The major world powers are facing a reality check. Pressure from the military is becoming more economic and political pressure is more political. Seemingly unrelated events from Washington's calculations on Iran to the security of oil shipments from the Black Sea to Saudi Arabia's war against the Houthis to Pakistan's political schisms are proving the test of the international order.

For India, these are not far-fetched diplomatic wranglings. They have a direct impact on crude oil prices, shipping insurance, export competitiveness, defence preparedness and the country's strategic manoeuvre.

The single most important one is about what President Donald Trump will do about Iran. The possibility of an American attack has sparked a high level of anxiety in West Asia, with speculation rampant in the region. However, the difference between military preparedness and an authorised operation is crucial. There is no inherent logic connecting a deployment, contingency plan or public warning to the decision to strike.

Trump is under conflicting pressures. Israel considers Iran's military build-up and regional connections to be a big security concern. Saudi Arabia and other Gulf economies, however, have good arguments to avoid a protracted regional conflict. Energy costs, military obligations and political ramifications in the United States also need to be taken into account.

The predicament of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is another wrinkle. His claim that the key to a lasting regional peace is a change in Tehran's political regime raises a challenging question: Is it possible to create a lasting peace in the region without a long and unpredictable war?

Despite facing a technologically more advanced adversary, Iran can still pose risks to regional energy supplies and maritime trade. Established international energy estimates indicate that the Strait of Hormuz is especially sensitive due to the fact that some 20% of the consumption of petroleum liquids worldwide passes through it. Anyone who affected Asian importers more would be impacted if there was a continued disruption.

Saudi Arabia's trouble with the Houthis is a case in point of how economic weaknesses can be turned into strategic assets. Airport and industrial security, and shipments, must be able to cope with threats from missiles and drones without having to match conventional military forces in terms of cost and weight.

The Bab el-Mandeb strait, between the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, is also significant. Some ships are forced to take longer routes around southern Africa, extending voyage times, fuel use and insurance risk. To Riyadh, ensuring energy export security is a part and parcel of investor confidence in its economic diversification plan.

The Black Sea is another area of pressure. The report of a tanker incident must be verified independently of the incident to determine the identity of the tanker(s) involved as well as the location and responsibility for any damage. However, it's clear that the wider economic threat is present. The Black Sea also continues to play a significant role in Russian/regional commodity transportation, with petroleum products, grain and fertilisers all being transported.

Ukraine's concerns over American intelligence co-operation and Starlink connectivity come into question its operational resilience. Satellite communications and intelligence support determines battlefield awareness, logistics and command coordination. But don't assume that there is an American cutoff unless it is officially confirmed.

President Volodymyr Zelensky's task is thus military and political. Europe's governments are under fiscal stress, and have to deal with defence procurement challenges, as well as with divergent views on the extent to which they should fund Ukraine's security.Ukraine requires ongoing Western support, while the governments in Europe are under fiscal strain and have to struggle with defence procurement constraints, as well as conflicting views on how far they should go to support Ukraine's security.

These theatres are linked to international commodity markets by risk premiums. Traders react both to actual loss of supply and to the risk of disruption. An extended rise in crude price of $10 per barrel would cost India about $18 billion a year in gross oil import cost at an illustrative import volumes of 5 million bpd, before considering any demand, exchange rate or sourcing changes.

The proposed India–US trade agreement is particularly important for India due to its economic interests. Negotiations are affected by American tariff policy, access to the Indian market, sensitivities of the farming sector, exports of agricultural technologies, and diversification of supply chains. While some progress is being made, a formal confirmation and agreement of terms are necessary to achieve final results for a statement suggesting progress.

New Delhi has to seek increased access to the American market, but not to the detriment of its vital domestic interests. The pharmaceuticals, engineering goods, textiles, electronics and technology services industries are heavily dependent on demand in the United States. Meanwhile, India's ties with Russia, the Gulf countries and Europe continue to be vital to energy security and export expansion.

American domestic political tensions raise the element of uncertainty. Trump's feuds with Obama are about larger and more fundamental foreign policy, institutional and international obligations. The rhetoric can attract headlines but the impact of policy decisions is gauged by flows of goods, defense budgets, interest rates and investor confidence.

In the meantime, reports of a suspected plot against a Hindu temple in Illinois remind us of the need to safeguard religious communities from extremist violence. In such instances, accurate distinction should be made between allegations, evidence and judicial findings. It's time Hindu Americans, as well as all religious communities, are afforded equal protection under the law.

The controversy surrounding Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal is also worth assessing on the basis of her actual words and the context, not in politically convenient ways.

The situation is not only different but increasingly dire for Pakistan. Military authority and civilian political leadership, and the relationship between them and provincial discontent, continues to be tense. Rumors about Army Chief Asim Munir and Punjab Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz also raise issues on distribution of political powers.

KP and Balochistan have both overlapping but different security issues. The use of military means to solve problems of militant violence, governance struggle, economic deprivation and provincial grievance is not a solution. Nor is any unrest which is concurrent necessarily proof of a coordinated provincial alliance without reliable supporting evidence.

These challenges are exacerbated by a number of economic constraints faced by Pakistan. The unstable situations require a lot of external financing, and Islamabad's debt-servicing commitments, dependence on energy imports and a restricted tax base, mean that it can take only so much. Security spending is competing with investments in development and political instability is not encouraging private investment.

The lesson that India must draw from this is clear. National strength is not just about being able to withstand a crisis, it's about minimising exposure to a crisis. Secure energy sources, flexible shipping routes, autonomous weapons production, profitable exports and strategic statesmanship are better than reliance on any foreign power.