By WIIS Global Member Sara Peters
Introduction
Escalating political and military tensions in the Middle East have once again brought the Strait of Hormuz to the center of global attention, underscoring its role as one of the most critical economic and energy chokepoints in the international system. As a strategic maritime corridor connecting the Persian Gulf to global markets, the Strait facilitates the transit of nearly 20 percent of global daily crude oil¹, as well as a significant share of liquefied natural gas shipments and a wide range of globally traded commodities. This makes it essential not only to energy markets, but also to broader supply chains and global economic stability.
While some producers such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have invested in alternative export routes, many remain heavily reliant on the Strait, reinforcing its disproportionate importance in global energy markets. Any disruption in this narrow passage immediately triggers market uncertainty, higher insurance costs, and upward pressure on global energy prices.²
Recent regional military escalation in early 2026 has demonstrated a different level of impact compared to previous historical episodes between 2011 and 2025. Rather than limited or symbolic disruptions, recent developments have generated more direct and widespread effects on energy markets, supply chains, and the broader global economy, including spillover impacts on agriculture and food-related trade.³ These patterns of disruption highlight the need for a more structured diplomatic approach. In this context, inclusive diplomacy, particularly the integration of women in security and negotiation processes in line with UN Security Council Resolution 1325, plays a critical role in strengthening long-term governance outcomes in high-risk environments such as the Strait of Hormuz.⁴
Persistent Instability in the Strait of Hormuz
The Strait of Hormuz has long been characterized by recurring cycles of tension and instability. Over the past decade, confrontations, including major episodes in 2011–2012, 2018, 2019, and 2025, have consistently translated into threats to navigation⁵, including naval harassment, vessel seizures, drone activity, and indirect threats to commercial shipping.
Rather than full closure, these patterns instead reflect a strategy of calibrated disruption limited, controlled actions designed to exert pressure while avoiding large-scale escalation.
Developments in 2026 represent a more serious phase of escalation, with more direct effects on maritime transit through the Strait. These disruptions have extended beyond energy flows to affect broader supply chains, while also increasing insurance costs and operational risks for commercial vessels.² ³
Taken together, these dynamics suggest that the primary risk in the Strait lies not only in the possibility of full closure, but in a persistent pattern of instability that remains prone to escalation. Despite repeated crises, responses have remained largely reactive and military-focused, prioritizing short-term stability over long-term solutions. As a result, the Strait continues to function as a strategically exposed corridor where instability is a structural feature rather than an exception.
A Diplomatic Governance Framework for the Strait of Hormuz
Building on existing security arrangements in and around the Strait of Hormuz including the International Maritime Security Construct (IMSC) and the European Maritime Awareness in the Strait of Hormuz (EMASOH), a complementary diplomatic governance framework is required.⁶ While these arrangements support freedom of navigation and provide reassurance to global shipping markets, their primary focus remains on deterrence and crisis response, leaving the structural drivers of instability largely unaddressed. Ongoing maritime advisories continue to highlight persistent navigational risks, demonstrating that disruptions occur despite sustained security presence.⁷
Addressing these limitations requires the establishment of a structured and institutionalized governance mechanism centered on diplomacy rather than episodic crisis response. At its core, the framework should adopt a proportional exposure model, aligning participation, decision-making authority, and financial contributions with each country’s economic stake in the Strait, measured through trade flows. This ensures that both major exporters and key importers, those most affected by disruption, play a central role in shaping coordination and de-escalation efforts.
Similar approaches have been applied in other maritime and economic security contexts. The Contact Group on Piracy off the Coast of Somalia brought together affected states, industry actors, and international organizations to coordinate responses based on shared exposure to maritime risk.⁸ Likewise, the Joint Coordination Centre under the Black Sea Grain Initiative established a mechanism for monitoring, verification, and coordinated decision-making among key stakeholders in a high-risk maritime environment.⁹ These precedents demonstrate that structured coordination mechanisms when anchored in shared economic interests can operate effectively even in politically complex environments.
To ensure both legitimacy and effectiveness, the framework must embed inclusive governance principles from its outset. In line with the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda, women should be systematically integrated across negotiation, mediation, risk analysis, and strategic planning processes. Evidence shows that women’s participation improves both the quality and durability of agreements, increasing the likelihood of sustained cooperation over time.⁴
Beyond formal negotiations, women play critical roles in humanitarian coordination, community-level mediation, and early warning systems particularly in conflict-affected environments where trust-building and local engagement are essential. In multiple contexts, including the Colombia peace process, women have contributed to bridging divides, facilitating dialogue, and ensuring that agreements reflect broader societal needs.¹⁰
Research further indicates that inclusive processes strengthen communication, reduce escalation risks, and improve stakeholder engagement in complex, multi-actor environments.¹¹ In a setting such as the Strait of Hormuz where security, economics, and diplomacy intersect, these contributions are directly relevant to improving crisis management and long-term stability. Expanding women’s participation is therefore not only a matter of inclusion, but a strategic requirement for effective governance.
