Good People, geopolitics has a way of exposing the difference between ideals and interests. We are now reading that the Iran conflict is triggering a global return to coal as nations scramble to replace disrupted crude oil and natural gas supplies. With major LNG flows through the Strait of Hormuz affected, countries that spent years preaching aggressive climate transitions are adjusting rapidly. Taiwan is reactivating idle coal plants. South Korea significantly increased coal-fired electricity generation. Environmental targets are suddenly meeting energy realities.
The Iran war is triggering a global resurgence in coal consumption as countries scramble to replace lost natural gas supplies, The Wall Street Journal reports. With the Strait of Hormuz effectively closed, roughly 20% of global LNG shipments have been cut off, pushing some countries back toward coal. Taiwan has reactivated idle coal plants, while South Korea increased coal-fired electricity generation by over a third in April. Analysts warn the return to coal could have environmental consequences for climate goals worldwide.
This reminds me of the point I made recently when Canada moved to remove major federal climate rules. Policies often appear absolute until national interests become threatened. Once energy security, economic growth, industrial competitiveness, or political stability enters the equation, governments recalibrate quickly.
The lesson is not that climate concerns are unimportant. Far from it. Climate change remains real and environmental stewardship matters. But nations do not operate primarily on moral philosophy; nations operate on strategic interests.
Register for Tekedia Mini-MBA edition 20 (June 8 – Sept 5, 2026).
Register for Tekedia AI in Business Masterclass.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and co-invest in great global startups.
Register for Tekedia AI Lab.
Adam Smith explained the Invisible Hand in economics, but there is also an invisible hand in geopolitics: self-preservation. When circumstances change, countries adjust policies to protect their economies and citizens. In moments of uncertainty, governments choose energy availability over climate orthodoxy because factories must run, homes require electricity, and economies cannot pause.
This is why Africa must study the world carefully. For years, many African countries have faced pressure to move rapidly away from hydrocarbons and traditional energy systems despite having some of the world’s largest untapped energy resources and despite still confronting fundamental development challenges. Yet when crises emerge, many of the same advanced economies quietly return to the energy options they previously discouraged others from pursuing.
The issue here is not hypocrisy; it is realism. Nations protect themselves first.
And that means Africa must therefore be pragmatic, not naïve. In climate geopolitics, there is no absolute climate “right” or “wrong”, only national interest. Let us protect our environment, but let us also protect our development, understanding that global players will always choose themselves first.
---
Connect via my
LinkedIn |
Facebook |
X |
YouTube