With the deteriorating security situation in the Gulf region, the Strait of Hormuz has once again become a global flashpoint. Drone attacks, maritime sabotage, and energy pressures have created a threatening landscape that no longer follows traditional conflict patterns.
As major powers grapple with conflicting strategies, the world watches to see how this narrow waterway could affect oil prices, alter military calculations, and shape the course of international politics.
The Strategic Importance of the Narrow Waterway
The Strait of Hormuz has long been a pivotal waterway for global energy flows. According to data from global oil transit tracking organizations, an average of 20.9 million barrels per day of crude oil, condensate, and petroleum products passed through the strait in 2023, representing approximately 20% of global oil consumption.
A significant portion of global oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) trade also transits the strait. The world’s reliance on this narrow waterway makes Hormuz a vital artery for international energy stability.
Moreover, a substantial share of oil flows from the Gulf region are destined for Asia, particularly Japan, South Korea, India, and China countries highly sensitive to any disruptions in Hormuz. In this context, even the slightest disruption in Hormuz could destabilize global oil markets and trigger an energy crisis in major Asian consumers.
At its narrowest point, the strait is only a few dozen kilometers wide. The narrow shipping lanes and heavy tanker traffic increase the risk of collisions and shipping congestion, making it highly vulnerable to disruptions. This makes the Strait of Hormuz not just a trade route, but a vital geopolitical hub.
From Traditional Threats to Hybrid Warfare
Over the past two decades, threats to the Strait of Hormuz have shifted from traditional forms (naval blockades, naval deployments, and sovereignty disputes) to more complex hybrid threats combined military, technological, cyber, and non-state elements.
This shift aligns with the global trend that conflicts are no longer necessarily conventional confrontations but now involve non-linear means that can impact stability without a formal declaration of war.
These threats include unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) incursions, drone attacks on oil tankers or maritime infrastructure, underwater sabotage, and cyberattacks on navigation or ship tracking systems. These tactics allow regional actors, whether states or their proxy militias, to exert strategic pressure, maintain ambiguity regarding the perpetrators, and avoid major military escalation.
In the context of sanctions and diplomatic pressure, hybrid warfare offers perpetrators an advantage: achieving significant impact with minimal risk. Therefore, maritime passages such as the Strait of Hormuz are no longer just a matter of shipping, but have also become part of modern geopolitical warfare that uses control of energy as a tool of pressure.
Energy Dependence and Asian Exposure
The effects of this potential disruption are particularly pronounced in Asia. With most Gulf oil flowing to Asia, major consuming countries are the most vulnerable. There are no alternative routes to fully compensate for the loss of the Strait of Hormuz’s capacity, and other overland pipelines and export terminals can only handle a fraction of the essential transport volume.
Geographical constraints, costs, and technical capacity make short-term substitutions unrealistic. Consequently, any crisis in the Strait of Hormuz could lead to a sharp rise in global oil prices, increased transportation costs, and inflationary pressures in many energy-importing developing countries.
In the medium term, persistent disruptions or threats might encourage consuming countries to accelerate energy diversification, but in the short term, the market will remain susceptible to geopolitical volatility and speculation.
A Fragmented Security Architecture and Institutional Gaps
At the institutional level, international and regional maritime security has failed to address hybrid challenges. In the Gulf region, the security architecture relies heavily on the military capabilities of major powers and traditional naval patrols. However, this approach overlooks unconventional threats, such as drone attacks, cyber sabotage, and small autonomous vessels.
By contrast, the experience of Southeast Asia demonstrates that maritime security issues, known as “unconventional threats,” can be managed more effectively through cross-border cooperation, intelligence sharing, and collective maritime diplomacy.
Read more: Talara dan Transformasi Hormuz: Ketika Jalur Energi Dunia Jadi Arena Arbitrer
In this context, Indonesian studies indicate that addressing modern maritime threats requires an integrated, multilateral maritime security policy that reflects the diversity of threats. One relevant study by the author emphasizes the importance of an “international maritime security system” that adapts to unconventional threats, not just traditional military threats.
Given this pattern, it is clear that the traditional security approach, based on warships and military force, is no longer sufficient. The need for a comprehensive, multi-sectoral, and rules-based maritime security architecture, along with cyber intelligence, is critical. Without institutional reform and cooperation, strategic waterways like the Strait of Hormuz will remain vulnerable to collective threats.
Theoretical Framework: Realism, Securitization, and Hybrid Warfare
First, realism categorizes conflict and power competition as central to state behavior. Gulf oil-producing states leverage their geographic location as a strategic advantage, maintaining control over oil shipping routes and regional influence, and using energy as a tool for negotiation and power, particularly within the context of global great power competition.
From a realist perspective, the Strait of Hormuz is a source of structural power that controls oil routes and provides bargaining power in international relations.
Second, securitization theory (of the Copenhagen School) helps explain how energy and maritime routes are defined as existential threats and threats to national security. Oil-importing states secure against potential disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz: they use a security framework, rather than a traditional economic one, to justify their foreign policy, military budgets, and strategic cooperation.
