If war can disrupt food so easily, what does a resilient food system actually look like?

The U.S.–Israel–Iran tensions are exposing something deeper than geopolitics. They are revealing just how fragile our global food system really is.

When fertiliser—especially urea—becomes expensive or scarce, the effects cascade quickly: farmers reduce usage, yields decline, and prices rise. What begins as an energy disruption quickly becomes a food security issue.

And we’re already seeing this play out in real time.

In Pakistan, the government has had to implement emergency energy measures, including suspending gas supplies to the fertiliser sector—cutting around 78 million cubic feet per day of LNG and forcing shutdowns of urea plants. () At the same time, fuel shortages have pushed prices up and triggered wider restrictions, from reduced industrial activity to temporary closures of schools and workplaces to conserve energy.

In Thailand, the situation looks different but points to the same vulnerability. Farmers are queuing for diesel just to harvest crops, while the government has moved to restrict fuel use and even limit exports to protect domestic supply. () Across the region, electricity rationing and energy-saving measures are being introduced as governments try to manage shortages.

This is the chain reaction in action: Energy shocks → fertiliser disruption → farming constraints → food risk

So instead of just reacting to each new crisis, we should be asking a more fundamental question: How do we build food systems that don’t break every time the world does?

Part of the answer lies in reducing dependence on synthetic fertilisers. Modern agriculture relies heavily on nitrogen inputs derived from natural gas, which creates a structural vulnerability. More resilient systems invest in regenerative practices, crop rotation with nitrogen-fixing plants like legumes, and organic soil enrichment—approaches that reduce exposure to volatile global energy markets.

Resilience also means rethinking supply chains. Decades of optimisation have produced highly globalised systems built for efficiency, not stability. But when fuel shortages in Thailand delay harvests, or gas shortages in Pakistan shut down fertiliser plants, it becomes clear how exposed those systems are. Shorter, more regional supply chains can reduce reliance on global chokepoints and improve local food availability.

At the same time, we need to shift focus from maximising yield to investing in soil health. Healthy soils retain nutrients more effectively, require fewer synthetic inputs, and are more resilient to both climate stress and price volatility. Soil is not just a resource—it is infrastructure. Diversification is another key piece. Monocultures may be efficient, but they are fragile. Diverse systems spread risk, reduce input dependency, and improve long-term productivity. In a volatile world, resilience comes from diversity, not uniformity.

But my view is that this isn’t just about resilience—it’s about history: This crisis is not new. It is the outcome of a long-standing system shaped by unequal relationships: between countries, between producers and consumers, and between those who control inputs and those who depend on them. At its core, the system has prioritised intensive, high-output production. That model delivered scale—but it also created deep dependencies: on synthetic fertilisers, on fossil fuels, and on global supply chains controlled by a small number of actors.

For many countries, particularly in the Global South, this has meant operating within a system they do not control, using inputs they do not produce, and absorbing shocks they did not create. So when disruption hits, the impacts are not evenly distributed. They follow the same fault lines. Farmers carry the risk. Import-dependent countries carry the risk. Consumers—especially the poorest—carry the risk. What we built was not just an efficient system, but one that concentrates power and distributes vulnerability.

So the real shift we need goes deeper:

From input dependence → to local resource cycles From global optimisation → to regional resilience From yield-at-all-costs → to long-term sustainability From concentrated control → to more equitable systems. Because what we’re seeing now isn’t an anomaly, it’s a predictable outcome of a system built on efficiency, inequality, and dependency. And unless those foundations change, the next crisis may look different— but it will feel exactly the same.