Washington maintains a policy of assigning roles-at times with implicit reproach-to Asian countries such as South Korea, Japan, Australia, and the Philippines. However, the Iran war has created a major rupture in precisely this framework.
Washington maintains a policy of assigning roles-at times with implicit reproach-to Asian countries such as South Korea, Japan, Australia, and the Philippines. However, the Iran war has created a major rupture in precisely this framework.
By Orçun Göktürk / President of the Sino-Turkish Studies Center
The war launched against Iran following the assassination of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei on February 28-carried out by Washington and Tel Aviv while negotiations with Tehran were still ongoing-has now exceeded its first month. The operations initiated under Trump’s “regime change in Iran” strategy continue in the face of Iran’s strong resistance, including successful missile attacks targeting American bases and Israel in the region, as well as the closure of the Strait of Hormuz to US allies.
The first shock for the United States may have come from Tehran’s resistance, but the second wave came when NATO and especially its traditional allies in Asia responded negatively to Trump’s call to “open Hormuz together.” Even the Japanese leader’s mid-March visit to Washington and some tribute-like trade agreements were not enough to reverse this situation.
Why did Asia leave Trump alone?
In the US National Defense Strategy document announced at the end of last year, the Indo-Pacific region was designated as the most critical geography for “deterring China.” While the US openly admitted that policies such as regime change in China or suffocating the Communist Party of China were unrealistic, it also declared that it would continue its strategy of containing China’s rise.
Within this desperate strategy, Washington also maintains a policy of assigning roles-at times with implicit reproach-to Asian countries such as South Korea, Japan, Australia, and the Philippines. However, the Iran war has created a major rupture in precisely this framework. How so? Let us take a closer look.
Hormuz: The energy heart of Asia
Under Trump, the United States had been working to consolidate not only its traditional allies in Asia but also ASEAN countries and those attempting to remain relatively neutral between China and the US against Beijing. The “tariff stick” shown to Vietnam and Indonesia, provoking the Philippines against China in the South China Sea, and nearly $45 billion in arms sales to Taiwan in 2025 were all part of this strategy. The war against Iran has, at this very point, begun to create a significant power vacuum in the region to the detriment of the U.S.
Japan and South Korea
Let’s begin with Japan. The country’s daily oil demand is close to 3.5 million barrels, and 90% of its crude oil comes from Gulf countries, primarily Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. According to many analyses, the 1973 Gulf Oil Crisis exposed Japan’s vulnerability in energy dependence, prompting Tokyo to build significant oil reserves to avoid a repeat of that experience.
Nevertheless, the closure of Hormuz to US allies alarmed Tokyo. Both the Trump-aligned leader Takaichi and the Minister of Defense rejected Trump’s call to “open Hormuz” on the very same day. It should also be noted that oil is not only critical for Japan’s daily fuel needs but also for its petrochemical industry.
Two additional developments that increased Japan’s dependence on Gulf oil were the shutdown of many nuclear reactors following the 2011 Fukushima disaster and the rise in oil prices after the Russia–Ukraine war that began in February 2022.
South Korea, another country heavily invested in by the US as part of its China containment strategy, has also been among the most affected by the Iran war. More than 70% of South Korea’s crude oil comes from the Gulf. In addition, half of the naphtha used in its automotive, electronics, and plastics industries passes through the Strait of Hormuz.
At the same time, nearly 30,000 US troops are stationed in the country, and Seoul was shocked by the sudden redeployment of US’ THAAD systems from Korea to West Asia. Despite this, South Korea responded to Trump’s call with a vague statement such as “necessary support will be provided for joint operations.”
Southeast Asian countries
It can be said that Southeast Asia has been the region most affected by the closure of Hormuz. Many airlines in the region began canceling domestic and international flights in April, some countries shifted to a four-day workweek, and rationing systems were introduced in places such as Pakistan, Sri Lanka, India, and Bangladesh.
India and Pakistan appear to be trying to resolve the crisis by importing more oil from Saudi Arabia’s Yanbu port on the Red Sea. However, Yemen’s recent involvement in the war and the potential closure of the Red Sea would most severely impact these two countries.
In India, the Modi government is under intense domestic pressure. Compared to Beijing, which appears well-prepared for a disruption in Gulf oil supplies, India’s lack of preparedness has drawn increasing criticism.
Similar difficulties are being experienced in Malaysia, Vietnam, the Philippines, Cambodia, and Laos. Among these countries, Vietnam responded the fastest. Hanoi’s leadership traveled to Russia and signed a rapid energy agreement that includes the construction of nuclear power plants.
Across the region, there will likely be a growing shift toward renewable energy. This trend will benefit China, the most advanced country in this field, as regional countries increasingly require Beijing’s expertise.
The failure of the US strategy to encircle China
As mentioned above, among the energy-importing countries of East and South Asia, China appears to be the most-if not the only-prepared for the oil crisis. Beijing’s daily oil demand is around 16 million barrels, but strategic reports indicate that its reserves are sufficient for at least six months. Moreover, Iranian oil continues to flow to China.
The US strategy to encircle China-defined as the greatest challenger to its global order in the 21st century-has effectively hit a wall in Tehran. The aggression toward Venezuela and Iran was, in fact, also aimed at Beijing. Meanwhile, the very countries Washington relies on -Japan, South Korea, Australia, the Philippines, and India-are now experiencing the consequences of US policies.
The United States is now forced to confront both its inability to provide a reliable security umbrella to Gulf countries in West Asia and the energy crisis it has created for its allies in East Asia. On the other hand, Beijing appears to be emerging as one of the winners on both fronts of this conflict.