The ripple effect of the Iran war can be felt far and wide. More so, since it involves contests over one of the most valuable resources in the modern world – Oil. As the war intensifies, with the parties involved refusing to step down, its consequences continue to have a devastating effect on the economies of countries involved in the war, directly or indirectly.
Different nations have responded differently to tackle the challenges, but who really pays the price?
In the United States, President Donald Trump recently backed suspending federal gas taxes after fuel prices surged amid the Iran conflict and continuing disruptions linked to the Strait of Hormuz. Reuters reported that rising fuel costs have become a major political issue ahead of the US midterm elections.
In India, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent appeal asking citizens to reduce fuel consumption, postpone gold purchases, avoid unnecessary foreign travel, and conserve foreign exchange may have been framed as economic caution during a time of global uncertainty. But for many ordinary people already struggling with rising costs on a modest income, the message landed differently, less as prudent guidance and more as a somewhat tone-deaf or even selectively burdensome plea.
For small business owners, jewellers, transport workers, and middle-class families, the concern is no longer just about war in West Asia or disruptions in global oil markets. It is about whether another international crisis will once again make everyday life more expensive at home.
According to a Reuters report, Modi urged people to adopt such measures as they once did in the Covid-19 pandemic, emphasising that “in the current situation, we must place great emphasis on saving foreign exchange”. This includes using more public transport, returning to work-from-home practices where possible, reducing cooking oil usage, and avoiding non-essential spending as fears grow over pressure on India’s foreign exchange reserves and rising global energy prices.
India imports more than 80 per cent of its crude oil, much of it routed through the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical shipping corridors. As tensions linked to the Iran conflict continue to disrupt global energy markets, fears over oil prices and inflation have intensified across several countries, including India.
But while the government pretends to speak in the language of economic preparedness, the effects are often felt first by ordinary people. Among the most discussed parts of Modi’s patronising remarks was his appeal asking citizens to postpone gold purchases. In India, which is the world’s second-largest consumer of gold, it is not simply about luxury. While it is often tied to weddings, many middle-class families also rely on it as a form of savings, financial security for the family, and support for small local economies. Thousands of small jewellery shops and workers depend heavily on seasonal sales and family purchases.
Traders across India’s jewellery markets have begun expressing fears that prolonged hesitation around gold purchases could hurt thousands of small jewellers, artisans, karigars (craftsmen), and workshop labourers dependent on the industry for daily income. An India Today report noted that industry groups fear that weaker demand during the wedding season could eventually trigger layoffs and severe losses across smaller businesses. The anxiety extends beyond the jewellery sector.
Higher fuel prices affect transportation, deliveries, groceries, farming costs, and household spending. For families already managing inflation and uncertain incomes, appeals to “consume less” are not abstract economic ideas but ones that directly shape daily life.
In recent days, social media discussions around possible austerity measures and reports of economic slowdown have reflected a growing nervousness about how deeply global instability could affect India’s economy if the crisis continues.
Business leaders have also begun raising concerns. Banker Uday Kotak recently warned that India may not be fully prepared for prolonged global disruptions linked to energy insecurity and supply-chain instability, adding to broader fears around long-term economic vulnerability. Rimjhim Singh from Business Standard writes,
“Rather than declaring a formal energy emergency, the government appears to be relying on voluntary behavioural change to manage demand.”
While wars and geopolitical conflicts devastate lives directly in affected regions, their economic consequences also travel far beyond borders. Rising fuel prices, inflation, and uncertainty often reach ordinary households, workers, and small businesses elsewhere long before stability returns.
It is ultimately the government’s responsibility to ensure economic stability and maintain the country’s strong standing internationally. Critics argue that instead of placing the burden of adjustment on ordinary citizens, the government should address structural economic challenges directly. For example, concerns over inflation, fuel prices, unemployment, currency pressures, and dependence on imports have all affected household finances and India’s economic position globally.
Many believe Narendra Modi’s administration has not done enough to effectively manage these pressures despite presenting itself as a strong economic steward. Critics also point to the contrast between appeals for ordinary citizens to tighten spending and the government’s own high-profile expenditures, including Narendra Modi’s extensive foreign travel and perceived policy benefits or tax concessions favouring powerful business groups linked to figures such as Gautam Adani and Mukesh Ambani.
For many Indians, the frustration is not simply about calls for restraint but about who is being asked to sacrifice and who appears insulated from the consequences of economic instability. While middle-class and lower-income households are told to reduce consumption, postpone purchases, and curb spending, large corporations and politically connected elites are often perceived as continuing to benefit from state support and favourable policies. This has reinforced a growing sense that economic nationalism and public sacrifice are being framed as civic duty for ordinary citizens, while accountability for economic management at the highest levels remains limited.
As George Bernard Shaw once observed, “Very few people can afford to be poor.” For millions of ordinary Indians already balancing rising fuel costs, stagnant wages, household expenses, and economic uncertainty, calls to further reduce consumption do not feel like temporary patriotism or prudent sacrifice. Instead, they reinforce the perception that the burden of economic instability is once again being shifted onto those least equipped to absorb it.
And as governments increasingly demand that citizens tighten spending during periods of uncertainty, the question remains whether ordinary people can continue absorbing the cost of crises they had no role in shaping.
Karuna Kumari Kandregula
is an independent writer and researcher from Andhra Pradesh, India, whose work focuses on social issues, politics, education, rural systems, gender, child protection, and climate.
