Tehran (Somalia Today) – US allies and rivals reacted cautiously on Sunday after President Donald Trump urged major powers to help police the Strait of Hormuz, underscoring the difficulty of quickly assembling an international naval mission even as attacks on shipping and fears of wider war shake global energy markets.
Trump said on Truth Social that countries affected by Iran’s attempted closure of the chokepoint should send warships, naming China, France, Japan, South Korea, and Britain.
He later told NBC News that several states had already committed support.
But by Sunday, no country named by Trump had formally agreed to join a US-backed operation, leaving a wide gap between his public appeal and the restrained responses from capitals worried about being drawn deeper into a dangerous conflict.
The appeal came as the US-Israeli war with Iran entered its third week, with the Strait of Hormuz effectively shut to normal commercial traffic after repeated attacks on vessels and Iranian threats against shipping.
The disruption has rattled energy markets and raised fears of a major supply shock, with crude prices surging and governments scrambling for emergency relief measures.
The Strait of Hormuz links the Gulf to the open ocean and remains one of the world’s most important energy routes.
The US Energy Information Administration says oil flows through Hormuz averaged 20.9 million barrels per day in the first half of 2025, equal to about a fifth of global petroleum liquids consumption.
Roughly a fifth of global liquefied natural gas trade also passes through the waterway, much of it from Qatar.
That central role has turned the strait into the focus of growing military and diplomatic tension as the conflict spreads beyond direct strikes and into global trade routes.
Allies hold back
Japan, one of Washington’s closest Asian allies and among the economies most exposed to Gulf energy disruption, stopped well short of any immediate military commitment.
Japanese officials said Tokyo would make its own decision independently, while also moving to soften the economic blow by releasing 80 million barrels from its oil stockpiles from Monday.
South Korea also struck a cautious tone, saying it would stay in close contact with Washington and review the matter carefully before making any decision.
China did not answer Trump’s request directly and instead called for an immediate halt to hostilities.
Europe responded in much the same way.
Britain said it was discussing options with allies and looking at what support it could provide, including autonomous mine-hunting systems.
But Energy Secretary Ed Miliband stressed that ending the conflict remained the surest way to reopen the route.
France, which has already deployed forces in the broader region and has previously considered escort operations, did not endorse Trump’s call for a combat mission.
Paris signalled that any posture for now would remain defensive.
That caution matters.
European governments have long tried to defend freedom of navigation while avoiding a direct military confrontation with Iran, and few appear ready to rush into a coalition whose aims, rules of engagement, and risks remain unclear.
Risks in narrow waters
Trump’s appeal also exposed mixed messages from Washington.
Only days earlier, the US Navy told the shipping industry that military escorts through Hormuz were not possible for now because the risk of attack remained too high.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent later said escorts might come when conditions allowed, possibly under an international coalition.
Trump himself acknowledged on Saturday that even after claiming to have destroyed Iran’s military capacity, Tehran could still disrupt the narrow waterway with drones, mines, or short-range missiles.
That admission underlined the core military challenge.
Securing Hormuz is not simply a matter of sending warships into the area.
The strait is narrow, crowded, and highly exposed, making vessels vulnerable to mines, drones, fast boats, and coastal missile attacks.
Even one successful strike could again stop traffic and send insurance costs soaring.
Analysts say that reality helps explain why many governments still favour de-escalation over a hurried show of force.
It also helps explain why talk of a coalition has so far produced caution rather than commitments.
Old problem, sharper crisis
The danger is not new.
After tanker attacks and ship seizures in 2019, the United States launched a protection effort known as Operation Sentinel.
Britain pushed for a European-led mission, and France later backed the European Maritime Awareness mission in the Strait of Hormuz, known as EMASoH.
Those efforts aimed to reassure shipping without triggering uncontrolled escalation.
The current crisis is far more severe, but the basic lesson remains.
Naval deployments can calm nerves only up to a point, especially when commercial operators know that a single attack can close the route in practice even if no formal blockade exists.
Iran has signalled that some passage may still be possible for states it does not regard as hostile, but shipowners and crews have remained wary after a succession of attacks since the conflict began on February 28.
At least 16 vessels have been hit in or around the Gulf since the war started, while hundreds of ships have hesitated to enter the area.
The disruption now threatens more than oil and gas.
United Nations officials have warned that restrictions through Hormuz could also hit deliveries of food and medicine, adding a humanitarian dimension to a crisis already straining global markets.
For now, Trump’s promised “team effort” looks more like an ambition than a coalition.
Friendly governments are studying options, rivals are keeping their distance, and energy-importing countries are trying to cushion the shock with emergency stock releases.
But unless the fighting eases or a credible maritime security framework takes shape, the world’s most important oil chokepoint is likely to remain a source of strategic danger, diplomatic friction, and market panic.
