Closure of the Strait of Hormuz is not a distant concern

Home > Opinion > Columns

Closure of the Strait of Hormuz is not a distant concern

Published: 19 Mar. 2026, 00:03

Audio report: written by reporters, read by AI

Jung Ho-sub

The author is a chairman of the Korea Naval Association and a former chief of naval operations.

U.S. President Donald Trump has asked seven countries, including Korea, Japan, Britain, France and China, to deploy forces. The request calls for participation in international cooperation to secure maritime routes in response to Iran’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. The strait is a critical chokepoint through which about 20 percent of global oil and 25 percent of liquefied natural gas pass. As Iran moved to block the waterway amid a conflict involving the United States and Israel, it has become a major source of instability in global energy supply.

The Cheonghae unit's Chungmugong Yi Sun-shin destroyer, right, alongside the Italian frigate Luigi Rizzo, participates in a counter-piracy operation codenamed ″Hanul″ in waters near the Gulf of Aden on Wednesday. [JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF]

Despite Trump’s frustration over lukewarm responses, building such cooperation is not simple. There are differing views on the legitimacy of the U.S.-Iran conflict. Many countries are concerned about being drawn into a war that is not their own. For Korea, dispatching naval forces is especially sensitive given the ongoing military standoff on the Korean Peninsula.

The operational risks in the strait are also severe. At its narrowest point, it spans only 21 nautical miles, concentrating a vast volume of maritime oil transport into a confined space. Even the detection of a single naval mine can halt traffic, and Iran is believed to have already deployed such mines.

In addition to mines, Iran has reportedly used asymmetric tactics, including drones and missiles, to selectively target vessels based on nationality, effectively enforcing a blockade. Even ships with advanced missile defense systems can suffer serious damage if saturation attacks penetrate their defenses. Participation in such operations requires accepting the possibility of both material losses and casualties.

This is why some analysts argue that Iran’s most powerful weapon is not a nuclear device but its control over the Strait of Hormuz. The strategic leverage of the waterway amplifies its influence far beyond conventional military capability.

Nevertheless, beyond political debates and operational risks, a pragmatic assessment of national interests suggests that Korea should consider participating in international cooperation within feasible limits. First, the Strait of Hormuz is a vital route through which more than 60 percent of Korea’s imported energy supplies pass. Securing this route is not a distant issue but a matter directly linked to national survival.

Second, participation would help Korea gain recognition as a middle power capable of contributing to international maritime order and security. No navy, including that of the United States, can guarantee the safety of global sea lanes on its own. Such security depends on international cooperation. Korea’s own maritime trade routes, stretching across the South China Sea and the Indian Ocean, rely on this collective framework.

Third, participation would contribute to strengthening the Korea-U.S. alliance. Trump has emphasized that allies should take greater responsibility for their own defense and contribute to global security to receive continued U.S. support. Korea has already expanded cooperation with Washington in areas such as investment and security following tariff negotiations concluded in October last year. Given North Korea’s nuclear and missile threats, as well as China’s maritime expansion, Seoul needs to carefully consider Washington’s request.

The Callisto tanker sits anchored in Port Sultan Qaboos as the traffic is down in the Strait of Hormuz, amid the U.S. and Israeli conflict with Iran, in Muscat, Oman, March 12, 2026. [REUTERS/YONHAP]

The current conflict underscores the importance of securing maritime trade routes. Such security can be understood in three stages. First, in waters surrounding the Korean Peninsula, the Navy and Coast Guard must operate as an integrated national fleet to protect major ports and coastal shipping lanes.

Second, beyond national jurisdiction, the safety of routes to the Middle East and the United States depends on international maritime law and cooperation with partner countries. Korea should take a more active role in these efforts.

Third, a coordinated system for managing Korean-flagged vessels is essential. This involves building communication and information-sharing networks to guide and escort ships to safe routes in times of crisis. Real-time satellite-based systems are already in use, but emergency coordination among the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries, the Navy, the Coast Guard and commercial vessels must be further strengthened.

This situation serves as a reminder that secure maritime transport cannot be taken for granted. Korea has long relied on the U.S. Navy to safeguard regional maritime security, but the strategic environment is changing rapidly. As U.S. naval power faces constraints and China rises as a maritime force, policymakers must closely monitor these shifts and prepare thoroughly to ensure the safety of maritime trade routes.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.