• The cost of conflict through the lens of energy law and security

The recent Iran conflict demonstrates that modern warfare is fundamentally intertwined with energy law and energy security. Rather than being limited to military confrontation, the conflict has exposed the vulnerability of energy systems as central pillars of national and global stability. Attacks on energy infrastructure — such as oil refineries, pipelines, and power plants — transform war into a direct assault on economic lifelines.

From a legal perspective, the targeting of energy infrastructure raises serious concerns under international humanitarian law. Energy facilities often serve both civilian and military purposes, placing them within the category of dual-use objects. However, the scale and frequency of attacks challenge the principles of distinction and proportionality, raising questions about the adequacy of existing legal protections in energy-related conflicts.

Economically, disruptions to energy flows have cascading effects across global markets. Instability in critical supply routes affects pricing, availability, and long-term investment decisions. Thus, the cost of war, when viewed through energy law, extends beyond immediate damage to include systemic risks to global energy governance and regulatory stability.

Energy infrastructure as a central target in modern warfare

The evolution of warfare has elevated energy infrastructure to a primary strategic target. In the Iran conflict, energy installations have not merely been collateral damage but deliberate focal points of military strategy. This reflects a broader shift in which control over energy systems equates to control over economic and political power.

Modern tactics — such as drone strikes and precision missile attacks — enable states to target energy assets with increased accuracy. This creates a situation where even limited strikes can produce disproportionate effects, such as regional blackouts, reduced industrial capacity, and interruptions in export revenues. The legal implications of such tactics remain underdeveloped, particularly in relation to accountability and reparations.

Furthermore, cyber operations targeting energy grids introduce a new dimension of vulnerability. Unlike physical attacks, cyber intrusions can disrupt systems without visible destruction, complicating attribution and the legal response. This underscores the need for evolving legal frameworks that address both physical and digital threats to energy security.

Iran’s energy-centric strategy and strategic outcomes

Iran’s approach to the conflict has been deeply rooted in energy geopolitics. Rather than seeking traditional military victory, Iran has leveraged its position within the global energy system to exert influence. By threatening key oil transit routes and regional energy infrastructure, it has effectively internationalised the conflict.

This strategy reflects an understanding that energy markets are highly sensitive to disruption. Even the perception of instability can drive price volatility and alter global supply chains. Iran’s actions have therefore amplified its strategic impact far beyond its immediate military capabilities.

From a legal standpoint, this raises questions about the weaponisation of energy resources. While international law recognises the sovereignty of states over their natural resources, the deliberate use of energy systems as tools of coercion challenges the boundaries between lawful economic policy and unlawful conduct in armed conflict.

Legal and strategic foundations of Iran’s leverage

Iran’s sustained leverage can be partly explained through its strategic use of energy law principles and geographic advantage. Control over a major maritime chokepoint provides a form of regulatory power over global energy flows. This control is not merely physical but also legal, as it interacts with the Law of the Sea and principles governing transit passage.

The decentralised nature of Iran’s energy-related strategy further enhances its resilience. By combining physical infrastructure with mobile and dispersed capabilities, Iran reduces its exposure to concentrated attacks. This reflects a broader trend in energy security, where resilience and redundancy are key components of strategic planning.

Additionally, Iran’s actions exploit the interconnected nature of global energy systems. Disruptions in one region quickly affect supply and demand dynamics elsewhere. This interdependence creates indirect legal and political pressure on external actors, demonstrating how energy security can be used as a tool of 

International energy law and governance

The conflict exposes significant gaps in international energy law. While existing frameworks address aspects of maritime security, environmental protection, and armed conflict, there is no comprehensive regime governing the protection of energy infrastructure during war. This creates uncertainty and inconsistency in legal responses.

The increasing use of hybrid tactics further complicates legal regulation. Cyberattacks on energy systems, for example, fall into a grey area between peacetime economic measures and acts of war. The absence of clear norms and enforcement mechanisms undermines the effectiveness of international law in this domain.

