Dr. Salem AlKetbi is a UAE political analyst and former Federal National Council candidate
Tensions in the Gulf regularly focus attention on the Strait of Hormuz as one of the most critical chokepoints in the global economy. This narrow sea passage between Iran and Oman serves as more than a transit route for ships. It handles a large share of the energy supplies on which the world depends, so any disruption here rapidly becomes an international concern that affects energy market stability and global trade.
Anyone following recent developments understands that events in this sensitive area amount to more than temporary military tensions. They test the entire regional security system. The strait carries about one-fifth of global energy supplies and serves as a geopolitical chokepoint that demands attention. Large vessels travel along narrow lanes in the strait, so even a small threat can disrupt international trade within hours.
The main issue in the strait is not full closure but the ease of disrupting navigation. The narrow passage can become dangerous without full naval control. A few naval mines or attacks with fast boats and drones can raise insurance costs for ships and prompt global shipping companies to adjust their plans. In a world reliant on steady energy flows, even temporary disruptions can cause more damage than a full shutdown.
This shows a point often missed in political and media talks. Security for the strait depends not on political statements or diplomatic catchphrases but on the balance of power and ongoing deterrence. Vital sea lanes require complex security systems with military presence, international coordination and quick response to threats rather than empty rhetoric.
Recent developments in the Gulf show that disrupting navigation in the strait no longer requires a large conventional naval force. Iran’s Revolutionary Guard employs asymmetric warfare tactics with fast boats, naval mines and drones. These allow even limited threats to disrupt navigation in the narrow passage.
Protecting the strait therefore requires more than traditional naval superiority. It needs ongoing ability to monitor, deter and respond quickly to any disruption attempts.
The discussion involves more than protecting oil tankers or escorting commercial ships. It concerns building a security system to maintain stable navigation in one of the world’s key sea lanes.
Modern military experience shows that depending on one large military base no longer works best in high-threat areas. Military strength now relies on a network of distributed bases and facilities that operate together in an integrated deterrence system. In the Gulf, where safe navigation through the Strait of Hormuz needs ongoing security, spreading military capabilities across several locations proves more effective than concentrating them at one base that enemies can target easily.
The military situation in the region shows the challenge. The US naval presence centers on the United States Fifth Fleet in Bahrain. This fleet covers a wide area from the Gulf to the Arabian Sea and the Red Sea.
At the same time, the eastern coast of the United Arab Emirates gains more strategic value because the Port of Fujairah offers a direct maritime outlet outside the strait. This adds depth to any regional security system and reduces the impact of disruptions inside the passage.
Recent developments show that security for strategic passages requires more than temporary measures or quick reactions. It needs a long-term security framework that can adapt to changing threats. Modern military technology makes disrupting navigation far easier than before, so security models must become more flexible and distributed.
These developments point to the need to expand security partnerships in the region and strengthen military infrastructure to protect international navigation. Multiple naval and air bases connected by early warning systems and advanced surveillance now serve as a strategic necessity for protecting the global economy rather than a political choice open to debate.
The UAE takes a realistic view of regional security. Anwar Gargash, diplomatic adviser to the president of the UAE, has said several times that the Gulf states do not seek wars, yet they cannot overlook threats to their security and stability. They address regional tensions with strategic thinking, away from media hype, while maintaining defensive readiness and building international partnerships.
Similarly, Reem Al Hashimy, UAE minister of state for international cooperation, has said the strategic partnership with the United States rests on decades of trust and cooperation. Security challenges in the region lead the UAE to strengthen these ties rather than pull back.
Countries in complex security situations must rely on alliances that protect stability and secure vital passages rather than emotions or ideology. But this measured stance does not mean ignoring the populist rhetoric that has dominated regional discourse for decades. This rhetoric promotes illusions of power and trades realistic analysis for simplistic rallying cries.
History offers many cases of backward regimes and groups that promoted outdated battle cries on solidarity and defiance and export this message across the region. In the end, they exposed their internal problems and failure to provide stability. Dealing with such regimes requires a realistic diplomatic framework that avoids overestimating their influence or depending on their political statements.
By contrast, countries that invested in defensive capabilities and international partnerships have safeguarded their stability and delivered prosperity to their people. Security today consists of an integrated system of power, alliances and technological capabilities rather than ideological buzzwords. Those without such a system eventually fall victim to regional crises.
The security of the Strait of Hormuz depends, above all, on the regional balance of power. This passage, which carries a large share of the world’s energy, needs a permanent deterrence system and strong international security partnerships. Protecting international navigation depends on the real ability to maintain stability in this vital corridor rather than hollow slogans or statements.
