THE warning from the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) that the Strait of Hormuz could close should not be dismissed as just another far-away geopolitical alarm.
It is a stark reminder of how fragile the global food system has become to conflict, energy shocks and supply chain disruptions.
The fallout could be far broader than oil markets and shipping lanes and could eventually reach dinner tables around the world, including in developing countries already grappling with inflation and food insecurity if it goes unchecked.
The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most important maritime chokepoints and carries a large proportion of global oil and fertiliser supplies daily.
Any major disruption there would send energy prices soaring, increase transport costs dramatically and put enormous strain on agricultural production worldwide. So that warning from the FAO about the potential for a severe global food price crisis in six to 12 months’ time is not just talk, but a realistic assessment based on the interconnected nature of the modern economy.
What makes this threat particularly alarming is the chain reaction it could trigger. Higher fuel prices also mean higher costs for shipping and farms.
Fertiliser shortages raise the costs of production and decrease crop yields. Lower yields tighten food supplies which in turn drive up commodity prices and intensify inflation.
For the poorer countries that rely on food imports the effects could be devastating.
The world has already seen how fast-food insecurity can spiral out of control in a crisis. The COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine conflict have highlighted the fragility of global supply systems and how export bans, panic buying and supply bottlenecks can worsen hardship.
The FAO is right to caution against repeating those mistakes. Protectionist policies may seem politically attractive in the short term, but they are generally self-defeating, worsening shortages and driving prices higher abroad.
Equally important is the organisation’s focus on protecting humanitarian food flows. Populations affected by conflict and living in low-income countries are particularly dependent on international food assistance.
To cut these lifelines in a global supply crisis would lead to human catastrophes far beyond the Middle East.
The FAO’s recommendations are a call for urgent international attention. In the short term, governments need to cooperate to secure alternative trade routes and must avoid placing export restrictions on vital goods such as fertilisers, energy and food inputs.
Social protection programmes must be scaled up to shield the most vulnerable populations from rising costs.
The medium- and long-term recommendations are even more relevant as they address structural deficiencies in the global food system. Investing in renewable energy for agriculture, diversifying ports and logistics corridors, improving irrigation systems and supporting precision farming technologies are not just responses to crises, they are investments in resilience.
Developing countries, particularly those reliant on imported food and fertiliser, should take heed of these warnings.
Countries should begin to strengthen local agricultural capacity, bolster storage infrastructure and, where possible, lower dependence on volatile global supply chains.
Improved regional cooperation on food security and trade can also act as a shock absorber in the future.
To make matters worse, the possibility of a strong El Nino event looms. Droughts and volatile weather would worsen supply shortages and boost agricultural losses when it mattered most. To wait until prices in supermarkets rise and shortages spread would be a costly error.
The FAO has warned in a timely and clear way. The question now is whether the international community will use its foresight rather than wait until the full eruption of the crisis.
Food security can no longer be an afterthought in world geopolitics. In a connected world, instability in one strategic waterway can quickly turn into hunger in another part of the world.
