Executive Summary

The opening weeks of 2026 witnessed a sharp military escalation between Iran, Israel, and the United States. On 28 February 2026, American and Israeli forces launched coordinated airstrikes against targets on Iranian soil. Although Africa lies far from the theatre of operations, the continent faces profound economic and geopolitical repercussions, rooted in its structural dependence on the Strait of Hormuz and the Suez Canal—twin arteries that sustain global energy flows and maritime commerce.

I. Background to the Conflict

The confrontation between Iran and Israel has escalated through a series of successive crises. In April 2024, Israel struck the Iranian consulate building in Damascus; Tehran responded with a broad missile offensive dubbed “Operation True Promise.” In October 2024, following the assassination of Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah, Iran launched approximately 200 ballistic missiles toward Israel. In June 2025, the United States executed “Operation Midnight Hammer,” striking Iranian nuclear installations. The conflict reached its apogee on 28 February 2026, when the United States and Israel jointly conducted “Operation Roaring Lion” and “Operation Epic Wrath,” operations that resulted in the death of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who had led Iran since 1989.

In response to these strikes, Iran declared the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, triggering immediate turbulence across global energy markets and placing Africa squarely at the centre of the unfolding economic crisis.

II. The Strait of Hormuz and the Energy Shock

The Strait of Hormuz ranks among the most strategically sensitive energy chokepoints on earth. According to data published by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), approximately 20 percent of global oil consumption—equivalent to between 17 and 20 million barrels per day exported by Gulf states—transits through this narrow waterway. The strait also accommodates more than 25 percent of the world’s liquefied natural gas trade.

The vast majority of African countries depend heavily on imported oil and manufactured goods, rendering them acutely vulnerable to any sharp surge in energy prices. In nations where energy import bills already consume disproportionate shares of national budgets, a sudden price spike translates directly into inflation, depreciating currencies, mounting pressure on the poorest households, and widening fiscal deficits as import revenues contract.

III. The Suez Canal and African Trade

The Suez Canal handles between 12 and 15 percent of global trade by volume and approximately 30 percent of international container traffic, making it an indispensable conduit for the commercial flows connecting Asia, Europe, and Africa.

Prior events have laid bare the vulnerability of this vital corridor. During 2024 and 2025, the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and Houthi attacks in the Red Sea combined to produce a severe contraction in transit traffic through the canal. Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi publicly disclosed that monthly losses approached 800 million dollars, while canal revenues fell by 60 percent over the course of 2024, generating cumulative losses estimated at some 7 billion dollars.

Data from the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) indicate that approximately 34 percent of Sudan’s exports and imports pass through the Suez Canal, followed by Djibouti at 31 percent, Kenya at 15 percent, and Tanzania at 10 percent.

IV. Economic Repercussions for African States

1. Most Vulnerable Countries

• Egypt: Exposed to direct and immediate consequences, as the Suez Canal constitutes the country’s principal source of foreign exchange earnings.
• Sudan, Djibouti, Kenya, and Tanzania: Countries whose external trade is heavily reliant on the maritime corridor.
• Oil-importing African nations: Subject to rising fuel costs and higher prices for imported goods across the board.

2. Potential Beneficiaries

African oil-producing states—among them Algeria, Angola, and Nigeria—may stand to gain from elevated oil prices and increased export revenues. However, such benefits will remain subject to violent market swings, generating an environment deeply inimical to medium-term economic planning and investment.

3. Repercussions for Supply Chains

Nigerian political and economic analyst Issoufou Boubacar Kado Magagi, speaking to Sputnik Africa, noted that “stock markets will all fall, and prices of imported goods will rise significantly.” The security disruptions in the Red Sea had already compelled shipping operators to reroute vessels around the Cape of Good Hope, adding thousands of kilometres to transit distances and significantly inflating maritime freight costs worldwide.

V. Geopolitical Repercussions

The conflict is also reshaping geopolitical dynamics across the African continent. Gulf states—whose cities of Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Doha, and Manama were themselves struck by Iranian missiles—may reorder their security priorities in ways that reduce the flow of investment into Africa. Alongside this, the intensifying rivalry between the United States and China for access to African resources is likely to sharpen further in an already volatile geopolitical climate.

African diplomacy has not been silent in the face of this crisis. South African President Cyril Ramaphosa expressed deep concern over the escalating confrontation, calling on all parties to exercise maximum restraint.

Iran’s accumulated influence in Africa—painstakingly cultivated over years of diplomatic engagement and framed around the assertion of states’ sovereign right to peaceful nuclear programmes—is now under severe strain in the wake of Iran’s accelerating military degradation.

VI. Recommendations and Strategic Pathways

This crisis brings into sharp relief a set of strategic imperatives that African states must address at both the short and medium-term horizons:

• Accelerate the energy transition: Reduce structural dependence on imported oil through genuine and sustained investment in renewable energy sources.
• Diversify trade corridors: Develop Atlantic-facing port infrastructure and activate intra-African overland trade routes as alternatives to Red Sea passages.
• Establish regional price-stabilisation mechanisms: Put in place effective coordination frameworks capable of absorbing acute spikes in energy and food prices.
• Strengthen unified African diplomacy: The African Union must speak with a coherent and authoritative voice in international forums to defend the continent’s interests.
• Build foresight and anticipation capacities: Draw lessons from previous crises—most notably the Russia–Ukraine war—and establish dedicated strategic foresight units capable of mapping scenarios and equipping African economies to navigate them.

Conclusion

As the history of global conflicts consistently demonstrates, wars respect no geographical boundaries. From the Gulf crises of the 1990s to the Russia–Ukraine war, and now to the present conflagration in the Middle East, Africa has invariably borne costs it did not incur, shouldering consequences for conflicts in which it holds no decision-making power. The current crisis makes plain that the continent’s structural dependencies in the domains of energy and trade render it immediately exposed to any disruption in international markets.

Yet this vulnerability need not be a permanent condition. Through genuine regional integration, the diversification of energy sources and trading partners, and the forging of a coherent and effective common diplomacy, Africa can move from the position of passive bystander to that of a sovereign actor with the institutional capacity to protect its peoples’ interests against the turbulence of an unstable world order.