Within this structure, leadership and coordination roles should be anchored in actors with both strategic capacity and economic exposure, most notably Saudi Arabia. The Kingdom’s position as a leading global energy producer, combined with its role in shaping production decisions within OPEC and OPEC+, has established it as a central stabilizing force in global energy markets. Its ability to adjust output and influence market expectations provides a critical buffer during periods of disruption, reinforcing its role as an energy stabilizer within the international system.²
In addition to its market influence, Saudi Arabia has demonstrated an expanding diplomatic role as a convener of international dialogue. In recent years, the Kingdom has hosted high-level negotiations on major international crises, including talks on Ukraine and mediation efforts related to Sudan.¹² Its regional positioning further reinforces this role, particularly following the restoration of diplomatic relations with Iran in 2023.¹³
Saudi Arabia’s diplomatic engagement is complemented by its international humanitarian and development activities, including large-scale assistance delivered through KSrelief.¹⁴ These efforts enhance its credibility as a contributor to international stability and crisis response.
Within this framework, Saudi Arabia is well positioned to serve not only as a participant, but as a central coordinating actor potentially hosting key institutional functions, facilitating dialogue among stakeholders, and anchoring efforts to stabilize both markets and maritime security conditions.
These strengths are reinforced by Saudi Arabia’s material capabilities, including alternative export infrastructure such as the East–West pipeline, which provides partial flexibility to bypass the Strait during periods of disruption.² ¹⁵ Taken together, these factors position Saudi Arabia as a pivotal actor capable of supporting coordination, reducing volatility, and reinforcing confidence within a structured governance framework.
For such a framework to be politically viable, it must align with the strategic interests of regional actors while avoiding perceptions of external imposition. The Strait lies within the sphere of influence of its littoral states, particularly Iran and Oman, yet under international law specifically the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) it remains an international waterway subject to transit passage rights.¹⁶ Balancing these realities requires a governance model that preserves sovereignty while maintaining openness to global trade.
Beyond political considerations, instability in the Strait carries significant economic consequences. Recurrent disruptions increase insurance premiums, raise shipping costs, and introduce volatility into global markets.² By improving coordination, transparency, and predictability, a diplomatic governance mechanism can help stabilize commercial conditions and reduce systemic risk.
Operationally, such a framework should incorporate a real-time monitoring and early warning system capable of tracking emerging threats and facilitating timely information sharing. A permanent diplomatic coordination mechanism would support continuous dialogue and de-escalation.
Conclusion
The persistence of instability in the Strait of Hormuz highlights a critical gap in current approaches. While military deterrence and reactive security measures continue to dominate responses, they have not addressed the underlying dynamics that sustain volatility in this strategically vital corridor.
A structured and institutionalized diplomatic governance framework should be prioritized and implemented as a core complement to existing security arrangements. Diplomacy must be repositioned as a central mechanism for managing risk, reducing escalation, and securing the stability of global energy flows, trade routes, and supply chains.
At the same time, the limited integration of women in maritime security and diplomatic processes represents a significant strategic gap. Women have demonstrated their capacity to contribute meaningfully to negotiation, humanitarian coordination, and conflict resolution, yet remain underrepresented in key decision-making spaces. Expanding their participation is a practical requirement for improving the effectiveness and durability of policy outcomes.
Embedding inclusive diplomacy within a formalized governance framework provides a viable pathway toward long-term stability. Without such a transition, the Strait of Hormuz will remain a persistent source of uncertainty and systemic risk for the global economy.
About the Author
Sara Peters is a petroleum engineer and energy economist with a background in reservoir and completion engineering. She holds a Master of Engineering Management and Leadership from Rice University, a Master of Science in Applied Energy Economics from King Faisal University, and a Bachelor of Science in Petroleum Engineering from Missouri University of Science and Technology. Her research focuses on energy security, Middle East geopolitics, AI applications for energy intelligence and policy research, and the analysis of global energy markets and strategic affairs.
References
- International Energy Agency (IEA), Oil Market Report – March 2026
- International Energy Agency (IEA), Sheltering From Oil Shocks (2026)
- UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD), Global Trade Update: Disruptions and Food Security Implications (2026).
- United Nations Security Council, Resolution 1325 (2000)
- CSIS / Council on Foreign Relations, Strait of Hormuz Tensions Analysis (2011–2025)
- European-led Maritime Awareness in the Strait of Hormuz (EMASOH) & International Maritime Security Construct (IMSC) official documents
- UK Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO), Maritime Security Advisories (2026)
- United Nations, Contact Group on Piracy off the Coast of Somalia
- United Nations, Black Sea Grain Initiative – Joint Coordination Centre Framework
- UN Women / USIP, Women’s Role in Colombia Peace Process
- UN Women / World Bank, Women, Peace and Security Evidence Base
- Reuters, Saudi-hosted Ukraine and Sudan diplomatic talks (2023–2025)
- Reuters / AP, Saudi–Iran normalization agreement (2023)
- KSrelief, International Humanitarian Assistance Reports
- Saudi Aramco / CSIS, East–West Pipeline (Petroline) Analysis
- United Nations, UNCLOS – Transit Passage Regime