the interruption of their trade has contributed to uncertainty in global food markets.
However, reviving the corridor requires more than asking Moscow and Kyiv to stop attacking commercial vessels. The experience of the 2022 Black Sea Grain Initiative provides an important lesson. The agreement, brokered by Turkey and the United Nations, enabled nearly 33 million tons of Ukrainian agricultural products to reach world markets. Russia withdrew in July 2023, arguing that its own food and fertiliser exports continued to face financial, insurance and logistical obstacles.
Any renewed arrangement must address that grievance rather than ignore it. Russia’s demand for practical access to agricultural markets, payment systems, shipping services and fertiliser exports must be considered alongside Ukraine’s right to export grain safely. Turkey’s diplomatic and geographical role remains indispensable, while the United Nations can help establish monitoring and verification mechanisms.
The objective should be a reciprocal arrangement: secure passage for Ukrainian grain and meaningful facilitation of Russian food and fertiliser exports.
Clearly designated shipping lanes, advance notification, mine-clearance arrangements, emergency communication channels and independent incident monitoring would help restore confidence. Without reciprocity and verification, a new agreement risks repeating the failures of its predecessor.
The Global South is already adapting.
The consequences are visible across developing economies. Sri Lanka has introduced a QR-code-based fuel rationing system, while Egypt has imposed restrictions on business operating hours and reduced public lighting to conserve energy. These are not theoretical scenarios; they are emergency responses to the pressure on fuel supplies and public finances.
Nigeria illustrates the link between energy and agricultural security. Although its domestic fertiliser industry has expanded considerably, it remains dependent on imported raw materials, including phosphate and potash. Research by the International Food Policy Research Institute has documented a sharp rise in urea prices, increasing pressure on farmers already facing tight financial margins.
This response points towards a wider lesson. The Global South needs regional food reserves, advance procurement arrangements, diversified fertiliser sources, affordable trade finance and stronger cooperation between producing and importing countries. It cannot remain dependent on a handful of vulnerable maritime routes or suppliers.
The nuclear red line must not be crossed.
Amid this crisis, the nuclear dimension is especially disturbing. US commentator Tucker Carlson has alleged that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is pressing President Donald Trump to consider a nuclear strike against Iran’s underground nuclear facility at Pickaxe Mountain. Carlson has offered no publicly verifiable evidence for this allegation, and it must not be presented as an established US or Israeli policy.
Threatening nuclear weapons as a means of intimidating a country or forcing political concessions is profoundly irresponsible. Their use would not be a conventional military escalation; it would be a humanitarian and environmental catastrophe. Radiation, civilian casualties and long-term contamination would not respect borders. A nuclear strike could also provoke retaliation, destabilise the Gulf and destroy what remains of the international restraint against nuclear use.
A common responsibility
The Global South must not become the silent casualty of conflicts it did not initiate. India has the diplomatic reach to bring together countries across Asia, Africa, the Gulf and Latin America, and to turn G20 discussions into practical cooperation on maritime security, food supplies, energy resilience and the protection of civilian infrastructure.
The priority must be clear: secure shipping, affordable energy, reliable fertiliser supplies and uninterrupted food trade. The international community must also establish firm limits against attacks on civilian economic infrastructure and reject the use or threat of nuclear weapons as instruments of political pressure.
The credibility of global diplomacy will ultimately be measured not by the number of declarations issued at summits, but by whether those declarations protect ordinary people from the consequences of war.
The Global South needs cooperation, not coercion; secure trade routes, not economic blockades; and diplomacy, not nuclear intimidation. The world’s food and energy security must never be sacrificed to the ambitions of military powers.
Dr Waiel Awwad, is a veteran journalist specialising in West Asian affairs; Views presented are personal.