The Strait That Feeds the World

Y España también sintió eso.

And Spain felt that too.

En los años setenta, la crisis del petróleo fue muy difícil para España porque el país dependía mucho de los países árabes para el petróleo.

In the seventies, the oil crisis was very hard for Spain because the country depended a lot on Arab countries for oil.

Muchas familias españolas todavía recuerdan ese período.

Many Spanish families still remember that period.

Right, and Spain at that point was also in the middle of a very complicated political transition.

So you had economic shock layered on top of political instability.

That's a volatile combination.

Exactamente.

Exactly.

Y ahora, en 2026, el mundo está en una situación similar.

And now, in 2026, the world is in a similar situation.

Hay una guerra en Irán, los precios del petróleo son altos, y muchos países ya tienen problemas económicos.

There's a war in Iran, oil prices are high, and many countries are already having economic problems.

Un problema en el Estrecho de Ormuz puede ser muy grave.

A problem in the Strait of Hormuz can be very serious.

Let's talk about what Iran is actually proposing, because the framing matters here.

The word being used is 'regulate,' which sounds administrative.

But what's being described is creating a designated shipping lane and charging fees to any vessel that uses it.

Sí, y eso es muy polémico.

Yes, and that's very controversial.

El Estrecho de Ormuz es un estrecho internacional, y según el derecho internacional del mar, todos los barcos tienen el derecho de pasar libremente.

The Strait of Hormuz is an international strait, and according to the law of the sea, all ships have the right of free passage.

Irán no puede cobrar tarifas legalmente.

Iran cannot legally charge fees.

The legal architecture here is the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, UNCLOS.

The United States, funnily enough, has never ratified UNCLOS, but it's always been the first to invoke it when it needs freedom of navigation in somebody else's water.

Eso es interesante, Fletcher.

That's interesting, Fletcher.

Pero lo que me preocupa no es solo el aspecto legal.

But what worries me is not just the legal aspect.

Es el aspecto práctico.

It's the practical aspect.

Si los barcos tienen que pagar tarifas, los costos de transporte van a subir.

If ships have to pay fees, transportation costs are going to rise.

Y al final, esos costos extra los paga el consumidor.

And in the end, those extra costs are paid by the consumer.

Exactly.

And the consumer who feels it first and hardest is never the consumer in Madrid or Austin.

It's the consumer in Dhaka, in Nairobi, in Karachi.

Places where a 15 or 20 percent rise in the price of staple food doesn't mean eating out less.

It means eating less.

Tienes razón.

You're right.

Y hay países que dependen casi completamente de las importaciones para comer.

And there are countries that depend almost completely on imports to eat.

Por ejemplo, Yemen importa más del noventa por ciento de su trigo.

For example, Yemen imports more than ninety percent of its wheat.

Si el transporte por el Estrecho de Ormuz es más caro o más difícil, Yemen va a tener un problema enorme.

If transport through the Strait of Hormuz is more expensive or more difficult, Yemen is going to have an enormous problem.

Yemen is already in the middle of one of the worst food security crises on the planet.

I covered the early stages of that conflict in 2015.

The pictures from the markets then were haunting.

And now you're layering another potential disruption on top of that.

Y no solo Yemen.

And not just Yemen.

Egipto también importa mucho trigo, especialmente de Rusia y Ucrania.

Egypt also imports a lot of wheat, especially from Russia and Ukraine.

Pero los barcos que llevan ese trigo a Egipto usan rutas que pueden ser afectadas por la situación en el Golfo.

But the ships that carry that wheat to Egypt use routes that can be affected by the situation in the Gulf.

La comida y la política internacional están muy conectadas.

Food and international politics are very closely connected.

Let me ask you something, Octavio, because you know the Spanish market well.

Does any of this register in Spain in terms of food prices?

Is this felt at the supermarket level, or is it still abstract?

En España ya sentimos el aumento de precios.

In Spain we already feel the price increases.

El aceite de oliva, por ejemplo, subió muchísimo en los últimos años por la sequía.

Olive oil, for example, rose enormously in recent years because of the drought.

Pero también los precios del transporte afectan los productos que importamos, como la fruta tropical, el café, el chocolate.

But transportation prices also affect the products we import, like tropical fruit, coffee, chocolate.

The olive oil situation is its own whole episode.

But what you're pointing to is the interconnection, right?

The Spanish consumer is already absorbing one climate shock with olive oil, and now there's a potential maritime disruption adding pressure from the other side.

Sí, exactamente.

Yes, exactly.

Y España también importa carne y soja de Brasil y Argentina.

And Spain also imports meat and soy from Brazil and Argentina.

Esos barcos no pasan por el Estrecho de Ormuz, pero los precios del combustible para esos barcos también suben cuando hay problemas en el Golfo.

Those ships don't pass through the Strait of Hormuz, but the fuel prices for those ships also rise when there are problems in the Gulf.

The fuel cost for global shipping is just...

it's this hidden variable that most people never think about.

Every container of food on a ship has a fuel cost embedded in its price.

When oil goes up, that cost gets passed through the entire supply chain.

Y hay algo más que la gente no sabe.

And there's something else people don't know.

Los fertilizantes también son muy caros de transportar porque son pesados.

Fertilizers are also very expensive to transport because they are heavy.

Entonces, si los costos de transporte suben, los agricultores pagan más por los fertilizantes, producen menos, y la comida es más cara.

