Global Impact · March 2026

No Butter Chicken, Shorter Showers, Pricier Homes: How the Iran War Is Hitting Everyone, Everywhere

A war in the Middle East sounds like someone else’s problem — until the cooking gas runs out, the airfare doubles, the cancer drug doesn’t arrive, and a gas line forms in Texas. Here is what the Iran-US-Israel conflict is actually doing to the rest of the world.

Wars have always had consequences beyond their borders. But in a world wired tightly by trade, shipping lanes, and supply chains, a conflict in one region doesn’t stay there. It travels — through fuel prices and freight routes, through cancelled flights and disrupted harvests, through the price of a tracksuit and the cost of a cancer drug — until it lands, quietly and uninvited, in the daily life of someone who had nothing to do with starting it.

The war between the United States, Israel, and Iran — now in its fourth week — is doing exactly this.

I. Food and the Kitchen

Butter chicken and dosa have disappeared from some Indian restaurant menus. These dishes depend on cooking gas. India imports most of its LPG from the Gulf, and the Strait of Hormuz closure has made supplies scarce enough that commercial kitchens have been rationed or shut.

Australian farmers are planting less wheat — and farmers in many other countries are watching their input costs climb. About a third of the world’s fertiliser is shipped through the Strait of Hormuz. When that route closes, fertiliser prices rise, and planting decisions change. Smaller harvests could follow within a season or two.

Sugar from Brazil could get more expensive. Brazil is the world’s largest sugar producer. As energy prices spike globally, Brazilian sugar mills are finding it more profitable to convert their cane into biofuel rather than sugar. Less sugar on global markets means higher prices — everywhere.

II. Energy and the Household

South Koreans were asked to take shorter showers. Much of the energy South Korea uses to heat water comes from Middle Eastern gas imports. With supply disrupted and prices surging, the government has moved to public conservation appeals.

Thailand’s prime minister wore short-sleeved shirts to work and asked others to do the same. Government offices have been ordered to cap air-conditioning use.

The Philippines asked civil servants to take the stairs instead of elevators. Egypt cut shopping mall operating hours five days a week. Both countries are trying to reduce electricity demand as energy costs climb.

Sri Lanka declared Wednesdays a public holiday. The intention is to reduce daily commuting and conserve fuel. Laos adopted a three-day school week for the same reason.

Gas lines are back in Texas. In San Antonio, drivers queued for up to 30 minutes at a Costco fuel station, worried about a price spike. The irony of an American oil state experiencing fuel anxiety because of a war its government is fighting has not been lost on observers.

III. Travel and Transport

Tens of thousands of flights have been cancelled. With parts of Middle Eastern airspace closed, carriers have had to suspend routes, reroute around conflict zones, and absorb higher fuel costs — all of which are filtering through to ticket prices.

Airfares are rising globally. Airlines pay more for jet fuel. They pass the cost to passengers. There is no opt-out for anyone who needs to fly.

Formula 1 cancelled races in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. With missiles targeting Gulf nations, competitions scheduled in both countries were scratched from the calendar.

Zara clothes piled up at airports in Bangladesh. Bangladesh is one of the world’s largest garment exporters. The cancelled and disrupted flights have blocked textile exports from leaving the country, with finished garments sitting in airport cargo holds with nowhere to go.

IV. Health and Medicine

Cancer drugs might not reach patients on time. Dubai and Doha are major cargo transit hubs for temperature-sensitive pharmaceuticals — medicines that must be kept refrigerated at all times. Shutdowns in both cities have disrupted the cold-chain logistics that keep these drugs viable from manufacturer to patient.

This is, in purely clinical terms, a life-or-death supply chain failure. It receives far less attention than the price of petrol.

V. The Unexpected Ones

Party balloons may be harder to find. Qatar produces a third of the world’s helium — a byproduct of natural gas production. As Qatari production and export slow, balloon suppliers globally are running low. It is a small thing. It is also a precise illustration of how deep global supply chains go, and how far a disruption in one place travels.

Tracksuits could get more expensive. The polyester in athletic wear is made from petrochemicals — oil and gas derivatives. Rising energy prices increase the cost of the raw material, which increases the cost of the finished product.

Ceramics factories in India stopped firing their kilns. Kilns run on natural gas or propane. Both are now scarce. Ceramic tiles — used in construction, in kitchens, in bathrooms — have joined the list of things that cannot currently be made at the rate they are needed.

Gold has fallen. This is counterintuitive — gold is traditionally a safe-haven asset that rises in times of crisis. The fall is attributed partly to speculative investors cashing out gold positions to cover losses elsewhere, a sign that the financial stress of the conflict is spreading across asset classes in unpredictable directions.

A chess grandmaster withdrew from a major competition in Cyprus over safety concerns after a drone struck a British military base on the island early in the war. Even the chess calendar is not immune.

Shakira and Christina Aguilera postponed concerts in the region. Cultural events — the things that make cities feel alive and economies feel connected — are, like everything else, contingent on the war not spreading further.

VI. Winners and Odd Developments

Russia is getting a little richer. Surging energy prices are a direct revenue boost to an economy built on oil and gas exports. Every dollar added to the global oil price is a dollar more for Russia’s budget, which is currently funding an ongoing war in Ukraine.

Ukraine may run short on Patriot missiles. The conflict has depleted US stocks of the interceptors that Kyiv relies on to defend against Russian air attacks. The same war that is boosting Russia’s revenue is simultaneously straining the military supply chains that Ukraine depends on.

Venezuela has been allowed to export fertiliser again. The Trump administration loosened sanctions specifically to help American farmers access fertiliser supplies disrupted by the Hormuz closure. A country sanctioned for democratic backsliding is being unlocked as a fertiliser supplier because a war has made the alternative too expensive.

The full list, laid out this way, is both absurd and clarifying. A war between three countries is cancelling concerts and reducing shower lengths and delaying cancer drugs and making tracksuits cost more and forming gas lines in Texas and emptying butter chicken off Indian menus and pushing a chess grandmaster off his competition schedule. The connections are real. The supply chains are real. The consequences are real — and they are landing on people who had no vote in the decisions that started this.

That, perhaps, is the most useful thing a list like this can do: make visible the fact that in a genuinely interconnected world, the cost of war is not contained by national borders or military perimeters. It distributes itself — silently, through prices and shortages and small inconveniences and large medical emergencies — across the entire human network. The war is not over there. It is in the price of the fuel, the absence of the drug, the cancelled flight, and the empty balloon aisle at the party supplies store. It is already here.


 

Receive Daily Updates

Stay updated with current events, tests, material and UPSC related news

Recent Posts

  • Context:-

    At the recently concluded Leaders’ Summit on Climate in April 2021, Lowering Emissions by Accelerating Forest Finance (LEAF) Coalition, a collective of the United States, United Kingdom and Norway governments, came up with a $1 billion fund plan that shall be offered to countries committed to arrest the decline of their tropical forests by 2030.

    [wptelegram-join-channel link=”https://t.me/s/upsctree” text=”Join @upsctree on Telegram”]

    What is LEAF Coalition?

    • Lowering Emissions by Accelerating Forest Finance (LEAF) Coalition, a collective of the United States, United Kingdom and Norway governments, came up with a $1 billion fund.
    • LEAF is supported by transnational corporations (TNCs) like Unilever plc, Amazon.com, Inc, Nestle, Airbnb, Inc as well as Emergent, a US-based non-profit.

    Why LEAF Coalition?

    • The world lost more than 10 million hectares of primary tropical forest cover last year, an area roughly the size of Switzerland.
    • Ending tropical and subtropical forest loss by 2030 is a crucial part of meeting global climate, biodiversity and sustainable development goals. Protecting tropical forests offers one of the biggest opportunities for climate action in the coming decade.
    • Tropical forests are massive carbon sinks and by investing in their protection, public and private players are likely to stock up on their carbon credits.
    • The LEAF coalition initiative is a step towards concretising the aims and objectives of the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) mechanism.
    • REDD+ was created by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). It monetised the value of carbon locked up in the tropical forests of most developing countries, thereby propelling these countries to help mitigate climate change.
    • It is a unique initiative as it seeks to help developing countries in battling the double-edged sword of development versus ecological commitment. 
    • The initiative comes at a crucial time. The tropics have lost close to 12.2 million hectares (mha) of tree cover last year according to global estimates released by Global Forest Watch.
    • Of this, a loss of 4.2 mha occurred within humid tropical primary forests alone. It should come as no surprise that most of these lost forests were located in the developing countries of Latin America, Africa and South Asia.
    • Brazil has fared dismally on the parameter of ‘annual primary forest loss’ among all countries. It has lost 1.7 mha of primary forests that are rich storehouse of carbon. India’s estimated loss in 2020 stands at 20.8 kilo hectares.

    Brazil & India 

    • Between 2002-2020, Brazil’s total area of humid primary forest reduced by 7.7 per cent while India’s reduced by 3.4 per cent.
    • Although the loss in India is not as drastic as in Brazil, its position is nevertheless precarious. For India, this loss is equivalent to 951 metric tonnes worth carbon dioxide emissions released in the atmosphere.
    • It is important to draw comparisons between Brazil and India as both countries have adopted a rather lackadaisical attitude towards deforestation-induced climate change. The Brazilian government hardly did anything to control the massive fires that gutted the Amazon rainforest in 2019.
    • It is mostly around May that forest fires peak in India. However, this year India, witnessed massive forest fires in early March in states like Odisha, Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh and Mizoram among others.
    • The European Union’s Copernicus Atmospheric Monitoring Service claimed that 0.2 metric tonnes of carbon was emitted in the Uttarakhand forest fires.

    According to the UN-REDD programme, after the energy sector, deforestation accounts for massive carbon emissions — close to 11 per cent — in the atmosphere. Rapid urbanisation and commercialisation of forest produce are the main causes behind rampant deforestation across tropical forests.

    Tribes, Forests and Government

    Disregarding climate change as a valid excuse for the fires, Indian government officials were quick to lay the blame for deforestation on activities of forest dwellers and even labelled them “mischievous elements” and “unwanted elements”.

    Policy makers around the world have emphasised the role of indigenous tribes and local communities in checking deforestation. These communities depend on forests for their survival as well as livelihood. Hence, they understand the need to protect forests. However, by posing legitimate environmental concerns as obstacles to real development, governments of developing countries swiftly avoid protection of forests and rights of forest dwellers.

    For instance, the Government of India has not been forthcoming in recognising the socio-economic, civil, political or even cultural rights of forest dwellers. According to data from the Union Ministry of Tribal Affairs in December, 2020 over 55 per cent of this population has still not been granted either individual or community ownership of their lands.  

    To make matters worse, the government has undertaken systematic and sustained measures to render the landmark Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 ineffective in its implementation. The Act had sought to legitimise claims of forest dwellers on occupied forest land.

    Various government decisions have seriously undermined the position of indigenous people within India. These include proposing amendments to the obsolete Indian Forest Act, 1927 that give forest officials the power to take away forest dwellers’ rights and to even use firearms with impunity.

    There is also the Supreme Court’s order of February, 2019 directing state governments to evict illegal encroachers of forest land or millions of forest dwellers inhabiting forests since generations as a measure to conserve wildlife. Finally, there is the lack of data on novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) deaths among the forest dwelling population;

    Tardy administration, insufficient supervision, apathetic attitude and a lack of political intent defeat the cause of forest dwelling populations in India, thereby directly affecting efforts at arresting deforestation.

    Way Forward

    • Implementation of the LEAF Coalition plan will help pump in fresh rigour among developing countries like India, that are reluctant to recognise the contributions of their forest dwelling populations in mitigating climate change.
    • With the deadline for proposal submission fast approaching, India needs to act swiftly on a revised strategy.
    • Although India has pledged to carry out its REDD+ commitments, it is impossible to do so without seeking knowledge from its forest dwelling population.

    Tuntiak Katan, a global indigenous leader from Ecuador and general coordinator of the Global Alliance of Territorial Communities, aptly indicated the next steps at the Climate Summit:

    “The first step is recognition of land rights. The second step is the recognition of the contributions of local communities and indigenous communities, meaning the contributions of indigenous peoples.We also need recognition of traditional knowledge practices in order to fight climate change”

    Perhaps India can begin by taking the first step.