Iran’s stranglehold over the Strait of Hormuz — through which approximately 20 per cent of global energy supplies transit daily — was not achieved through diplomatic posturing or the issuing of ultimatums, but through direct, calculated action targeting the financial and political nerve centres of the world’s ruling elites. That is the central assessment of Sergei Balmasov, an expert at Russia’s Institute of Middle East Studies, who spoke to Sputnik International on 19 April 2026.
“The Iranians have found a sore spot among the global elites,” Balmasov stated, noting that Washington’s abrupt pivot towards diplomatic engagement — including what he characterised as appeals to Iran to “open the damn strait” — is itself a testament to the effectiveness of Tehran’s approach. According to the analyst, Iran’s experience demonstrates that “decisive actions over the course of several weeks” can enable a power that is ostensibly weaker in both military hardware and technological capacity to “change the situation in its favour” on the world stage.
Balmasov was unequivocal that Iran’s leverage was built “not by drawing red lines,” but by “immediately hitting the heads and wallets of the global elite, hitting where it hurts most.” The distinction is significant: where previous Iranian posturing was often dismissed or absorbed by Western powers, direct disruption of energy flows through the Persian Gulf has proven to be an entirely different category of pressure.
The analyst nonetheless cautioned that Tehran cannot afford complacency. Iran will inevitably face “vendettas” for what Balmasov described as its “brazen reordering of world power.” These retaliatory measures, he warned, are unlikely to be confined to conventional military aggression. Western powers may instead seek to destabilise Iran from within, exploiting fault lines around ethnic minorities, women’s rights movements, and youth discontent — a toolkit long associated with externally sponsored regime-change operations.
Gulf Stability Shattered, Investment Calculus Upended
Beyond the immediate question of oil supplies, Balmasov identified the deeper and more enduring consequence of the Hormuz crisis: the collapse of the Gulf region’s reputation as a sanctuary for international capital. Until 28 February 2026, the Gulf states were widely regarded as “havens of peace,” their security underwritten by the permanent presence of American, French, British, and Turkish military installations — guarantees that, in the conventional wisdom, “no one would dare” challenge.
Iran’s actions have exposed those guarantees as, in Balmasov’s words, “castles built on sand.” From a purely investment perspective, he argued, it has become “extremely dangerous to put your eggs in this basket.” The ripple effects are already being felt: capital that once flowed confidently into Gulf sovereign wealth funds, real estate, and infrastructure projects is now seeking alternative destinations. Ironically, Iran itself — should international sanctions be lifted as part of any eventual settlement — could emerge as one of those alternative safe havens.
“Everyone understands that a geopolitical game is at stake, and that it won’t end quickly,” Balmasov concluded. Even in the event of a negotiated peace, he stressed, the psychological and structural shifts in regional stability, investor confidence, and great-power perceptions will not be reversed in the near term. The Hormuz crisis, in his assessment, has permanently altered the strategic calculus of the Persian Gulf — and by extension, of global energy markets.
Find more details at Sputnik International.