Escalating Iran conflict threatens energy flows, markets, Korea’s security calculus
Wars are often sold as swift. This one began with a promise of speed and precision, and within days exposed the illusion.
On Feb. 28, the US and Israel launched “Operation Epic Fury,” a coordinated strike that killed Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, and targeted missile facilities. US President Donald Trump projected four to five weeks of operations, while stressing that US forces could continue far longer if required.
What was framed as a decapitation strike has instead widened into a regional war. Proxies have mobilized, sea lanes are threatened and the illusion of brevity has evaporated.
Iran has answered with asymmetric escalation. Its Revolutionary Guards declared they would burn every vessel transiting the Strait of Hormuz. US Central Command said it sank 11 Iranian ships in the Gulf of Oman to defend freedom of navigation.
Civilian shipping has already come under attack, and energy facilities in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait have been struck. Hezbollah in Lebanon and Houthi forces in Yemen have joined the fray, extending the battlefield from Israel’s borders to the Red Sea. The turn from military targets to infrastructure signals a willingness to raise the humanitarian stakes.
Markets reacted at once. On Tuesday, the Kospi tumbled 7.24 percent to 5,791.91, closing well below 6,000, and a sell-side circuit breaker was triggered on futures. The won weakened against the US dollar in offshore trading.
Oil is the accelerant. Brent crude futures surged on fears of disruption and have edged toward $100 per barrel. Japanese and Hong Kong equities also slid, a reminder that geopolitical shocks now transmit across borders in real time.
Roughly 27 percent of global seaborne oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz. For South Korea, about 70 percent of crude oil and 20 percent of liquefied natural gas imports come from the Middle East, and around 95 percent of that volume traverses the narrow channel between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman.
If disruption persists, the impact will reach far beyond higher fuel bills. The Korea International Trade Association warns that shipping rates could jump by as much as 80 percent if vessels are forced to reroute. Longer transit times would squeeze exporters of automobiles and electronics, complicating supply chains and thinning margins.
Analysts caution that sustained oil prices above $100 per barrel could lift global inflation by up to 0.7 percentage points. For the Korean economy, targeting 2 percent growth this year, that arithmetic is unforgiving.
South Korea holds about 200 million barrels of strategic reserves, equivalent to 221 days of consumption and well above International Energy Agency guidelines. That stockpile can buy time, but not immunity.
The government has convened emergency meetings, pledged round-the-clock monitoring and prepared a stabilization program exceeding 100 trillion won ($68.2 billion). Financial groups have rolled out liquidity support and tightened cybersecurity checks against potential attacks linked to Iranian-aligned hacktivist networks.
Still, contingency planning must go further. Diversifying crude supply beyond the Middle East is now a strategic necessity. Closer coordination with Saudi Aramco and priority access to UAE crude at Fujairah would also ease reliance on Hormuz. Diversification reduces exposure, even if it cannot erase risk.
The crisis also sharpens the strategic dimension. Protecting maritime freedom in the Gulf aligns squarely with the US alliance. Closer intelligence sharing on cyber threats and firmer security coordination are no longer optional.
The status quo in the Gulf has been broken. What began as a limited strike now threatens the architecture of energy and trade on which export economies depend.
For South Korea, energy security and the US alliance are not separate silos but interlocking pillars. In a fragmented maritime order, resilience must be built before the next shock arrives.
khnews@heraldcorp.com
