A muted response to Trump call for Hormuz naval coalition has emerged after the US president urged major global powers to deploy naval forces to escort commercial vessels through the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz during the ongoing US-Israel war on Iran.
The proposal comes as tensions in the Persian Gulf escalate following weeks of fighting and retaliatory actions that have disrupted one of the world’s most critical energy corridors.
Donald Trump called on countries that rely heavily on oil shipments through the waterway to send their warships to join a multinational effort led by the United States Navy.
Writing on his Truth Social platform, Trump suggested that major economies such as China, France, Japan, South Korea and the United Kingdom should deploy ships to guarantee safe passage for global shipping through the narrow maritime corridor.
The strait is widely considered one of the most important choke points in global energy supply. Under normal circumstances, roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil exports pass through the waterway connecting the Persian Gulf to international markets.
However, since the outbreak of hostilities between the United States, Israel and Iran, maritime traffic has been severely disrupted.
Iran’s military has effectively restricted the passage of ships from countries it considers hostile. Tehran has framed the move as retaliation for the air strikes carried out by the United States and Israel against Iranian military infrastructure.
Iranian officials have argued that the disruption is intended to impose economic pressure on Washington and its allies while demonstrating Iran’s ability to influence global energy markets.
Despite Trump’s appeal for a show of international naval unity, governments around the world have so far refrained from committing warships to the proposed coalition. Diplomatic statements from several capitals suggest that many countries are reluctant to become directly involved in a military confrontation in the Gulf.
Officials in Washington said discussions were ongoing with several governments. The administration insists that international participation is necessary to restore safe passage through the strait and stabilise oil markets that have reacted sharply to the conflict.
Oil prices have surged to around $100 per barrel as traders fear prolonged disruption in supplies. The uncertainty has been intensified by reports that hundreds of tankers remain stranded near the Gulf, unable to transit through the narrow shipping lanes.
At least 10 oil tankers have been hit, targeted or reported attacks since the conflict escalated in late February, according to maritime monitoring organisations and regional authorities. The incidents have raised concerns about the safety of commercial shipping in waters that already carry a significant share of the world’s energy trade.
Officials from China signalled a cautious approach. Liu Pengyu, a spokesperson for China’s embassy in Washington, said all parties share responsibility for ensuring stable and uninterrupted energy supplies. However, he stopped short of indicating that Beijing would send naval vessels to support the US-led initiative.
Analysts say China may have little incentive to join such a mission. The country remains one of the largest buyers of Iranian crude oil and may prefer to avoid actions that could strain its relationship with Tehran.
Some observers believe Iran’s restrictions are selective. According to experts, Tehran has largely allowed shipments to countries it views as neutral or friendly while blocking tankers associated with the United States and its allies.
Barbara Slavin, a distinguished fellow at the Stimson Center, suggested that China is unlikely to participate in a US-led naval operation. She argued that Beijing has little need to intervene militarily because Iranian oil shipments to China appear to be continuing despite the broader disruption in the Gulf.
While several countries have avoided committing naval forces, some governments are pursuing diplomatic channels to maintain access to the shipping route. India has engaged directly with Tehran to negotiate safe passage for its energy shipments.
S Jaishankar confirmed that negotiations between New Delhi and Iranian officials had already produced results. According to Jaishankar, two Indian-flagged gas tankers were allowed to pass through the Strait of Hormuz after discussions with Iranian authorities.
The Indian minister said talks were continuing and emphasised the importance of dialogue in resolving the crisis. He indicated that diplomatic coordination might provide a workable solution while broader tensions in the region remain unresolved.
European governments have also shown caution in their responses to Trump’s proposal. France previously indicated it was examining the possibility of an international naval mission to escort vessels through the strait, but officials stressed that such a mission would only be considered once the immediate fighting subsides.
Similarly, Germany expressed reservations about joining any military initiative that could deepen the conflict. German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul said he was sceptical about the idea of participating in escort operations, questioning whether it would effectively draw European nations into a direct confrontation.
Other Western leaders have focused primarily on diplomatic coordination. Keir Starmer reportedly discussed the situation with Trump and highlighted the need to restore shipping through the strait to prevent further disruption to global trade.
Starmer also spoke with Mark Carney about the issue, underscoring the broader economic concerns created by the crisis. Shipping delays in the Gulf have affected not only oil markets but also broader supply chains connected to the region.
Meanwhile, US officials insist that international cooperation is essential to resolving the situation. Some reports in American media suggest that the administration could soon announce a coalition of countries willing to participate in escort missions, though those claims have not yet been independently confirmed.
The uncertainty surrounding the proposed naval coalition reflects the delicate geopolitical balance in the Middle East. Many governments appear wary of escalating tensions with Iran or becoming entangled in a broader regional war.
Iran’s leadership has responded defiantly to the US president’s statements.
A spokesperson for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps dismissed Trump’s claim that Iranian naval forces had been destroyed during the conflict.
Brigadier-General Ali Mohammad Naini challenged Trump’s assertions, saying that if Iran’s naval capabilities had truly been eliminated, the United States should have no difficulty sending its ships into the Persian Gulf.
The remark was widely interpreted as a warning that Iranian forces remain prepared to confront foreign naval operations in the region.
For global markets, the situation in the Strait of Hormuz remains a major source of uncertainty. The waterway’s narrow passage makes it particularly vulnerable to disruption during periods of conflict.
Energy analysts warn that even a limited confrontation between naval forces in the Gulf could have far-reaching economic consequences. A prolonged closure or severe restriction of shipping routes could send oil prices significantly higher and place additional pressure on global inflation.
Read also: UK considers military support to reopen Strait of Hormuz as Ed Miliband confirms intensive talks with allies
As diplomatic efforts continue and military tensions remain high, the world is watching closely to see whether the proposed coalition will materialise or whether negotiations with Tehran will offer an alternative path to restoring maritime traffic.
For now, the international reaction to Trump’s proposal remains cautious, reflecting widespread concern that direct military involvement in escort operations could further escalate an already volatile conflict.
About The Author
