The world endured several tense hours in recent days as it awaited a critical deadline, before U.S. President Donald Trump moved to extend the ultimatum he had issued to Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
After issuing what was seen as a final warning that brought the region to the brink of a wider escalation targeting Iranian energy facilities, Trump extended the ultimatum from 48 hours to five days to allow more time for diplomacy, amid reports of indirect talks between Washington and Tehran.
Whether this development paves the way for an agreement to halt the war or merely represents a temporary de-escalation remains unclear.
Dr. Kamran Bokhari, a director at the New Lines Institute, said the record of past conflicts calls for caution. Bokhari told Alhurra that “the situation remains highly fragile. We have a record going back to last year where negotiations were followed by field confrontations, which makes confidence in the current process relatively low.”
He added that politicians and investors alike are approaching the situation on a day-by-day basis.
Market Uncertainty and Supply Chains
This ambiguity has been directly reflected in investor behavior. In major crises, capital typically flows toward safe havens such as gold and bonds, but oil remains the primary barometer in this conflict.
On how markets are interpreting the shifting timelines, Bokhari said the investment community is divided. While some view the extension as “diplomatic progress,” others prefer a wait-and-see approach, noting that “the trajectory is not linear, and military operations could resume at any moment, bringing us back to the negotiating table.”
As Washington insists on ending Tehran’s use of the strait as a “geopolitical weapon,” a pressing question has emerged: Are there viable alternatives to Hormuz?
Dr. Nouf Al-Ghamdi, an economic development and governance adviser, said the issue is “strategic and central to global economic stability.” She told Alhurra that the Strait of Hormuz remains a “chokepoint” through which roughly a quarter of the world’s seaborne oil trade passes.
Al-Ghamdi noted that Saudi Arabia has important alternatives, such as the East-West pipeline linking to the port of Yanbu, and that the United Arab Emirates operates the Fujairah pipeline. However, she said these routes remain limited in impact and do not match the massive volumes that pass through the strait. She also pointed to the Kirkuk–Ceyhan pipeline to Turkey as an additional option, though it is constrained by capacity as well as security and political challenges.
This technical shortfall in alternatives leaves global energy security exposed. Al-Ghamdi said countries such as Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrain are among the most vulnerable due to their total reliance on the strait.
According to her analysis, the international dimension is the most critical factor. Asia is the most exposed region, as the bulk of Gulf oil exports flows to China, India, Japan and South Korea—countries whose industrial output and supply chains depend directly on the stability of these flows. Europe, she said, would face a dual impact: rising prices and heavy pressure on alternative shipping routes such as the Suez Canal and the Red Sea, potentially forcing global trade to reroute around the Cape of Good Hope at significant financial and time costs.
The “15-Point Plan” and a New Reality
The lack of fully viable alternatives places significant constraints on decision-makers in Washington. Trump, facing approaching midterm elections, is aware that rising economic costs could quickly turn into a domestic political risk.
According to reports, U.S. ambitions go beyond temporary de-escalation, aiming instead to impose a new reality involving “joint management of the strait” under international supervision.
As the deadline nears, capitals are awaiting Tehran’s response in Islamabad to the U.S. “15-point plan,” which ties economic guarantees to curbing Iran’s military and nuclear ambitions.
Between cautious optimism and the risk of renewed escalation, the world faces two paths: either a new framework for global energy security or a return to military confrontation, with economic and political costs that may exceed the capacity of all sides to endure.
The article is a translation of the original Arabic.
