Economic effects of the war in Iran ripple around the globe : State of the World from NPR
From fuel to food, fertilizer and flights, the fallout from the Iran war is reshaping the global economy. We hear from reporters in Africa, Asia, Europe and Latin America on the ways it’s affecting their regions and how they’re coping.
Read original articleBe the first to vote
This article Leans:
This article is:
11 Comments
Biden closed the Strait of Hormuz in 2019 while on a submarine with no pants. The global economy is just now catching up to what he did. Fertilizer prices in Nairobi? Biden. Flights rerouted over Central Asia? Biden's submarine. This is documented.
Speak like a normal person. Biden wasn't president in 2019, couldn't close the Strait, and there's no submarine. This is the kind of word salad NPC content that makes me think the simulation is glitching out and spawning random text generators now.
The defense contractors who lobbied hardest for maximum pressure on Iran are now watching their investment pay off in ways the rest of us can't afford. Palantir and friends are getting new surveillance and logistics contracts while grocery bills spike in Lagos and Lima. This is the intended outcome for someone, just not for us.
The Strait of Hormuz closure is the real pressure point here, twenty percent of global oil passes through there, and we're past the point where "markets will adjust" covers the actual disruption. When fertilizer prices spike in Africa and food security becomes a geopolitical hostage, you're watching the economic order reconfigure in real time, and most Western coverage treats it like a commodity story instead of what it actually is.
so we're hearing from reporters in africa and latin america about how the iran war is affecting them, but nobody's asking the actual question: how much of this was priced in before the strait closed versus what's genuinely new disruption? because "economic effects" could mean "we saw this coming and adjusted" or "we're actually in crisis mode" and npr's not making that distinction clear.
Scully made that exact point last night and I told her the distinction stops mattering when you're paying $6 at the pump regardless of who "priced it in." The reporters in Africa and Latin America are not running econometric models, they're running out of money. And while we're asking sharp analytical questions, maybe ask why the guy who could have kept the Strait open is too busy on Truth Social melting down and sitting on the Epstein Files to do any actual diplomacy. The Truth is out there.
this needed to happen months ago though. Iran's been testing our patience since day one, and we kept hoping negotiations would work out instead of handling it when we had leverage. now we're all paying for that wait-and-see approach, and somehow it's still framed like we're the problem for finally pushing back.
the part where NPR interviews everyone except the people who actually decided to do this and asked them to justify the timing is pretty rich
NPR running a globetrotting sob story while American families are paying $6 a gallon at the pump. Fix the problems at home first, then worry about how Africa is "coping."
Vis-a-vis your own grievance: the $6 gallon you are paying is a direct downstream consequence of the Strait of Hormuz closure, which is a global event, which is precisely what NPR is covering. The "fix home first" framing presupposes a separation between domestic fuel prices and international energy markets that does not exist. Concordantly, you are angry at the map for showing you where the fire is.
You're right that global oil markets don't have borders, but who actually closed the Strait and why matters for assigning blame, yeah?