Securitization allows the international community to view the strait not merely as a trade route, but as a vital area that must be secured as a top priority.
Third, hybrid warfare theory describes the transformations of war and violence in the modern international system, which are not limited to conventional warfare but encompass a mix of military, cyber, propaganda, and non-state actors to achieve geopolitical objectives.
In the context of the Strait of Hormuz, hybrid warfare allows for the disruption of energy flows without a major military confrontation, simply through asymmetric actions and the obscuring of perpetrators’ identities. By integrating these three theoretical frameworks, we see that the Strait of Hormuz is not merely a waterway, but a global strategic arena where power, threat identities, and methods of conflict are constantly evolving.
Political Implications: Addressing the New Maritime Risk Landscape
Faced with this complexity, the international community, particularly energy-consuming and producing states in the Gulf, must consider reforms to its approach to maritime security. First, a multilateral maritime security architecture is needed to address hybrid threats.
This includes joint patrols, shared maritime intelligence, early warning systems for drones and unmanned aerial vehicles, and international legal instruments that clarify responsibilities in unconventional maritime incidents. Cooperation between importing and exporting states must be strengthened, and strategic alliances based on shared interests in protecting energy supply chains must be formed.
Second, diversifying energy sources should be a long-term strategic priority for consuming states, reducing dependence on Gulf oil through the development of alternative energy sources, improving energy efficiency, and strengthening strategic reserves. This is not merely an environmental or economic issue; it is also a matter of national resilience to geopolitical shocks.
Third, energy diplomacy must be considered an integral part of foreign policy. States should include energy security on their diplomatic agendas, including dialogue with producing countries, energy companies, and international organizations to formulate a common policy on global energy transit. This approach helps prevent military escalation and establishes energy stability as a shared global interest.
Hormuz: A Critical Test for Global Energy Security
The Strait of Hormuz stands on the cusp of a major transformation. With vast quantities of oil and gas passing through this waterway, and with the rise of unpredictable hybrid threats, it represents a critical test of the international community’s ability to manage global risks.
The world’s energy dependence on the Gulf will not disappear anytime soon, but without structural reforms in maritime security and energy diplomacy, Hormuz will remain a flashpoint, and a potential global crisis could erupt at any moment.
From a theoretical perspective of international relations, Hormuz demonstrates that power, securitization, and conflict transformation are part of the new dynamics of the international system. As a political essay, it underscores that global energy stability is not merely an economic issue, but also encompasses security, diplomacy, and strategic innovation in the face of today’s hybrid, disparate, and less obvious threats. The world must prepare.
Author: Adinda
International Relations Student, Sriwijaya University
References
U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2024). World oil transit chokepoints: Strait of Hormuz. https://www.eia.gov/international/analysis/world
Energy Analytics Institute. (2025, June 24). Around 20% of global LNG flows through Strait of Hormuz: EIA analysis. Energy Analytics Institute Report.
Azizah, N. (2020). Keamanan Energi Asia Timur dalam Perspektif Realisme. Jurnal Ilmu Hubungan Internasional, 16(2), 145–160.
Setiawan, A., & Rachman, M. (2021). Ancaman Non-Tradisional dan Kerentanan Keamanan Maritim di Asia. Jurnal Keamanan Nasional, 7(1), 23–39.
Keliat, M. (2012). Keamanan maritim dan implikasinya bagi Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Ilmu Politik (JSP), 16(1), 1–18. https://jurnal.ugm.ac.id/jsp/article/view/10970
Fadillah, M. (2022). Securitization dan Politik Energi di Kawasan Asia Pasifik. Jurnal Global Strategis, 12(1), 67–83.
Samy, M., & Kusumadewi, J. A. (2021). Diplomasi pertahanan maritim Indonesia dalam menghadapi ancaman keamanan non-tradisional. Jurnal Hubungan Internasional, 14(1), 45–60. https://e-journal.unair.ac.id/JHI/article/view/25547
Anwar, S. (2019). Membangun keamanan maritim Indonesia dalam analisa kepentingan, ancaman, dan kekuatan laut. Jurnal Pertahanan & Bela Negara, 9(2), 73–94. https://jurnal.idu.ac.id/index.php/JPBH/article/view/315
World Ports Organization. (2025). Amid Regional Conflict, the Strait of Hormuz Remains Critical Oil Chokepoint. World Ports Report.
International Group of LNG Importers (GIIGNL). (2023). Annual LNG Report 2023. https://giignl.org/resources
U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2025). World Oil Transit Chokepoints and Throughput Volumes in the Strait of Hormuz. EIA Data Report.
Editor: Salwa Alifah Yusrina
Bahasa: Rahmat Al Kafi
⚡ Baca Lebih Cepat Artikel MMI di Ponsel Anda!
Ikuti Channel WhatsApp
Media Mahasiswa Indonesia (MMI):
KLIK DI SINI
