Meloni’s trip takes place against the backdrop of a crisis rooted in what is described as the war-driven conduct of the United States and Israel. Contrary to appearances, this crisis is not the result of a natural disruption in energy markets, but rather the product of deliberate interventions and military actions that have upset the regional equilibrium.
In this context, Iran is positioned as defending its lawful rights in the Strait of Hormuz, with its actions defined as responses to aggression and measures to hold aggressors accountable. This situation has challenged prevailing narratives about the origins of the crisis, redirecting attention toward what is portrayed as the destabilizing role of the United States and Israel.
The outcome of these dynamics has been a gradual shift in the regional balance of power and a growing weight of geopolitical factors in shaping the trajectory of energy security.
Europe between structural dependence and the need for autonomy
European countries, including Italy, are facing a deep economic crisis—particularly in the energy sector—rooted in decades of security and political dependence on the United States and the influence of aligned structures. This dependence has, in this framing, left Europe either silent or limited to minimal positions in the face of aggressive actions, including attacks on Iran.
Such an approach has not only called Europe’s independence into question, but has also raised its economic and strategic costs. Continuing along this path would mean intensifying the crisis and reducing room for maneuver in foreign policy.
Within this framework, the only viable way forward is a shift toward genuine autonomy and a fundamental reassessment of decision-making models—a change that must move from rhetoric to concrete action.
Role of Arab states and the need for behavioral change
Arab oil-exporting countries have traditionally been a key source of Europe’s energy supply. Under current conditions, however, their role is viewed as extending beyond that of suppliers to include a part in shaping the crisis itself. Their cooperation with the United States and Israel, and the facilitation of their actions, is described as a factor exacerbating tensions.
In such circumstances, any energy consultations with these countries can only be effective if accompanied by tangible changes in behavior—changes that would include ending military cooperation with the United States and moving toward de-escalation in the region.
Otherwise, the continuation of past practices will not resolve the crisis but will instead prolong constraints in the Strait of Hormuz and intensify energy insecurity. Actions seen as inconsistent with good neighborly conduct are also said to deepen Iran’s distrust and reduce the prospects for sustainable cooperation.
A new Hormuz and the imperative of accepting realities
Recent developments indicate that the Strait of Hormuz has entered a new phase, making a return to previous conditions unlikely. This shift is attributed to both U.S. and Israeli military conduct and Iran’s strategic doctrine in national and regional security.
Within this framework, recognition of Iran’s legal sovereignty over this passage is presented as an imperative for all actors. Experience, it is argued, has shown that military options to alter the situation are not only ineffective but risk further complications and the failure of aggressors.
For countries such as Italy that depend on Persian Gulf energy, acknowledging these realities and adapting to the new order is described as the only path to ensuring stable energy supplies. Otherwise, diplomatic visits and consultations risk becoming symbolic gestures without tangible outcomes.
Accordingly, the future of energy security is defined as contingent on accepting on-the-ground realities, ending interventionist policies, and moving toward engagement based on respect for national sovereignty.