The burning skies over the Middle East show no signs of clearing. As the war involving the United States, Israel, and Iran shows signs of prolonging, international oil prices continue to rise. A red flag has been raised over the supply chain for naphtha, a key feedstock for the petrochemical industry. The Strait of Hormuz is a chokepoint through which approximately 20% of the world's crude oil shipments pass. For South Korea, which imports roughly 70% of its crude oil from the Middle East, instability and blockage of this strait is not merely a matter of rising oil prices. It is a compound crisis that simultaneously shakes the entire industrial base and the livelihoods of ordinary citizens. A scenario in which oil prices surge toward $120 or $130 per barrel is no longer hypothetical — it stands on the threshold of reality.
What makes this crisis so difficult is its sheer complexity. A compound crisis — where an energy crisis, a supply chain crisis, an inflation crisis, and an industrial crisis all interlock and spin together — is regarded as the most challenging case in the field of crisis management. A single-cause, single-prescription approach does not work. Press down on one side and another erupts. Protect one segment of the population and the burden on another grows heavier. Moreover, war as an external variable is beyond our control. The only thing we can control is our own response. How we design that response will determine the depth and duration of this crisis.
What matters most is through which lens we view this crisis. The crisis is already upon us, and we have only one option: enduring it wisely, together. This is not the government's problem alone, nor is it solely the burden of businesses. It is a crisis of the community, in which no one stands apart. And a community's crisis can only be overcome by the community's collective wisdom.
The first thing required is diplomatic wisdom. Crude oil that cannot pass through the Strait of Hormuz is extremely difficult to replace by any means in the short term. The government's securing of priority oil supply commitments from the United Arab Emirates and others was a commendable step. South Korea, which is not in a direct military confrontation with Iran, should have independent diplomatic space on this front. Yet the realities of the Korea-U.S. alliance and other factors have constrained Seoul's room for maneuver. A balanced diplomacy that maintains the Korea-U.S. alliance while strengthening cooperation with Middle Eastern oil-exporting nations, including Iran, is urgently needed. Pragmatic diplomacy that secures the safety of crude oil shipments — that is the most realistic wisdom Korean diplomacy must demonstrate right now.
What the government must do domestically is also clear. Several responses the government has shown in this crisis are positive. Implementing a ceiling on fuel prices serves as a minimum safety net to prevent market runaway. Considering an odd-even license plate driving restriction for private vehicles if oil prices reach $120 to $130 per barrel is an effective contingency measure on the demand side. The swift formulation of a supplementary budget for the Iran war is a decisive break from peacetime inertia, preemptively securing fiscal resources for crisis response. In a crisis, the government's speed and decisiveness themselves become a signal of trust to the public.
In addition, the government must transparently disclose the energy supply-and-demand situation to the public. It must honestly communicate which industries will be affected in the event of supply chain disruptions and present stage-by-stage response plans. When difficulties exist, the government must not simply say everything is fine. Uncertainty breeds fear, and fear can trigger hoarding and panic. The public trusts a government that speaks uncomfortable truths more than one that conceals them. Transparent information disclosure is the most effective means of reducing fear. Furthermore, the pain of an energy crisis does not fall equally on everyone. The shock is far greater for residents of farming and fishing communities, households for whom heating costs are a matter of survival, and small business owners who cannot pass on rising raw material costs to their prices. Targeted support that directs supplementary budget resources to those who hurt the most is more effective than universal subsidies.
Businesses also have a significant role to play. Energy-intensive industries should set voluntary reduction targets, share supply chain information with the government, and activate systems for jointly responding to raw material supply crises. There are moments when cooperation becomes a more rational strategy than competition in the face of crisis. Now is precisely that moment.
The role of each and every citizen may well become the greatest force in overcoming this crisis. Reducing unnecessary car use, taking public transportation, and consciously lowering energy consumption at home — when tens of millions of people practice this simultaneously, the cumulative effect produces energy savings more powerful than any policy. When the gold collection campaign during the 1997 foreign exchange crisis stunned the world, it was not merely because of the amount of gold collected. The very fact that the people moved as one in the face of crisis restored market confidence. The power of a community comes not from numbers but from unity of direction.
A compound energy crisis demands national unity and collective wisdom more than any other type of crisis. As long as the war continues, this crisis will be a long battle. There is only one way to win a long battle. The government must protect supply routes through diplomatic wisdom and build trust through preemptive responses. Businesses must cooperate. And citizens must answer the call through conservation. When these three pillars interlock, the oil price surge crisis becomes not a disaster but an opportunity to strengthen the community of South Korea.
