WASHINGTON, D.C. — The United States and Israel recently acted in response to a growing security threat posed by Iran’s leadership and its expanding regional military reach. Intelligence assessments indicated the continued development of a massive stockpile of missiles and drones directed toward Israel and toward United States installations throughout the Persian Gulf region.
Analysts warned that the scale of this buildup may overwhelm existing defense systems. Even with significant portions of these capabilities now degraded, some projectiles have still penetrated defensive measures. Had no action been taken, a future large-scale first strike could have caused massive damage and loss of life.
The Strait of Hormuz, approximately 21 miles wide at its narrowest point, contains shipping lanes that are only about 2 miles wide in each direction. Roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil supply passes through this narrow corridor. Because so much of the global energy supply must move through such a confined passage, even limited disruption can quickly affect global markets and the broader world economy.
Any president sitting in the Oval Office, once advised of Iran’s intentions and capabilities, would have faced the same difficult reality and the same limited set of options, and would have ordered military action. The hope I share, along with many observers, is that the Iranian people will once again take control of their country, restore democracy, rejoin the Western world, and enjoy the benefits of freedom and a free market economy.
Such a development would bring greater peace and prosperity to the entire region. It would reduce the need for continued military buildup and could lessen the long-term level of military aid required to help Israel defend itself.
The Abraham Accords have already demonstrated the potential for increased economic and technological cooperation between Israel and several Persian Gulf countries, offering a framework that could expand opportunity, stability, and prosperity for many people throughout the region.
Without Iran’s financial and military backing of regional militant groups, the prospects for reduced conflict between Israelis and Palestinians could improve over time. Greater regional cooperation and economic development would create conditions in which a better quality of life becomes more achievable for Palestinians and Israelis, creating incentives for stability, investment, and long-term peace.
History has shown how sensitive the global economy is to disruptions in oil supply. The oil shocks of 1973 and 1979 contributed to inflation, economic slowdown, and financial strain across much of the world. When supply uncertainty increases, energy prices rise, and those increases ripple through transportation costs, food prices, manufacturing expenses, and household budgets.
Today, however, the United States is in a significantly stronger position than during previous energy crises. Domestic production has increased substantially, but equally important, demand per unit of economic activity has declined due to technological progress and efficiency improvements.
Energy independence has not been achieved only through increased energy production. Reduced demand has also played an important role. Over the past two decades, vehicles have become significantly more fuel efficient, hybrid technology has expanded, and millions of fully electric vehicles have entered American roads. Today, more than six million fully electric vehicles and approximately thirty million hybrid vehicles are operating in the United States.
Even traditional gasoline and diesel vehicles now achieve substantially greater fuel efficiency than in previous decades. Each year, the number of fully electric vehicles continues to increase as consumers recognize the long-term economic and practical benefits of reduced fuel and maintenance costs, even as government incentives are reduced or phased out.
If incentives had remained in place at previous levels, domestic petroleum consumption could be even lower today, allowing a greater share of domestic production to be available for export, further strengthening the strategic position of the United States in global energy markets. Together, these improvements have significantly reduced the amount of petroleum required for transportation across the American economy.
At the same time, homes, offices, factories, and commercial buildings are using energy far more efficiently than in previous decades. Modern lighting systems consume a fraction of the electricity once required. Heating and cooling systems have become significantly more efficient. Improved insulation, high-efficiency windows, and smarter building design have reduced the amount of energy required to maintain comfortable indoor environments. Electricity production has largely shifted away from petroleum-based fuels toward natural gas and other sources, further reducing dependence on oil.
These structural changes mean the American economy now requires less energy to generate economic output than in previous decades.
This raises an important question.
If the United States can supply all of its energy needs, then American households, small businesses, and large businesses alike should benefit from the stability that energy independence makes possible. Greater insulation from sudden global price shocks would help protect the broader economy from inflationary pressure caused by geopolitical instability.
At present, periods of global disruption often result in windfall profits concentrated within the oil sector, while the rest of the economy faces higher costs. Energy independence should provide economic stability for the entire country, not disproportionate gains for a single industry during periods of international instability.
Policymakers, including the President, the Senate, and the House of Representatives, should evaluate whether temporary economic stabilization mechanisms could reduce the transmission of sudden global price shocks into the domestic economy during periods of extraordinary instability.
Economic stability benefits Americans across the political spectrum. Reducing exposure to severe price volatility can help stabilize household budgets, support business planning, and moderate inflationary pressure across the economy.
North America’s evolving energy capacity presents an opportunity to examine whether greater insulation from global volatility could provide economic benefits while maintaining a productive and competitive energy sector. If domestic production is sufficient to meet internal demand, it may be possible to reduce the degree to which global disruptions immediately affect domestic pricing.
Such an approach would not eliminate markets. It would reduce sudden shocks that affect millions of households and businesses. Stability helps families plan. Stability helps businesses invest. Stability supports economic growth.
Energy independence was achieved through decades of innovation, investment, and technological advancement. The question now is whether that independence can also provide greater insulation from global instability so that American families, businesses, and communities are not repeatedly forced to absorb the economic consequences of conflicts far beyond our shores.
Greater economic stability at home means there will be less need for scapegoats.
Palkyweid dismantled:
The fact that some civilians unfortunately, also died in Iran (civilians it sees as friends) during Roaring Lion, shows Israel never seeks to harm civilians as a routine, rule (and Gaza is no exception).
“Had no action been taken, a future large-scale first strike could have caused massive damage and loss of life.”
Instead, action was taken, and that action was a large-scale first strike that caused massive damage and loss of life, including striking a girl’s elementary school.
One of the major points toward the end of the article is that the United States has reached a level of energy independence that gives the President significantly greater ability to insulate the American economy from disruptions in global oil markets caused by conflicts in the Persian Gulf region.
In January, oil was approximately $67 per barrel. Because the United States now produces so much of its own energy, the President has more authority and flexibility than in the past to help stabilize domestic prices and reduce the impact of global supply disruptions during international crises. That represents a meaningful strategic shift compared to prior decades, when instability in the Strait of Hormuz could immediately trigger major economic shock in the United States.
James, you may have missed this important point in the concluding section of the article, and other readers following the comments may want to take another look as well. It is a key part of understanding the broader national security and economic implications of the situation.
Regarding the specific incident you mentioned, it is tragic anytime civilians or civilian structures are affected during conflict. At the same time, according to intelligence reporting, the site that was struck had previously functioned as an Iranian intelligence facility, with communications equipment reportedly still operating. When military assets are embedded within or adjacent to civilian structures, the risks to civilians unfortunately increase.
It also raises difficult but important questions that often go unaddressed. If military facilities were known to exist in the area, why was the school still operating during an active conflict situation? Were children moved to shelters? Were precautions taken to reduce risk?
Much of the discussion in the comments is focusing on civilian casualty concerns, which are always tragic, but proportionally have remained relatively limited given the scale of military targets involved. Meanwhile, the broader strategic point about energy independence and economic insulation is receiving less attention than it deserves.
That issue affects every American household and is central to understanding the long term implications of the situation.