The edge of war: Why efforts to end the Middle East conflict must include seafarer protection

This article was first published on Safety4Sea.

A commercial ship's most precious cargo is its crew. As the conflict between US-Israel and Iran continues to escalate, this principle is being tested across trade and transport routes in the Middle East. 

Vessels of all kinds, including many crude oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) carriers, are being delayed from passing through the Strait of Hormuz due to severe dangers posed by attacks. Governments and markets are focused on energy flows, supply disruptions, and economic fallout. Yet in the urgency to move cargo and protect commercial activities, the people who keep these systems operating risk being pushed out of view. 

The professionals staffing commercial ships are not combat actors; they are civilian workers, many with little or no preparation for operating in an active conflict environment. Still, much of the response appears to prioritise the movement of commodities over the safety, dignity, and rights of the crews working in the region. 

What this conflict reveals is a weakness in crisis-response systems which are not designed to protect workers first, even when those workers are indispensable to keeping the world moving. There is an urgent need now to focus the world’s attention on protecting seafarers amidst escalating threats.

A region dependent on migrant workers

The Gulf Cooperation Council countries currently host 35 million migrants and are among the most migrant labour-dependent economies in the world. Migrant workers employed in the private sector form a very large share (86%) of the workforce. Many are employed in shipping and ports. Many migrant workers in Gulf labour corridors still migrate through debt-financed recruitment models, often paying substantial and unethical fees before departure - and this scourge is endemic shipping.

The COVID-19 outbreak in 2020 made clear that crises do not affect all groups equally; migrant workers often bear a disproportionate share of the risk. The pattern of unequal exposure remains familiar in the current crisis, too.

Indeed, for many workers, vulnerability does not begin with conflict. It simply deepens in a system already marked by recruitment debt, subcontracting chains, employer-linked visa arrangements, low savings, crowded accommodation, and dependence on intermediaries. 

Seafarers are the clearest example of invisible but essential labour

In the present crisis, around 20,000 seafarers are currently affected. Hundreds of vessels have dropped anchor, and multiple maritime casualties have been reported, including at least eight merchant sailors killed. Commercial traffic through the Strait has also fallen sharply, with ship transit traffic reported to be down by about 97% at one point during the disruption. 

Seafarers are facing direct physical danger in the course of ordinary work. If crews are expected to continue sailing through active high-risk waters, then route transparency, meaningful risk disclosure, crew choice, hazard protections, and crew welfare cannot be treated as optional.

Seafarer abandonment was a serious labour-rights crisis before the present escalation. Thousands of seafarers globally have been left on ships without adequate support, and the Middle East has been one of the worst-affected regions. Seafarers already stranded on abandoned ships in or near UAE waters are among the least protected workers in the regional economy. Conflict can deepen this problem significantly by making rescue, repatriation, port coordination, and access to services even harder.

While not a new phenomenon, the so-called “dark fleet” — vessels used to transport illicit or sanctioned cargo (usually oil and LNG)— appears to have grown further during the conflict, and now dominates the transits through Hormuz. For seafarers, working on dark fleet vessels presents an especially dangerous working environment, with ambiguous legal status leaving them exposed to exploitation, weak safety standards, and hazardous operations such as transshipments carried out without basic safeguards.

What the situation facing seafarers reveals most clearly is that crisis systems are still not designed to protect workers first.

Labour protection is part of economic security

This present escalation is not only a military or diplomatic emergency. It is also a test of whether existing worker protections are being taken seriously in practice. The question is whether workers are truly being treated as central to the region’s resilience, or are simply being used to keep the system running. 

Even in a crisis, basic protections do not disappear. International law still matters, including non-refoulement for those facing serious harm on return and the wider humanitarian-law requirement of humane treatment and non-discrimination in conflict settings. 

For seafarers, the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 remains relevant through its provisions on repatriation, medical care, wages, and financial security in abandonment cases. The International Maritime Organisation's (IMO) Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) reinforces core ship safety obligations, while its Search and Rescue Convention is important in situations involving distress, rescue, and safe disembarkation. IMO–ILO guidance stresses fair treatment after maritime incidents, and IMO guidance on places of refuge is also relevant where ships in need of assistance require safe access and coordinated response. 

Businesses should not view a stranded workforce as simply a social concern. Worker welfare is tied directly to operational continuity, cost escalation, supply reliability, legal exposure, and reputation. It is a business risk. The same applies to governments, particularly in labour-dependent economies where service continuity and public order rely heavily on migrant workers. 

If essential workers keep systems functioning in crisis, then their protection cannot be an afterthought. A credible response begins with some critical steps: 

Governments in destination countries should treat labour protection as part of crisis governance through temporary visa flexibility, protection from overstay penalties where departure is impossible, emergency wage support, accessible helplines, and safe-access information in languages workers understand. In March 2026, the IMO Council also urged States to ensure essential supplies for ships unable to leave the region, facilitate crew change and renewal, and establish a safe maritime framework for vessels and crews confined in the Gulf. The ITF has similarly called on governments to prevent the routing of civilian seafarers through active war-risk areas and to ensure access to food, water, fuel, medical care, crew change, and repatriation.

Origin states should move from passive consular support to active protection measures, including worker registration, emergency communication, embassy coordination, temporary shelter, and repatriation support where normal travel or crew-change routes have broken down. In the maritime sector, these efforts should be tied to existing MLC protections and to the ILO–IMO abandonment and seafarer-support mechanisms already in place.

Employers should review conflict-readiness through a labour lens, including safeguards for workers who may be affected by disruption. Recruitment fee debt should be treated as a specific conflict vulnerability, not as a private matter between worker and recruiter. 

Abandoned crews in Dubai and nearby waters should be treated as a priority labour-governance and humanitarian concern, requiring stronger coordination among maritime administrations, port authorities, insurers, flag states, and welfare organisations.

The broader lesson is, in many ways, an extension of a conversation the region is already having. As the Gulf states rightly focus on the safety and security of all who live and work within the region, that commitment finds its fullest expression in the protection of the workers who keep essential systems and everyday life running, especially during times of crisis. The Gulf region has the ambition, the resources, and the momentum to lead on this. Extending that leadership to worker protection is not a departure from the region's current direction. It is its natural next step.