作者： admin

The widening geopolitical fallout from the US-Israeli war on Iran has sent shockwaves through India’s energy supply chain, triggering the most severe cooking gas shortage in 10 years and pushing hundreds of thousands of low-income internal migrant workers to abandon urban livelihoods and return to their rural hometowns. The crisis traces its roots to Iran’s recent decision to close the Strait of Hormuz, the strategic maritime chokepoint that carries roughly 20% of the world’s daily crude oil shipments. As one of the world’s largest LPG importers, India relies heavily on Middle Eastern energy exports: approximately 60% of the country’s total LPG comes from Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, and 90% of those shipments pass through the Strait of Hormuz. This dependence has left India uniquely exposed to the disruptions sparked by ongoing regional conflict.

For millions of Indian households, LPG – a blend of propane and butane – is the primary cooking fuel, making consistent access a non-negotiable requirement for daily life. For low-wage migrant workers, who make up the backbone of India’s urban industrial and service sectors, the supply crunch and subsequent price spike has proven catastrophic. Thirty-year-old Raj Kumar, a daily-wage laborer who spent 15 years working at a New Delhi bathware factory earning less than $7 a day, is one of hundreds of thousands of workers forced to leave the capital. For weeks, Kumar attempted to secure LPG to cook for his wife and two children, but skyrocketing prices and persistent shortages made staying impossible. The factory where he worked, one of thousands of small businesses affected by fuel shortages, shut down entirely, leaving Kumar and all 40 of his co-workers unemployed. Left with no other options, Kumar loaded his family’s belongings and traveled 650 kilometers back to his hometown in Mahua, Uttar Pradesh. “It is hard to stay here anymore. We were struggling to eat properly. Seeing my children and wife suffering for the past few days was painful,” Kumar told reporters.

Stories like Kumar’s are not isolated. Across major Indian industrial hubs including New Delhi, Mumbai and Gujarat, thousands of small and medium enterprises – from textile and ceramic manufacturing units to food processing facilities, local eateries and street food vendors – have scaled back operations or shut down completely as fuel supplies dried up. Migrant workers, who move from rural areas to cities in search of scarce, low-paying work, have borne the brunt of the crisis, a pattern that mirrors the widespread displacement seen during India’s 2020 COVID-19 lockdown.

Twenty-two-year-old Chandan, who works at a motorcycle spare parts factory in Bhiwandi, Rajasthan, spent all of his wedding savings trying to refill his small 5-kilogram LPG cylinder before being forced to head home to Balia village, also in Uttar Pradesh. After exhausting his savings, Chandan switched to eating at roadside eateries, but found that tripled commercial gas prices had pushed food prices up threefold as well. “Before the unforeseen gas crisis, I would buy a plate of rice for 50 rupees (around half a dollar), but all the eateries have tripled the price for the same plate, claiming an equal rise in commercial gas in the grey markets. I earn around 500 rupees a day ($6), and I cannot purchase a kilo of gas for 400 rupees ($4),” Chandan explained. With no government relief in sight, he joined the wave of reverse migration back to rural Uttar Pradesh.

Government data and official statements have painted a conflicting picture of the crisis. India’s federal energy ministry has claimed that it maintains uninterrupted domestic LPG supplies and that no large-scale worker outmigration from major cities is occurring, despite long queues of workers seeking tickets home at railway stations across the country. However, during a March 12 parliamentary address, junior petroleum and natural gas minister Suresh Gopi admitted that India holds only five days of strategic crude oil reserves, and just 20 days of LPG reserves to cover unexpected supply disruptions.

Compounding the crisis for migrant workers are long-standing regulatory barriers that limit their ability to purchase LPG in urban areas. Under current government rules, each household is only eligible for one subsidized LPG connection, which is almost always registered to the worker’s home village. In cities, migrants are only permitted to purchase small 5-kilogram cylinders, a process hampered by heavy bureaucratic restrictions. As a result, most migrants are forced to buy LPG on the unregulated black market, where prices are often multiple times the subsidized rate. In response to growing public pressure, the government announced on April 7 that it would ease these restrictions and double the national allocation of 5-kilogram cylinders, a move analysts say is too little too late.