So, if transportation costs rise, farmers pay more for fertilizers, they produce less, and food is more expensive.

Es un círculo muy difícil.

It's a very difficult cycle.

I want to push back slightly on one framing that comes up a lot in these conversations.

People say, 'well, the market will find alternatives.' Reroute around Africa, use different suppliers, whatever.

And that's technically true but it ignores time.

Claro.

Of course.

Rerouting, como dices tú, tarda tiempo.

Rerouting, as you say, takes time.

Y si una crisis de comida empieza, la gente no puede esperar dos meses mientras los barcos cambian de ruta.

And if a food crisis starts, people can't wait two months while ships change their route.

La comida es urgente.

Food is urgent.

No puedes decirle a una familia: espera un poco, el mercado va a resolver el problema.

You can't tell a family: wait a bit, the market will solve the problem.

Going around the Cape of Good Hope instead of through the Strait adds roughly ten to fourteen days to a voyage from the Gulf to Europe.

That's ten to fourteen days of extra fuel, extra crew time, extra port delays.

The cost calculator on that is significant.

Fletcher, quiero añadir algo sobre la perspectiva histórica.

Fletcher, I want to add something about the historical perspective.

En la historia española, siempre hubo una conexión entre el control del mar y el acceso a la comida.

In Spanish history, there was always a connection between control of the sea and access to food.

En el siglo XVI, España controló las rutas marítimas del Atlántico y eso fue muy importante para el comercio de comida entre Europa y América.

In the sixteenth century, Spain controlled the Atlantic sea routes and that was very important for the food trade between Europe and America.

The tomato.

The potato.

Chocolate.

All of it came through those routes.

And the whole nutritional landscape of Europe changed as a result.

Which makes it a genuinely long-running story, the idea that whoever controls the shipping lanes shapes what people eat.

Exacto.

Exactly.

Y hoy en día es lo mismo, pero con petróleo y fertilizantes en lugar de tomates y cacao.

And today it's the same, but with oil and fertilizers instead of tomatoes and cocoa.

La historia cambia los detalles pero no cambia el problema fundamental: la comida y el poder están siempre conectados.

The history changes the details but doesn't change the fundamental problem: food and power are always connected.

So what happens now?

Pakistan's interior minister just flew to Tehran to try to keep the ceasefire talks alive.

If that holds, if the war de-escalates, the Hormuz question might recede.

But if it doesn't, this fee proposal could go from a political statement to an actual policy.

Y eso sería muy serio.

And that would be very serious.

Los países del Golfo, como Arabia Saudí y los Emiratos, también dependen del estrecho para exportar su petróleo.

The Gulf countries, like Saudi Arabia and the Emirates, also depend on the strait to export their oil.

Un conflicto en el estrecho es malo para todos, incluso para Irán.

A conflict in the strait is bad for everyone, including Iran.

Which is why most analysts think this is a negotiating posture, not a genuine plan.

But here's what I've learned covering places where people use economic pressure as a weapon: sometimes the threat itself is enough to move prices, and by the time anyone figures out it was a bluff, the damage is done.

Oye, Fletcher, antes dijiste 'el mercado encontrará alternativas.' Esa frase me recuerda algo.

Hey, Fletcher, earlier you said 'the market will find alternatives.' That phrase reminds me of something.

En español, cuando alguien usa 'encontrará', eso es el futuro.

In Spanish, when someone uses 'encontrará,' that's the future tense.

Pero en el español cotidiano, a veces usamos el presente para hablar del futuro, ¿lo notaste?

But in everyday Spanish, we sometimes use the present to talk about the future, did you notice that?

Now that you mention it, I have noticed that.

You said earlier 'los barcos tienen que pagar tarifas, los costos van a subir.' You used 'van a subir' rather than 'subirán.' Is that just a matter of preference, or is there a real difference?

Hay una diferencia pequeña pero importante.

There's a small but important difference.

'Van a subir' es más inmediato, más cercano, como si el futuro ya está empezando.

'Van a subir' is more immediate, closer, as if the future is already beginning.

'Subirán' es más formal o más lejano en el tiempo.

'Subirán' is more formal or further away in time.

En la conversación diaria, usamos mucho 'ir a más infinitivo' porque suena más natural.

In daily conversation, we use 'ir a plus infinitive' a lot because it sounds more natural.

So it's a bit like the difference between 'prices will rise' and 'prices are going to rise' in English.

The second one feels like it's already in motion, already inevitable.

Exactamente, eso es perfecto.

Exactly, that's perfect.

Y es útil para los estudiantes de español porque si no recuerdas el futuro, siempre puedes usar 'ir a más infinitivo.' 'Voy a comer,' 'vamos a hablar,' 'van a subir los precios.' Funciona siempre.

And it's useful for Spanish students because if you don't remember the future tense, you can always use 'ir a plus infinitive.' 'I'm going to eat,' 'we're going to talk,' 'prices are going to rise.' It always works.

That's genuinely useful.

Though knowing me, I'll try to use it and end up telling someone I'm going to be very pregnant about the whole situation.

Fletcher, eso nunca va a cambiar.

Fletcher, that is never going to change.

Pero hoy estuviste bien.

But today you did well.

Sin errores de vocabulario.

No vocabulary errors.

El Estrecho de Ormuz es un tema muy serio, y creo que lo explicamos bien.

The Strait of Hormuz is a very serious topic, and I think we explained it well.