No sudden shelter from storms: What protected India's oil supply during Hormuz crisis

Albany, US: When the Hormuz Strait closed to commercial traffic on February 28, India's exposure was severe. Judged by headline import dependence alone, one would have expected dry pumps, queues for cylinders and a sharp political reckoning. More than 100 days on, none of that happened.

The conventional answer credits GoI's decisive action once the crisis hit. That account places too much weight on decisions taken after the crisis began. Choices that mattered had been made years earlier, when the case for them was administrative, rather than dramatic.

What protected India's crude supply was the breadth of its supplier base, which had widened from 27 countries to 41 over two decades. So, when Hormuz shut, refineries could draw on the Atlantic basin, West Africa and the Americas because contracts and logistics were already in place. The shift was substantial. Within weeks, Gulf sourcing was replaced elsewhere, with the share of cooking gas imports from the US rising several-fold, and new suppliers from Norway to Nigeria to Kazakhstan entering the mix. Diversification of this kind takes years to build, and shows its value only when a route closes.


Also read | Why Europe can’t just air-condition its way out of this meltdown

The physical network mattered as much as contracts. India operates 23 refineries, more than 50,000 km of hydrocarbon pipeline, and over 1 lakh retail outlets. This density lowered cost of adjusting to a closed route. Refineries had enough flexibility to shift their product slate toward cooking gas, lifting output by close to half from plants not built for the purpose, and cargoes could be redirected to other ports without new investment in the middle of the crisis. Because spare capacity and alternative routings already existed, a blocked choke point did not translate into domestic shortage.

India's strategic stocks were not large: crude cover stood at under 74 days. The most striking result is one of timing. Supply held without interruption for more than 4 mths, well beyond the point at which stocks alone would have been exhausted. The difference was covered by sourcing flexibility rather than by size of the reserve.

Diversified supply can substitute for stockpiles over a short horizon. But a longer closure would still have required them. Reopening of the strait in late June ended the disruption before that substitution faced a longer test.

India's experience also differed from that of comparable importers. Most large importers that got through the disruption did so by drawing down strategic reserves built up over decades, or by increasing prices. India continuity rested on how quickly it could redirect flows across a diversified supplier base.

Also read | India cuts windfall tax on diesel, raises petrol tax from July

That is a more replicable form of resilience than a national stockpile, and a cheaper one to build, though it depends on commercial relationships that take years to establish and cannot be improvised once a choke point has closed. That flexibility need not be enough in a more volatile world, which is the case for deeper strategic reserves.

The broader conclusion is a modest one. Resilience of this kind is built quietly, in ordinary years, and is best understood as insurance whose premium is paid long before any claim. The structural agenda follows from it: long-term supply contracts formalised across regions rather than left to the spot market, and faster substitution toward piped gas that moves households off imported cooking fuel.

The Hormuz episode shows that India's investments in diversification and physical capacity have paid off. But it also reveals a remaining weakness: a diversified supply network can bridge a temporary disruption, while a prolonged closure still requires deeper strategic reserves. The objective should, therefore, not merely be to manage the next shock successfully but to make such resilience a routine feature of India's energy system.