From Hormuz to the streets: Europe’s crisis of confidence

A disturbance in the Strait of Hormuz seems like an implausible reason for protests on the streets of Paris, Madrid or Lisbon. Yet, the Persian Gulf and European discontent are more connected than one might think, irrespective of what geography suggests.

In the event of a critical energy route being disrupted, the shock travels through oil markets, transport networks, production costs and household budgets thereby making a distant crisis a local problem.

The disturbance in Hormuz can’t be held responsible for the creation of Europe's housing crisis, dissatisfaction with public services or anxieties over stagnant purchasing power.

However, it is responsible for the added pressure on a society that was already crumbling under economic pressure, was losing patience with the administration, and is now losing its confidence in political leaders.

From Hormuz to the household

The Strait of Hormuz is a particularly important energy chokepoint, as roughly one-fifth of global oil consumption normally passes through it. A disruption to maritime traffic that passes through Hormuz generates uncertainty over supplies, delays in supply chains, and increases shipping and insurance costs, thereby driving up international energy prices.

Economies are interconnected and oil is traded as a global commodity. However, due to its fundamental nature, crude oil becomes a basic constituent in the daily lives of the end consumer, and in keeping all industry alive. Even a slight increase or a hint of instability in the oil markets anywhere in the world has a compounded impact on every sector globally, and especially in countries that are dependent on others for energy security.

While the government may provide some subsidies, the end customers always face increased pressure and end up bearing the brunt of such an increase. For citizens who are already reeling under economic pressure of a high cost of living, an unforeseen increase like this exponentially increases actual financial pressure and leads to growth in societal despair and lowering of morale. This often manifests itself in social dissatisfaction and loss of confidence in the politics of the country.

The same is being displayed in Europe in various degrees. It is true that the closing of Hormuz is not the cause of socio-economic discontent in Europe, but the incident has certainly amplified what despondence that was already being felt by the citizens.

Citizens tend to judge a government based on its ability to provide its people with a stable life that is protected from such shocks. Most governments find it difficult to meet these criteria.

When grievances converge

Across Europe a rise in social dissatisfaction has been registered.

France is witnessing protests due to discontent over education, public services, and high living costs. Spain saw protests due to lack of affordable housing and tenant insecurity. Portugal has been demanding better wages, pensions, and public services. Italy and Belgium have also been protesting about living standards, lowering education standards, and lack of social spending by their governments.

These problems mimic each other and protests in multiple countries have an adverse impact on the perception of stability both inside and outside Europe.

The high cost of living and a drop in educational standards can't be attributed to the closing of the Hormuz. The rise in fuel costs not only adds to the woes of the people, but also changes the context in which their existing problems are experienced.

As the cost of essential goods rises, the gap between income and expenditure also rises. When combined with unaffordable housing, manageable grievances turn into frustration, and at times turn into a sense of dread and anger against the authorities.

This often leads to greater debate about government priorities. In such a situation, even social groups that follow different ideologies and/or organisations can arrive at the same conclusion that the government is not responding well to their circumstances.

From higher prices to political distrust

Political unrest is not the obvious next step to economic pressure. While it is understandable for many citizens that international crises can’t be controlled by their own government, citizens do expect their governments to be prepared, to have transparency, and share the burden with a credible action plan.

When the government's responses seem inadequate, and their concerns are met with political apathy, external shocks become entangled with domestic frustrations.

Europeans don’t blame their governments for the closing of Hormuz, but they do blame them for a lack of contingency plans, for the government not sharing the burden of rising costs, not being prepared with sufficient relief packages, and most of all, the government’s policy priorities.

As a result people’s faith in their government’s abilities gets shaken, and this loss of confidence in politics gets more entrenched as the people continue to wrestle with the fundamental question of their political regime being unable to provide a reasonable standard of living, especially for a region as developed as Europe.

Repeated disappointment leads to demonstrations and protests, which are usually met with force by the governments, which leads to even more anger among the citizens and a sense of cynicism regarding any attempts of engagement by the government. This continued cycle of violence and cynicism pushes people towards gradually losing faith in ideas, political participation and improvement.

One would have to go back quite a way in history to see Europe so restless and conflicted. The fault lies not just with the lack of preparation and diversifying energy supplies; it also lies with their inability to foresee that their domestic dissatisfactions would get compounded in case of such an event.

This unrest in Europe is not unique and can easily be witnessed in any energy-dependent region or country in case the governments fail to build a resilience against such shocks. While diversifying energy trade and building strategic supplies, ensuring that the most vulnerable are protected are important steps for energy security; these also help in maintaining and further building political legitimacy.

The author is a Senior Assistant Professor at the Amity Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, Amity University.