Hormuz as a new line of pressure: why Ursula von der Leyen linked the war with Iran and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine

Europe is once again speaking the language of energy anxiety

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen effectively drew a direct political line between the current war around Iran and the shock Europe experienced after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. This comparison is not accidental and certainly not rhetorical. In Brussels, they well remember how quickly a military conflict can turn into an energy crisis, affecting logistics, prices, and the resilience of allies.

Von der Leyen urged the US and Iran to come to the negotiating table to stop the fighting in the Middle East and end the de facto blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. For the global economy, this is not a peripheral plot or a local maritime problem. About one-fifth of the world’s oil supplies pass through this route, meaning any disruption there almost automatically reverberates far beyond the region.

For the Israeli audience, this signal is especially clear. When Iran increases pressure in the world’s key maritime artery, it’s not just about oil prices or tanker insurance. It’s a matter of strategic stability for the entire region, where Israel lives not in theory but in a state of daily threat.

Why Brussels remembered Ukraine

The comparison with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine shows that the EU views the Iranian escalation primarily as a threat to the supply system, not just another episode of the Middle Eastern crisis. After 2022, Europe has come to understand one unpleasant thing too well: when an authoritarian regime strikes at critical infrastructure, sea routes, and energy chains, the consequences are felt even by countries that are not formally on the front line.

That’s why von der Leyen’s words sound harsh. She specifically emphasized that Iran’s attacks on commercial ships and infrastructure must be condemned. Moreover, Tehran, she said, must immediately cease threats, mine laying, drone use, and missile attacks, as well as any other attempts to block the strait for commercial shipping.

What this means for Israel and the global market

In the Israeli perspective, the statement by the head of the European Commission is important not only because Europe is finally calling things by their names. More importantly, the West is increasingly beginning to understand that Iran’s strategy is built on creating pressure in several directions at once — military, energy, maritime, and psychological.

Israel has long lived with this understanding. When Tehran or its affiliated forces strike infrastructure, threaten shipping, or try to expand the geography of the conflict, their goal is not just to inflict local damage. The broader aim is to increase the security cost for opponents, destabilize the market, heighten political nervousness among allies, and force external players to seek compromise not from strength but from fatigue.

Here emerges the meaning that is especially important for readers following the connection between the war in Ukraine and crises in the Middle East. NANews — Israel News | Nikk.Agency has repeatedly noted that Russia and Iran, despite their differences, use a similar model of pressure: striking vulnerable nodes of the system, playing on the fear of rising prices, and betting that democracies will tire of instability faster than aggressive regimes will tire of isolation.

The Strait of Hormuz is no longer just geography

When Brussels talks about the strait through which about 20% of the world’s oil supplies pass, they are talking about the global economy almost as they once talked about gas, oil, and grain supplies after the start of Russia’s major war against Ukraine. Any prolonged disruption in Hormuz hits the chain: oil, freight, insurance, transport, energy costs, inflation, political pressure on governments.

For Israel, there is both a direct and indirect risk here. Direct — because Iran remains the main source of regional threat. Indirect — because any new energy shock changes the behavior of allies, makes them more cautious, increases internal pressure on Western cabinets, and creates a temptation to seek not a solution to the problem but a temporary pause at any cost.

The lesson Europe is trying to articulate aloud

Von der Leyen specifically noted that the current situation once again confirms a simple but costly conclusion: the more actively countries develop their own energy, the faster they gain independence and the better protected they are from sharp price spikes. This is no longer a technocratic formula or a routine thesis about the green transition. After Ukraine and now against the backdrop of Iranian escalation in the Strait of Hormuz, it is about the political survival of states.

For Israel, this approach is all the more understandable. In a region where security and economy have long been intertwined, energy independence is part of national resilience, not a separate economic topic. Europe seems to be coming to the same conclusion, albeit belatedly.

This is the main significance of the European Commission President’s statement. She not only compared two different conflicts. She acknowledged that the methods of pressure used by aggressive regimes are becoming increasingly similar: blocking, blackmailing, striking infrastructure, destabilizing markets, and testing the West’s resilience.

For Israel, this is not news. But it is important that now this is increasingly being heard in European capitals. And the clearer they understand the nature of such a threat, the less likely it is that another crisis will be explained as just a usual dispute over oil prices, rather than as part of a major war against the resilience of free countries.