Two wars, one goal

Everyone has a stake in the war in Iran. If this conflict drags on, everyone stands to lose—though the economic pain will vary from country to country.

Iran’s leadership and military strength have been “neutered,” but the Islamic nation continues to hold out for a more favorable outcome of the conflict. By leveraging its strategic control over a critical maritime passage in the Persian/Arabian Gulf, Iran is buying time and temporarily halting the United States and Israel from resuming full-scale war.

The Strait of Hormuz is more than a choke point; it is one of the world’s most vital arteries for global oil supply. The paralysis in oil and gas flows caused by the Middle East conflict has underscored how events at the Strait directly drive oil futures and, in turn, fuel prices at the pump worldwide.

The Strait now stands at the center of the deadlock between the US and Iran, its fate intertwined with stalled peace negotiations. The ongoing conflict has already disrupted global oil flows and sent energy prices soaring. Many experts warn that if the Strait were closed for six months, the resulting supply shock could spark a global recession. Oxford Economics projects that such a scenario would push global inflation to 7.7 percent, fueling further turmoil in energy markets (source: tinyurl.com/yr7hre6w). The Strait thus becomes an economic front in this geopolitical conflict that may not have been amply considered by war planners in both Jerusalem and Washington.

Nuclear proliferation. Moreover, Iran’s potential to possess nuclear weapons remains a nonnegotiable issue for all parties involved. While nuclear-armed Israel and the US firmly agree that Iran must never develop such weapons, Tehran continues to assert its right to possess them. Both the US and Israel argue that a nuclear-armed Iran poses a grave threat to global peace and stability, pointing to the regime’s willingness to attack Gulf neighbors with ballistic missiles and drones in retaliation for hosting US bases—actions that have even targeted civilian-manned oil tankers attempting to transit the Strait without its consent.

These two contentious issues—along with Iran’s backing of anti-Israeli groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and various Iraqi Shiite militias—have led to a stalemate, necessitating a new approach to resolving the conflict.

Gulf nations must be included in the negotiations, with the United Nations or European Union acting as mediators to ensure a truly multilateral and inclusive peace process—one whose outcomes are durable and broadly supported.

At present, Pakistan serves as a willing mediator. However, its geopolitical ties to Saudi Arabia, Iran, and the US mean it cannot be considered fully impartial. For any mediation to succeed, the legitimacy of the process is paramount.

The success of the peace negotiations hinges on the urgent need for all three warring nations to find an off-ramp from this conflict—ideally with no party losing face. Notably, Israel has expressed willingness to pursue peace, according to Israeli Ambassador to the Philippines Dana Kursh.

Two peace tables. Alongside the Israeli Embassy’s Deputy Chief of Mission, Ariel Seidman, Kursh met with Filipino journalists last week to discuss the separate peace talks between Israel and Lebanon and between the US and Iran. When asked about the prospects for peace with Lebanon after 42 years of hostilities, Kursh responded, “God willing, even more than a ceasefire.” She also highlighted Israel’s stable peace accords with neighboring Jordan and Egypt.

Kursh reaffirmed Israel’s commitment to peace, expressed her earnest prayers for its realization, and underscored that ending the conflict serves everyone’s interests. “We are a peace-seeking nation … that’s what we want,” she said, adding that “we needed our people to be safe and secure in Israel and not be bombarded by rockets and missiles constantly.”

But while Israel does not want to escalate the situation, success in negotiations has two sides. “One success is to bring back stability [to] the entire … economic situation in the Gulf. The second, equally important, is to take away the Iranian regime threat—their nuclear capabilities, their ballistic missile capabilities, and the fact that they are are funding terrorism,” Kursh explained.

OFW welfare. For the Philippines, a swift resolution to the conflict is crucial for maintaining access to energy markets in the Middle East—a region that supplies 98 percent of our country’s crude oil imports.

It would also safeguard the lives and livelihoods of not only the 30,000 Filipinos in Israel but also more than 2 million overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) across the Middle East. So far, only 7,674 have chosen repatriation, safely returning home with the generous help of the Philippine government.

But the Philippines is not prepared to absorb the return of over 2 million OFWs into its domestic workforce, especially with 2.66 million Filipinos already unemployed as of February. This figure doesn’t even account for public utility vehicle drivers and delivery riders who stopped working last month due to soaring oil prices.

—————-

lim.mike04@gmail.com