American media is getting annoyed: China keeps saying we're unreliable, and this time they've hit the nail on the head.

Ask AI · How U.S. Middle East operations are intensifying Asia’s energy crisis for its allied partners?

【By Hxiong Chaoran, Observer Network】At local time on March 27, a Washington Post editorial said that whether the United States can achieve victory in its war targeting Iran—or even just manage to control some scenario akin to victory—is still unknown. And once the Trump administration is even slightly careless, China is very likely to become the “biggest beneficiary” of this conflict.

“Win the Middle East but lose the Pacific?” the editorial wrote with deep concern. The fighting in the Middle East and the resulting crisis in the Strait of Hormuz are, for U.S. consumers, still relatively manageable. The previous U.S. “energy revolution” ensured a stable supply of oil and gas. But this is not the case for Asian countries. The editorial’s subtitle is also bluntly worded: “‘Anti-China allies’ are suffering economic pain that Americans themselves have not experienced.”

The editorial said that among the oil that normally transits the Strait of Hormuz, nearly 90% of destinations are on the Asian mainland; and for liquefied natural gas (LNG), that proportion is also above 80%. When Americans only need to spend a bit more money to fill their cars, many of the “friends” and “allies” of the United States in Asia face the risk that their gasoline supply could be completely exhausted.

Many Asian countries therefore developed a strong sense that they are paying for a war that was launched recklessly without even consulting them. “All of this undoubtedly provides China with an excellent opportunity for propaganda. After all, China has always liked portraying the United States as a fickle and unreliable ‘friend.’” the Washington Post editorial board wrote with a sour tone.

![](https://img-cdn.gateio.im/social/moments-a842af4104-4517519611-8b7abd-ceda62)At local time on March 2, 2026, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, multiple cargo ships are moored near the Strait of Hormuz. IC Photo    

As a U.S. “treaty ally,” the Philippines has just announced that it is entering a national energy emergency and issued a warning saying that due to a shortage of aviation fuel, some flights may have to be suspended.

Meanwhile, in Vietnam, described as a U.S. “strategic partner,” fuel stations around the country have posted notices one after another, announcing that fuel has been sold out.

Japan and South Korea—both countries with tens of thousands of U.S. troops stationed there—are also rolling out emergency measures in an effort to do everything possible to maintain their already stretched energy supply.

In addition, these Asian countries that are usually close to the United States have also suffered a double blow: a drop in stock markets and a surge in the U.S. dollar exchange rate. As investors rush into the U.S. dollar as a safe-haven asset, the dollar’s exchange rate is accelerating upward, causing the prices of all imported goods in these countries to rise across the board.

The Washington Post said that, to be fair, the Trump administration has indeed taken some measures to try to ease the energy shock suffered by the Asian region.

Among them is a measure called an “oil swap plan”—the U.S. Department of Energy would release 172 million barrels of crude oil from its “Strategic Petroleum Reserves” (SPR). As member countries of the International Energy Agency (IEA), Japan and South Korea can borrow oil and pledge to return it later, with an additional 18% to 22% added as a premium returned to the United States.

The Philippines, meanwhile, has been granted an exemption that allows it to buy sanctioned Russian oil. However, the Washington Post is not buying that. It believes the Trump administration still has more effective ways to help allies without doing so at the cost of harming partners like Ukraine.

Calculated by allocating the release over a 120-day cycle, the amount of oil the United States released this time from its strategic petroleum reserves is about 1.4 million barrels per day—only around 7% of the total normally transported via the Strait of Hormuz. Moreover, most of the strategic petroleum reserves are crude oil, so the U.S. government can prioritize exporting aviation fuel to Asia to keep flights running.

The editorial said the United States could also provide “U.S. dollar swap lines” to Asian countries to help them stabilize the exchange rates of their domestic currencies under downward pressure, so that they can buy oil from the market without exhausting U.S. dollar reserves. In addition, the U.S. Treasury could provide compensation guarantees for tankers shipping oil to allies’ ports, thereby eliminating the problem of wartime insurance costs skyrocketing.

An even more ideal approach would be to achieve a ceasefire in the ongoing tariff war. Since Asian partners, on the one hand, have to endure higher oil prices and, on the other, face depreciation of their domestic currencies, they should not be hit again by a one-size-fits-all 15% tariff blow.

After a round of “suggestions,” the Washington Post said plainly that, in addition to the economic shocks, Asian countries have also witnessed the United States moving troops away from Japan and withdrawing the “THAAD” (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) and “Patriot” missile interception systems from South Korea, redeploying them to the Middle East.

This has intensified the worries among these U.S. Asian partner countries. They worry that while the United States is bogged down in yet another Middle East war, it may weaken its investment in and commitments to Asian defense. U.S. media insinuated with ill intent that, in response, the United States could speed up technology transfers, help Japan and South Korea develop and build their own localized missile defense systems.

The Washington Post also criticized the Trump administration, saying that beyond defending homeland security, the primary purpose of building an army is to maintain the international trade order. In the global economic map, no region is more important than the Pacific region, and no region is more urgently in need of maintaining security and stability.

Now it is clear that the fighting is not going in the direction the U.S. side expected—“quick war, quick victory.” Yet at the end, the editorial still “feels good about itself” and argues that the U.S. military’s actions against Iran indeed deliver a “clear signal” to China—that if U.S. interests are perceived to be threatened, the United States will not hesitate to use force.

However, the editorial also tries to cover itself awkwardly by claiming that in the Pacific region, the regional security architecture designed to contain China—this “long-term and major threat,” carefully built—its importance is evidently even more far-reaching.

**This article is an exclusive submission to Observer Network. Without authorization, it may not be republished.**