There is therefore a growing need for the development of specialised legal instruments addressing energy security in conflict situations. This may include enhanced protections for critical infrastructure, clearer rules on the use of energy as a strategic tool, and mechanisms for accountability and dispute resolution.

Regional energy security in the ME

The Middle East (ME) remains a central hub of global energy production, and the conflict has highlighted the fragility of its energy systems. The targeting of infrastructure has exposed vulnerabilities that could have long-term implications for regional stability and economic development.

In response, regional states are likely to invest more heavily in energy security measures, including advanced defense systems, the diversification of energy routes, and increased reliance on alternative energy sources. These measures reflect a shift toward a more security-oriented approach to energy governance.

At the same time, the conflict may accelerate regional cooperation in certain areas, particularly in protecting shared infrastructure and ensuring the continuity of supply. However, existing geopolitical tensions may limit the extent of such cooperation, resulting in a complex and fragmented energy security landscape.

Energy law and security

For Sri Lanka, the conflict serves as a compelling reminder that energy security is no longer merely an economic concern but a core component of national security and legal governance. As a State highly dependent on imported fossil fuels — particularly crude oil and refined petroleum — Sri Lanka remains acutely exposed to disruptions in global supply chains, price volatility, and geopolitical instability in energy-producing regions. The recent conflict highlights how external shocks can rapidly translate into domestic crises, affecting inflation, foreign exchange reserves, and overall economic stability. This underscores the need to reconceptualise energy policy not as a sectoral issue, but as an integrated legal and strategic priority embedded within national security planning.

In this context, Sri Lanka is presented with a critical opportunity to undertake systemic reform of its energy law and regulatory architecture. This includes strengthening the legal framework governing renewable energy investments, enhancing transparency and efficiency in energy procurement processes, and introducing long-term policy certainty to attract both domestic and foreign investment. Legislative reforms should prioritise the diversification of energy sources — particularly through solar, wind, and liquefied natural gas — while also embedding principles of sustainability, resilience, and climate responsibility. Additionally, regulatory institutions must be empowered to function independently and effectively, ensuring that energy governance is insulated from political fluctuations and aligned with international best practices in energy law.

Beyond internal reforms, Sri Lanka’s geostrategic position in the Indian Ocean presents a significant opportunity to reposition itself within the regional energy security architecture. As global trade and energy routes adjust in response to instability in the ME, Sri Lanka can emerge as a critical hub for maritime energy logistics, including bunkering, storage, and transshipment services. To realise this potential, the country must develop a coherent legal and policy framework governing port infrastructure, maritime security, and energy transit, while actively engaging with regional and international partners. By aligning its domestic legal regime with evolving norms in international energy governance — particularly in areas such as energy transit, infrastructure protection, and environmental compliance — Sri Lanka can enhance both its economic resilience and its strategic relevance in an increasingly uncertain global energy landscape.

Conclusion

The Iran conflict vividly demonstrates that energy law and energy security have become indispensable frameworks for understanding the dynamics of contemporary warfare. Energy systems are no longer incidental casualties of armed conflict; rather, they have evolved into primary strategic assets and instruments of geopolitical influence. Control over energy flows, infrastructure, and transit routes now enables states to exert pressure far beyond conventional military capabilities. In this context, Iran’s approach reflects a broader transformation in warfare — where strategic leverage is derived not from territorial conquest, but from the ability to disrupt, manipulate, and recalibrate global energy dependencies.

For Sri Lanka, the implications are both cautionary and strategic. The conflict highlights the structural vulnerabilities of energy-dependent economies, while simultaneously opening pathways for legal, institutional, and policy transformation. By strengthening its domestic energy law framework, investing in diversification and renewable energy, and aligning with emerging norms of international energy governance, Sri Lanka can enhance its resilience against external shocks. At the same time, its geostrategic location offers an opportunity to reposition itself within regional energy and maritime networks. In navigating this evolving landscape, Sri Lanka must adopt a forward-looking approach that integrates energy security, legal reform, and geopolitical awareness as central pillars of its national development strategy.

The writer is an attorney and a Senior Law Lecturer at the Colombo University

-------

The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect those of this publication