• US-Israel strikes on Iran prompted Iranian retaliation against regional US bases and allies, with threats to close the Strait of Hormuz disrupting ~20% of global oil supply
• Brent crude jumped over 8% initially, with analysts warning of potential $100+ levels if the conflict prolongs
• Zimbabwe faces severe economic fallout as a landlocked, fuel-import-dependent nation with already the region's highest pump prices

Harare- On the 28th of February 2026, the world changed. A massive wave of US and Israeli airstrikes tore across Iran in what President Donald Trump described as a bid to permanently destroy the country's nuclear programme and destabilize the regime that has long been a thorn in Washington's side. Within hours, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was confirmed dead. The Persian Gulf was on fire, and so was the global oil market.

By Sunday night, when futures trading reopened, crude prices had surged over 8%. Brent crude,  the international benchmark, climbed from $72.87 to around $79 per barrel. This was not a limited skirmish, but a full-scale war with global economic consequences, and no country, however distant from the Gulf, would be spared.

For Zimbabwe, a landlocked southern African nation already reeling under the weight of the continent's highest fuel prices in its region, the timing could not be worse.

To understand why the US-Iran war rattles oil markets so profoundly, one must first appreciate what Iran means to global energy supply.

Iran is OPEC's fourth-largest oil producer, pumping over 3 million barrels per day as of early 2026. Despite years of US sanctions, Tehran had managed to export roughly 1.9 million barrels per day, primarily to China by the end of 2025. The country also holds the world's third-largest proven oil reserves, making it not just a current supplier but a strategic reserve for the planet's future energy needs.

But Iran's true leverage lies not just in what it produces, but in what it controls, the Strait of Hormuz.

The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow, 33-kilometre-wide waterway off Iran's southern coast connecting the Persian Gulf to the Arabian Sea. At its narrowest point, the shipping lane is just 3 kilometres wide in each direction. Yet through this sliver of water flows approximately 20 million barrels of oil every single day, roughly one-fifth of the entire world's daily oil consumption  along with 20% of global liquefied natural gas exports.

Since the strikes began, Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps has been broadcasting warnings over radio frequencies to tankers: "No ship is allowed to pass the Strait of Hormuz." While Iran has not formally closed the strait, tanker owners need no further persuasion. Traffic through the strait has already ground to a near-halt, with vessels queuing on both sides as shipping companies suspend operations and insurers balk at underwriting passage through a war zone.

The economic consequences of a prolonged closure are almost incomprehensible. Three-quarters of all oil passing through the strait is destined for China, India, Japan, and South Korea.

Barclays analyst Amarpreet Singh warned that Brent could hit $100 per barrel if the security situation continues to deteriorate. "The potential effect on oil markets is hard to overstate," he wrote.

Iran's response to the strikes has been swift and broad. Iranian missiles have targeted US military bases in Qatar, Kuwait, the UAE, and Bahrain. Riyadh, the Saudi capital, and oil-rich eastern provinces have reportedly been in Iran's crosshairs. Dubai International Airport was struck, and the UAE briefly closed its airspace. Iranian missiles were intercepted over Abu Dhabi, with at least one person reported killed.

The regional chaos adds a new dimension of fear to the market. What if Saudi Arabia's oil infrastructure,  the backbone of the world's energy supply,  is damaged? The Abqaiq oil processing facility, which handles a huge share of Saudi Arabia's output, was famously attacked in 2019, and experts note it contains specialised equipment that cannot simply be reordered, meaning a sustained hit could take months or years to repair.

Meanwhile, OPEC+ moved on Sunday to raise production by 206,000 barrels per day, more than analysts had anticipated. The move was designed to dampen the price surge, but most energy economists dismissed it as woefully insufficient against the backdrop of a full-scale war threatening 20% of global supply.

The current oil price spike represents the highest levels seen in approximately four years. Before the strikes, Brent had been elevated by weeks of geopolitical risk premiums as military buildups in the Gulf became impossible to ignore. J.P. Morgan's commodities team, which had forecast Brent averaging around $60 per barrel in 2026 based on fundamentals of oversupply, noted that markets had already been pricing in $10 per barrel above fair value by mid-February in anticipation of military action.

That risk premium has now become reality, and potentially a floor, not a ceiling. Rystad Energy's head of geopolitical analysis said prices could surge by $10 to $20 per barrel above Friday's close if tensions show no signs of easing. A full Hormuz closure, the worst-case scenario, could send prices well past $100 per barrel and potentially trigger a global recession.

President Trump said on Sunday that US combat operations will "continue until all objectives are met", hardly the language of a quick, surgical campaign. Markets are not pricing in a rapid resolution.

Zimbabwe ranks as the most expensive fuel market in the region. Across sub-Saharan Africa, it sits among the top four highest on the continent, behind only Malawi ($2.87/litre), Central African Republic ($1.90/litre), and Senegal ($1.66/litre).

By comparison, South Africa — which imports most of its fuel and has no oil reserves, pays around $1.06 per litre. Botswana sits around $1.10 per litre. Mozambique, despite its coastal access to international shipping, pays less than Zimbabwe. Even Zambia, which shares many of Zimbabwe's landlocked logistical disadvantages, pays slightly less at $1.51 per litre.

Zimbabwe's fuel is already, on average, 31% more expensive than the global average of $1.19 per litre. And a war-driven global oil shock is now bearing down on that already-strained reality.

Why Zimbabwe's Fuel Prices Are So High

Zimbabwe's fuel price crisis is not a new phenomenon born of this conflict. It is the product of deep structural vulnerabilities that a war-driven oil shock will now violently expose.

Zimbabwe imports virtually all of its petroleum products, primarily through South Africa, Mozambique (via the Beira corridor), and occasionally through other SADC neighbours. There is no meaningful domestic refining infrastructure.

