The world is watching with keen interest the UN Security Council vote scheduled for Friday on a strategic draft resolution submitted by Bahrain. This US-backed draft aims to authorize the use of "defensive" force to protect shipping lanes in the Strait of Hormuz, in response to escalating Iranian attacks that threaten regional stability.
Historical context and strategic importance of the Strait of Hormuz
Historically, the Strait of Hormuz is a vital artery for the global economy, connecting the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Oman, and the Arabian Sea. Approximately one-fifth of the world's crude oil and liquefied natural gas pass through this narrow waterway. The strait has long been a flashpoint for geopolitical tensions, most notably the "Tanker War" during the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s, when the international community recognized that any threat to freedom of navigation in the strait would directly cripple the global economy. More recently, Iran has imposed a blockade on the strait in response to US and Israeli strikes, igniting a new crisis in the Middle East that threatens to disrupt fuel supplies and destabilize global markets.
Warnings of economic terrorism and international repercussions
In light of these dangerous developments, the Permanent Representative of the Kingdom of Bahrain to the United Nations, Ambassador Jamal Al-Ruwaie, warned that the continuation of this situation constitutes “economic strangulation and terrorism” whose impact is not limited to the countries of the region, but extends to the entire world. He emphasized that the draft resolution, which has undergone extensive amendments and enjoys strong support from the United States, comes at a “sensitive and crucial time” to save the global economy from a potential recession resulting from the anticipated sharp rise in energy prices.
Defensive methods and differing positions
The current draft resolution authorizes member states, either unilaterally or through “voluntary multinational maritime partnerships,” to use “all necessary and proportionate defensive measures” to ensure the safety of ships and secure transit passage. This measure is expected to remain in place for at least six months. In a notable move, US President Donald Trump called on countries experiencing fuel shortages to protect their own ships, stating that US forces would not undertake this task on their behalf.
Fears of further escalation and a possible veto
On the other hand, the draft resolution faces international opposition and division. China warned that authorizing the use of force could lead to a dangerous “further escalation,” while Russia described the text as “biased,” raising the possibility of a veto. French President Emmanuel Macron, for his part, deemed the idea of a military operation to liberate the strait “unrealistic,” warning that it would be lengthy and would pose a real danger to all transiting vessels. French Ambassador Jérôme Bonnafont stressed that the Security Council is required to develop a swift defensive response.
The implications of the decision and the future of energy security
Analysts, including Daniel Forte of the International Crisis Group, believe that passing the resolution faces major obstacles due to the positions of Russia and China. He explained that focusing on military solutions ignores the urgent need for a comprehensive political settlement. It is worth noting that Security Council resolutions authorizing the use of force are historically rare; they occurred in 1990 to liberate Kuwait and in 2011 for the intervention in Libya. Today, the world once again stands at a crossroads: either to protect global energy security by force, or to slide into open regional conflict.