The reverse migration trend has experts warning of long-term social and economic damage that mirrors and exceeds the fallout from past crises. Sunil Kumar Aledia, executive director of the Centre for Holistic Development and a prominent social activist, argues that the Indian government has failed to take proactive steps to mitigate the crisis, leaving vulnerable migrant communities to fend for themselves. “They are facing the burden of the LPG crisis. Although it seems the impact is gradual, the government has not offered any help,” Aledia said, warning that the government’s slow response could allow the crisis to escalate into a larger humanitarian catastrophe in the coming months.

Professor S Irudaya Rajan, chairman of the International Institute of Migration and Development in Kerala, compared the current crisis to the displacement seen during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic and the 2008 global recession, noting that the long-term damage is likely to be far more severe this time around. Rajan added that the crisis will be compounded by an additional wave of reverse migration from Gulf nations, where thousands of Indian expat workers are employed. “Not only India, but people from several other countries in Southeast Asia earn a significant percentage of remittances from the Gulf nations that outweigh the earnings from domestic labour engagement. As the people start migrating from the war-hit countries, the impact of internal migration would be aggravated by this international reverse migration,” Rajan explained.

Dr Adfer Shah, a New Delhi-based sociologist and South Asia analyst, described reverse migration as an existential threat to India’s most economically and socially marginalized communities. “Reverse migration places enormous pressure on village economies and rural livelihoods that are structurally not equipped to reabsorb the returning workforce. Such a shock affects their whole life, even their children’s education. It curtails all freedoms and opportunities that urban proximity offers them,” Shah said, noting that the influx of returning workers will push down rural wages, increase joblessness, and destabilize already fragile village economies.

At major railway hubs across New Delhi, thousands of workers are scrambling to secure tickets home, often paying double or triple the official fare because of overwhelming demand. Twenty-one-year-old Sintu Kumar Bhagat, who has been out of work for more than a month, waited at New Delhi Railway Station to board a train to his home village in Purnia, Bihar, after scraping together enough money to buy overpriced tickets for himself and his brother. “I got the tickets for double the price with difficulty. Booking has to be done a day or two in advance as everyone is leaving for home,” Bhagat said.

Twenty-seven-year-old Ashok Kumar Chaudhary, who traveled 1,000 kilometers from his Jharkhand village to work in Delhi’s iron manufacturing industry to support a family of five, echoed the despair shared by many returning workers. “I had travelled 1,000 kms from my village in Jharkhand to Delhi to support my family of five, now going back home empty-handed feels like a curse,” Chaudhary said as he waited to board his train at Anand Vihar Railway Station.

For workers like Raj Kumar, who waited with his wife and newborn child for a train back to Uttar Pradesh, the only hope is that the crisis will end quickly, allowing them to return to the urban jobs that offer their children a better future. “At home, we have firewood to cook and feed ourselves. I will work on farms until the end of the crisis, and I hope the situation here improves soon. We don’t have any option but to return so that we earn better and make a good future for our kids,” Kumar said. With India’s domestic energy reserves stretched thin and geopolitical tensions in the Middle East showing no sign of easing, that future remains increasingly uncertain for hundreds of thousands of the country’s most vulnerable workers.

Following the collapse of weekend ceasefire negotiations with Iran, U.S. President Donald Trump’s announcement of a full blockade on the strategic Strait of Hormuz has sparked widespread pushback from key NATO allies, while triggering sharp volatility in global energy markets that threatens broader economic fallout. The strait, one of the world’s most critical maritime chokepoints for global energy trade, has become a central flashpoint in the escalating conflict between the U.S.-Israel coalition and Iran.

Within hours of Trump’s claim that other nations would join the blockade effort, top officials from major NATO member states made their opposition explicit on Monday, just ahead of the proposed implementation of the measure. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer told the BBC that the United Kingdom would not lend any support to the blockade, emphasizing that London’s top priority remains securing the full, unobstructed reopening of the waterway for global shipping.

“[The closure] is deeply damaging,” Starmer said, adding that the UK and France would host a diplomatic summit this week to develop a coordinated multinational plan to protect commercial navigation through the strait once the broader conflict cools.

Other European and NATO-aligned nations echoed this sharp rejection. Spanish Defense Minister Margarita Robles described Trump’s order to block all vessels entering or departing Iranian ports and coastal areas in the strait as fundamentally unreasonable, framing the move as the latest escalation in a dangerous downward spiral of conflict. Spain has already consistently condemned the U.S.-Israeli declaration of war on Iran and refused to deploy any Spanish military assets to the conflict zone.

Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan also added his voice to calls for a diplomatic resolution to reopen the strait, rejecting any unilateral military escalation that would harm global trade.

In an apparent partial retreat from Trump’s initial aggressive announcement, U.S. Central Command clarified Monday that American forces would not block the passage of commercial vessels traveling to and from non-Iranian ports through the strait, softening the original pledge of a “complete blockade” that Trump had reiterated as recently as Monday during an interview on Fox News.

The breakdown of the ceasefire talks followed sharp mutual recriminations between the U.S. and Iranian negotiating teams. Iranian officials have accused U.S. Vice President JD Vance of acting in bad faith during the high-stakes negotiations, while Vance has claimed Iran refused to comply with American demands related to Tehran’s nuclear development program. The collapse comes just one week after the two sides announced a temporary two-week ceasefire, a deal that had been struck hours before a sweeping Trump-imposed deadline that saw the president threaten to “obliterate Iran’s whole civilization” if no agreement was reached.

The ceasefire had already delivered an immediate calming effect on global energy markets, pushing Brent crude prices below $100 per barrel, but Trump’s blockade announcement reversed those gains almost overnight. By Monday trading, Brent crude had jumped 7.7% to settle at $102.52 per barrel, while U.S. domestic crude rose nearly 8% to hit $104.02 per barrel. The UK’s May wholesale natural gas contract surged by an even steeper 11.7%, underscoring the broad impact of the strait closure on global energy supplies.

Before the war began and Iran effectively closed the strait, roughly 20% of the world’s total daily oil and liquefied natural gas supplies, plus large volumes of global fertilizer shipments, passed through the narrow waterway connecting the Persian Gulf to the Arabian Sea.

Market analysts warn that the risk of prolonged disruption to Hormuz shipping carries severe structural consequences for the global economy, already grappling with persistent inflationary pressures. “The market reaction to Trump’s threat underscores a simple but powerful reality: Hormuz risk is not theoretical; it is structural, and it is real,” explained Priyanka Sachdeva, a senior market analyst at brokerage firm Phillip Nova, in comments to The Guardian. “In today’s environment, every barrel of risk added to oil markets carries an inflation price tag for the global economy,” she added.

Trump’s blockade order would target any vessel that has paid a transit toll to Iran since Tehran closed the strait, with the president accusing Iran of running an extortion racket on commercial shipping. But analysts note that the order would inevitably disrupt energy flows to many U.S. allies, even those that depend entirely on Hormuz shipments for their energy security.

Writing for Responsible Statecraft over the weekend, analyst Kelley Beaucar Vlahos noted that the U.S. blockade plan would directly impact major treaty allies such as the Philippines, which gets 98% of its total energy supplies via the Strait of Hormuz. The blockade would also impact commercial vessels from other major U.S. partners including Japan, which has had LNG carriers transit the strait in recent weeks.

Geopolitical analysts warn that the blockade marks a dangerous escalation of the conflict that erodes the norms of international maritime law. Sarang Shidore, director of the Global South program at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, described the U.S. move as a further step toward a “might-makes-right” global order. “Illegalities are being heaped on top of illegalities. The attack on Iran that started this war was compounded by Tehran’s seizure of the Strait of Hormuz. Washington’s blockade of the strait has further upped the ante,” Shidore said.

Iranian officials have already signaled they will take aggressive countermeasures to respond to the blockade. An advisor to Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei said Tehran retains significant unused leverage to retaliate, while Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf warned that American consumers will soon face skyrocketing fuel prices, saying U.S. drivers will “be nostalgic for $4-$5 gas.”

International legal experts echo the widespread concern that the blockade will kill the last remnants of the fragile ceasefire and plunge the region back into full-scale hostilities. Donald Rothwell, an international law professor at Australian National University, wrote in an analysis for The Conversation that a U.S. blockade would almost certainly end the temporary truce and resume full open hostilities. “In purely legal terms, if the US imposes a blockade then the ceasefire is over and hostilities have resumed,” Rothwell wrote.

