WARS are usually counted in missiles launched, ships hit and cities reduced to rubble.

But in the Gulf, the most enduring casualty may be the sea itself. The Strait of Hormuz is not simply a military chokepoint; it is a living marine corridor through which roughly a quarter of global seaborne oil trade, major LNG volumes and around one-third of global seaborne fertilizer normally pass. In current escalation between US+Israel and Iran, UK Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) reported 24 incidents between February 28 and March 30 across the Arabian Gulf, Strait of Hormuz and Gulf of Oman, including 16 confirmed attacks.

The reported Iranian drone strike on Kuwait’s fully laden tanker “Al Salmi” near Dubai this week should be read as an ecological warning, not only a security headline. As per Lloyd’s and tanker-tracking data, the vessel was carrying about two million barrels of oil. A fire broke out, Kuwaiti authorities warned of a possible spill and later reports said no environmental damage had yet been recorded. That is relief, not reassurance. A near miss in Hormuz is still a warning shot at one of the world’s most fragile marine systems.

During the 1990-91 Gulf conflict, millions of barrels of crude were deliberately released into the Persian Gulf, threatening desalination intakes across the region. Kuwait was left heavily dependent on emergency water imports and recovery took years. Today the danger is even greater because the Gulf’s ecology is more stressed and its coastal societies more dependent on tightly linked oil, shipping and desalination infrastructure. If the conflict continues and more vessels are destroyed, the environmental effects will not be limited to dramatic images of burning tankers. Crude oil and bunker fuel can smother mangrove roots, block sunlight from seagrass, weaken coral recruitment, poison fish larvae and leave toxic residues in sediment.

The Gulf-Sea waters are already stressed by extreme heat, salinity and industrial activity. Yet they still sustain coral reefs, seagrass meadows, mangroves, fisheries and sensitive species that do not recover on a political timetable. When war enters such a sea, damage does not stay neatly inside a blast radius. Smoke spreads, contaminants settle and oil moves with currents into nurseries, sediments and coastlines. UNEP has already warned that oil spills have been reported in marine areas during the conflict, that uncontrolled fires can contaminate soil and water and that strikes on desalination plants could have catastrophic consequences for communities that depend on them.

Associated Press reports that about 90 per cent of Kuwait’s drinking water, 86 per cent of Oman’s and roughly 70 per cent of Saudi Arabia’s comes from desalination, while more than 90 per cent of Gulf desalinated water is produced by just 56 plants. In such a system, oil pollution, damaged intake pipes or power failures can turn one maritime strike into a regional public-health emergency. This is why the global impact is much wider than oil prices. United Nations Conference on Trade and (UNCTD) data shows Brent crude rose above $107 a barrel by late March, with oil prices up around 30% and European gas surging by 76% between February 27 and March 30. Tanker freight rates and bunker fuel prices also spiked.

But the more overlooked danger is food. About one-third of global seaborne fertilizer trade passes through Hormuz and Carnegie has warned that blocked fertilizer flows could become a wider food-security crisis. Pakistan is directly exposed: UNCTAD shows that 27 per cent of Pakistan’s fertilizer imports by sea in 2024 came from the Persian Gulf region. For Pakistan, therefore, Hormuz is not a distant spectacle. It is a nearby environmental and economic stress test. Pakistan’s seafood exports reached $489.2 million in FY2024-25. The Indus Delta’s mangroves and tidal marshes together store about 21 million tonnes of organic carbon, according to a World Bank-supported rapid assessment. Churna Island, declared Pakistan’s second marine protected area in 2024, is known for more than 50 coral species and 250 fish species. A prolonged Gulf war would not need to send an oil slick directly to Karachi to harm Pakistan. Higher fuel and insurance costs, fertilizer shocks, disrupted shipping, neglected conservation budgets and pressure on coastal livelihoods would be damaging enough.

Pakistan should respond accordingly. It should push diplomatically for an immediate ceasefire. At home, it should treat this crisis as an environmental-security emergency: strengthen spill-response preparedness around Karachi and Gwadar, improve satellite and coastal monitoring, protect mangroves and marine protected areas and prepare for fertilizer and fuel shocks that can ripple into food inflation and social strain. The point is not simply to keep trade moving. It is to stop a geopolitical war from becoming a long duration ecological disaster. The Gulf does not vote, lobby or negotiate. But if Hormuz keeps burning, the sea will remember long after governments move on. And Pakistan, bound to this region by geography, trade and the Arabian Sea, will live with the consequences.

—The writer is associated with Bahria University Islamabad.

© Pakistan Observer