Every litre of fuel begins its journey as crude oil somewhere in the Middle East, is refined elsewhere, transported by sea, then moved overland through hundreds of kilometres to reach Zimbabwean pumps. Each step in that chain adds cost — and every step becomes more expensive when global crude prices rise.

Taxes and government levies alone account for between $0.52 and $0.54 per litre, roughly 30% of the total pump price. This compares unfavourably with Botswana, where fuel taxes constitute less than 20% of the pump price. The government relies on fuel levies as a significant revenue source, and there has been no political will to cut them despite the burden on consumers and businesses.

While fuel is priced in US dollars by ZERA, the parallel reality of Zimbabwe's monetary system, the Zimbabwe Gold (ZiG), adds complexity and cost. All uel retailers exclusively accept foreign currency in practice, meaning that the majority of the population, earning in ZiG, must navigate an additional layer of currency exchange to simply fill up a tank.

Also, Zimbabwe has no sea access. Oil products must travel from Indian Ocean ports in Beira or Durban through thousands of kilometres of pipeline and road infrastructure before reaching partially to reduce import dependency. However, the ethanol supply chain is controlled by a monopoly that keeps blending costs artificially high. More competition could shave meaningful cents off the pump price. Zimbabwe spends over $1 billion annually on fuel imports, draining the country's scarce foreign currency reserves.

The pipeline from a Middle East oil shock to a Zimbabwean pump price increase is not instantaneous, but it is inevitable.

Global crude price increases typically take between four and eight weeks to feed through to retail pump prices in landlocked African countries, given the time required for procurement, shipping, refining, and overland transport. This means that the full impact of the current spike, which began on the night of February 28, will likely hit Zimbabwean forecourts in late March to early April 2026.

If Brent stabilises around $80 per barrel, an optimistic scenario given ongoing hostilities. analysts estimate retail fuel prices in Zimbabwe could rise by $0.15 to $0.20 per litre, pushing petrol toward $1.75 and diesel toward $1.70. In the scenario where Brent approaches $100 per barrel,  increasingly credible if the Strait of Hormuz remains blocked, Zimbabwe's pump prices could spike toward $2.00 per litre or beyond.

Such levels would represent a devastating blow to an economy where transport costs are a primary driver of food prices, where informal sector operators, the backbone of Zimbabwe's economy,  run petrol-powered generators, motorcycles, and minibuses; where agriculture relies on diesel-powered irrigation pumps, tractors, and transport to bring produce to market; and where industry already hobbled by unreliable electricity relies on diesel generators to keep production running.

A fuel price spike of 20–30% in Zimbabwe could add 3–5 percentage points to inflation, further erode household purchasing power, and push more of the population, particularly the urban poor — into deeper food insecurity.

In an economy as fuel-dependent as Zimbabwe's, pump prices are never just about transport. They are a fundamental input cost for nearly every good and service in the country.

When diesel prices rise, the cost of running a water pump on a farm rises. The cost of moving grain from Mashonaland to Harare rises. The cost of keeping a cold chain running for dairy and meat products rises. Informal traders who carry goods on kombi vans watch their margins erode. Brick manufacturers, construction companies, and miners all absorb the hit, and pass it on.

The Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe, already managing a fragile monetary environment, has limited tools to absorb an externally driven price shock of this magnitude. The government could theoretically reduce fuel levies to cushion the blow, but doing so would punch a hole in an already constrained budget. The more likely outcome, is that Zimbabweans will simply absorb the higher prices,  and eat less as a result.

The fuel price gap between Zimbabwe and its neighbours is not merely an inconvenience. It is a structural competitive disadvantage that affects every corner of the economy.

A manufacturer in Harare competing with a counterpart in Johannesburg or Lusaka begins with higher input costs simply because fuel is more expensive. A farmer in Masvingo pays more to irrigate, harvest, and transport crops than a competitor in neighbouring Mozambique. A transport company operating between Zimbabwe and South Africa is squeezed between Zimbabwean pump prices on one end and competitive regional freight rates on the other.

The approaching oil shock will widen this gap further. South Africa, which has access to sea ports and a more diverse procurement base, will absorb crude price increases more efficiently than landlocked Zimbabwe. The competitive disadvantage will deepen at precisely the moment when the country's businesses can least afford it.

Reducing fuel taxes and levies to align with regional peers, breaking the ethanol blending monopoly to introduce competition and lower costs; investing in pipeline and storage infrastructure to reduce the per-litre logistics cost of importing fuel, accelerating the adoption of solar energy to displace diesel-powered generation, and creating incentives for the adoption of electric vehicles in high-use sectors like public transport may help.

Zimbabwe's solar potential is among the highest in the region, averaging 3,000 hours of sunshine per year. A meaningful shift to solar generation could displace significant diesel imports within five years. Experts suggest that every kilowatt of solar power displaces diesel or petrol demand, easing pressure on imports and pricing, and that Zimbabwe could cut its annual fuel import bill by as much as $400 million within five years through an aggressive solar transition.

These reforms require upfront fiscal courage, particularly on taxes, where government revenue loss would need to be compensated elsewhere. But the alternative, a perpetually uncompetitive economy perennially vulnerable to the next conflict in a faraway strait,  is a far costlier long-term proposition.

The missiles raining down on Tehran and the tankers stalled at the mouth of the Persian Gulf are far away from Harare. But in a globalised energy market, distance is an illusion. Every barrel of oil that does not flow through the Strait of Hormuz, every tanker that turns around rather than risk Iranian missiles, every insurance underwriter who refuses to cover Gulf passage, each is a small force pushing Zimbabwe's pump prices higher.

 Equity Axis News