On April 13, 2026, the United States launched a planned naval blockade of all maritime traffic entering and exiting Iranian ports, a dramatic escalation that came just days after high-stakes peace negotiations between Washington and Tehran in Islamabad, Pakistan, ended without any breakthrough agreement. The order to implement the blockade came directly from US President Donald Trump, who announced the move via a post on his Truth Social platform over the weekend.

Trump’s announcement confirmed the blockade would officially enter into force at 10:00 a.m. Eastern Time on April 13, targeting all vessels bound for or departing from Iranian coastal facilities across both the Persian Gulf and Gulf of Oman. In an official statement released shortly after the president’s social media post, US Central Command (CENTCOM) confirmed it had begun executing the blockade per presidential direction. The command clarified that its operations would not interfere with commercial shipping transiting the Strait of Hormuz en route to or from non-Iranian ports, and noted that additional navigational guidance would be distributed to commercial mariners via official maritime alerts ahead of full enforcement. CENTCOM also urged all vessels operating in the Gulf of Oman and approaches to the Strait of Hormuz to monitor regular Notice to Mariners broadcasts and maintain contact with US naval forces via bridge-to-bridge radio Channel 16.

Tehran swiftly rejected the US move as a violation of international law, with the Iranian armed forces’ unified command issuing a forceful counterstatement carried by Iranian state broadcaster IRIB and reported by Al Jazeera. The Iranian statement framed the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical global oil chokepoints, as a waterway that must remain open to all vessels or closed to none. It specified that what it labeled “enemy-affiliated vessels” would be blocked from passage, while other ships would be permitted to transit only under Iranian regulatory oversight. The statement labeled Washington’s imposition of maritime restrictions in international waters an unlawful act that equates to state-sponsored piracy.

Even as he announced the blockade, Trump offered conflicting framing of the current state of tensions, claiming that a two-week ceasefire between the US and Iran, set to remain in effect through April 22, “is holding well.” He added that he does “not care” whether Iran agrees to return to the negotiating table, a comment that analysts have interpreted as a contradictory negotiating tactic.

Regional policy experts have broken down the strategic logic behind the US’ limited blockade, which explicitly exempts shipping connected to non-Iranian ports. Rasha Al Joundy, a senior researcher at the Dubai Public Policy Research Centre, noted the restricted scope of the measure reveals two core US objectives. First, the blockade is designed to exert tactical diplomatic pressure on Tehran after negotiations stalled following 21 hours of talks in Pakistan. Second, it positions US naval forces to deter potential Iranian strikes against member states of the Gulf Cooperation Council.

Other analysts have flagged a fundamental contradiction in the US’ simultaneous announcements: confirming a full naval blockade while insisting the existing ceasefire remains intact. Abdolreza Alami, a senior lecturer in communication and media studies at Universiti Teknologi Mara in Malaysia, told China Daily that the dual messaging undermines US credibility on the global stage. Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), a naval blockade is defined as an act of military coercion that is fundamentally incompatible with an active ceasefire, Alami explained. He added that Trump’s claim he does not care if Iran returns to negotiations is a clear tell that the White House is desperate for a renewed diplomatic process, a signal Tehran has already recognized as a negotiating tactic rather than fixed policy. “Iran’s strategic patience has outlasted far greater pressures. Time, in this configuration, favors Tehran,” Alami said.

Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi emphasized that his country had entered negotiations with Washington in good faith, marking the highest level of diplomatic engagement between the two nations in 47 years, with the goal of ending ongoing hostilities. In a post on X, Araghchi wrote that the talks had been on the cusp of securing a preliminary memorandum of understanding in Islamabad before the US backed away with excessive demands, shifted negotiating positions, and moved forward with the blockade. “Zero lessons earned,” he wrote, adding that “goodwill begets goodwill while enmity begets enmity.”

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), which held a second special foreign ministers’ meeting on the Middle East crisis on April 10, issued an official statement on April 13 calling for de-escalation. The bloc reaffirmed its earlier welcome of the two-week US-Iran ceasefire and urged both parties to resume negotiations to reach a permanent end to hostilities that can deliver lasting stability to the region. ASEAN commended Pakistan’s mediation efforts and the work of all parties working toward a diplomatic solution. In its statement, the grouping called for the full restoration of “safe, unimpeded, and continuous transit passage” for all vessels and aircraft through the Strait of Hormuz, in line with the 1982 UNCLOS, and urged all parties to uphold the safety of seafarers and commercial shipping as required by the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS).