Hormuz Fertilizer Crisis: Why the UN Warns of Food Shortages

A United Nations official warned on October 14 that parts of Asia and Africa could face a food-security crisis if the United States and Iran do not agree within weeks on a mechanism to move fertilizer through the Strait of Hormuz. UN Under-Secretary-General Jorge Moreira da Silva said the proposed system could be activated within seven to 10 days after an agreement, and that as few as five fertilizer vessels a day could keep critical supplies moving. The warning links the conflict in the Gulf directly to planting calendars, farm yields and food prices far from the fighting.

Accountability runs in both directions. Iran has intensified attacks and restrictions on commercial shipping around Hormuz, while the administration of Donald Trump (opens in a new tab) maintains a naval blockade of Iranian ports and has not reached a passage deal with Tehran. Iran's state leadership under Ali Khamenei (opens in a new tab) says its restrictions are tied to national security and self-defence after US-Israeli attacks. Washington says it is defending freedom of navigation and assisting commercial shipping. Those stated justifications do not erase the effect: fertilizer traffic remains severely disrupted.

Why fertilizer is trapped at Hormuz

Before the war, roughly one-third of globally traded urea and nearly half of seaborne sulphur passed through the Strait of Hormuz, according to reporting based on UN and industry data. Urea is the world's most widely used nitrogen fertilizer, while sulphur is an important input in fertilizer production. That makes fertilizer availability (opens in a new tab) unusually sensitive to a shipping chokepoint better known for oil.

The proposed UN mechanism is deliberately narrow. It would establish a coordination centre in Oman, register vessels, use monitors alongside local authorities to verify cargo loading and track ships during transit. Moreira da Silva said the system could operate while Washington and Tehran continue wider negotiations. His warning is about timing: farmers cannot simply postpone planting indefinitely. Missing a planting season can reduce yields months later, turning a maritime-security dispute into a food-price shock.

The International Chamber of Commerce estimated in an August report that a prolonged Hormuz disruption could raise commodity prices by up to 81% for cereals, 66% for oil crops and 30% for animal products. Those are scenario estimates, not observed price increases, and should not be presented as a forecast guaranteed to occur. They do show the scale of the risk if fertilizer shortages persist.

The shipping threat is getting worse

The food warning arrived as attacks on commercial shipping accelerated. Al Jazeera reported that Kpler recorded 10 tankers struck between September 28 and October 4, followed by another strike on October 5. UK Maritime Trade Operations recorded 15 other attacks from October 6 through October 14, including 11 in the preceding four days.

A separate incident on October 14 illustrated the danger. Reporting said a container ship sank south of Hormuz after being hit by a projectile; Iran's Revolutionary Guards later claimed a vessel carrying more than 2,500 containers struck a naval mine. The mine claim was not independently verified in the reporting available at the time. Crew members from the GFS Pride were reported evacuated safely before the vessel sank. ## The contradiction on both sides

Iran says it is acting in self-defence and resisting a US blockade. Yet attacks on commercial vessels expose civilian crews and third-country cargo to danger and impede products needed for food production. Washington says it is protecting navigation, yet its blockade and unresolved negotiations are also part of the system that prevents normal trade. A policy can have a stated security rationale and still impose foreseeable costs on people who are not parties to the conflict.

That is the core human effect. Farmers in South Asia and parts of Africa do not control US-Iran negotiations, but their access to fertilizer may depend on them. Higher input costs can reduce fertilizer use, lower yields and raise prices. The pressure therefore moves from maritime security into food price pressure (opens in a new tab).

What happens next

The immediate benchmark is whether Washington and Tehran allow the UN fertilizer mechanism to start within the next few weeks. If they do, the plan's five-vessel-a-day target gives the public a concrete measure of whether critical cargo is moving. If they do not, the next evidence will appear in fertilizer inventories, planting decisions and food-price data.

Neither side needs to settle every dispute in the Gulf to reduce this specific risk. That is why the UN proposal matters: it separates a humanitarian and food-security corridor from the larger political bargain. Failure to make that separation would leave farmers and consumers paying for decisions made far from their fields and markets.

Questions people ask

How does the Strait of Hormuz affect fertilizer?

Before the war, about a third of globally traded urea and nearly half of seaborne sulphur moved through Hormuz. Disruption therefore constrains major fertilizer inputs used across Asia and Africa.

What did the UN warn about food prices?

The UN warned that missing planting seasons could cut agricultural productivity and push prices higher. An ICC scenario estimated very large potential increases if the disruption persists, but those figures are risk estimates, not guaranteed outcomes.

Who is blocking the Hormuz fertilizer corridor?

There is no single blocker established by the sources. Iran is attacking and restricting shipping, while the US maintains a blockade and the two governments have not agreed to the UN-backed mechanism.