TRUMP DÙNG HORMUZ ĐIỂM HUYỆT TRUNG QUỐC, CÁI BẪY HIỂM ĐANG CHỜ SẬP XUỐNG

On March 16 U S President Donald Trump called on China the United Kingdom France Japan and South Korea dispatch warships to accompany the United States in ensuring the Strait of Hormuz remains open and unobstructed after Iran attempted to shut down this world's most critical shipping route And on the surface of the news this appears to be a very noble call Protecting maritime freedom securing the Strait of Hormuz safeguarding the world's vital energy supply lines and so on and so forth But if we look at it from a deeper strategic level Trump's call is far from naive or simple It's a multi-layered move where the surface layer—international morality—is the shallowest of all That deep layer is essentially forcing major powers especially China to reveal their strategic positioning The act of publicly naming China Japan South Korea the United Kingdom and France underscored e countries benefiting from the Strait of Hormuz from its openness and maritime freedom We must deploy military capabilities such as warships mine sweepers or drone-defense systems to join forces with the U S in clearing this strait The first thing we need to recognize is that Trump is shifting the burden from the idea that the U S should protect the world to the idea that those who benefit should pay the costs That's very Trump-like logic perfectly in line with the very essence of a businessman like Trump The United States is no longer as dependent on Middle Eastern oil as Asian economies are while most of the oil passing through the Strait of Hormuz flows toward Asia According to statistics the volume passing through Hormuz in 2024 and early 2015 accounted for approximately one-fifth of global oil consumption and more than one-quarter of global crude oil maritime trade Approximately 84% of crude oil and condensate transported via this route is destined for Asian markets Asia stands to gain the most from the Strait of Hormuz China relies on Middle Eastern oil for about 95% of its supply Approximately 70% of the oil and 6% of the liquefied natural gas (LNG) passing through Hormuz remain in the region South Korea also heavily relies on Middle Eastern oil with about 70% of its crude oil imports passing through this route More important than that Trump is turning Hormuz into a strategic test against America's foremost adversary China You know Beijing has long wanted to benefit from a global maritime order protected by the United States yet they often avoid the military expenses shying away from the corresponding military and political costs When Trump explicitly named China he was sending a very sharp message If you're truly a global superpower and if you're dependent on this oil route then come out and defend it now Just do it don't stand on the sidelines anymore If China refuses Washington will immediately have a very strong argument to present to the world tha Beijing merely wants to ride on the security provided by the United States not to be a genuine leader committed to ensuring real credibility It was Trump himself who emphasized that China relies heavily on the Strait of Hormuz and should therefore contribute forces to ensure the smooth operation of this vital route What makes this move particularly significant is that it places China in a difficult position If they send warships Beijing would inadvertently acknowledge a principle that the United States has always sought to uphold Freedom of navigation is a global public good and must be protected through military presence even at strategic chokepoints And once China accepts that logic in Hormuz it will find it hard to rebut when the U S and its allies apply the same reasoning surrounding seas such as the South China Sea the Taiwan Strait or maritime areas On the other hand if China does not participate Trump wins in a different way At that point Washington could tell Japan South Korea Europe and Arab nations alike tha Look at them— the country benefiting the most from Middle Eastern oil refuses to share the burden of protecting this vital supply line And this helps the U S separate China's image as a major trading partner from its image as a guardian of the system's stability Strategically this is a powerful move that transforms Beijing from a peer rival into a passive beneficiary in the eyes of other nations And in fact it initially may have been the international response to Trump's call which was rather muted There has been no public commitment thus far and it also makes Trump's call all the more urgent It has become less of a practical naval alliance and more of a political test And another layer beneath that is Trump targeting the implicit connection between China and Iran but without having to mention the name directly Everyone understands that China and the U S are indirectly confronting each other across numerous battlegrounds from technology and commerce to maritime ports and energy bottlenecks Iran is a crucial link in that picture because the Strait of Hormuz is the key po e energy shock will hit Asia the hardest particularly China Japan and South Korea countries heavily dependent on and wealthy from the Middle East as we have analyzed When Trump named these three Asian countries invite them to join the U S in an alliance o respond to the situation at the Hormuz Strait is essentially him distancing the group of victims from a gay group because we know that Japan and Korea due to their alliance with the U S are almost automatically aligned It will stand with Washington upholding Washington's principles while China will be brought into the spotlight Ultimately which side is Beijing on in the equation of maritime stability Alongside which nations Is protecting the oil route or maintaining a strategically advantageous position for Iran more critical That question is extremely dangerous It offends them because it directly challenges the neutral image Beijing has been trying to build Moreover this is also an internationalization of responsibility yet the United States retains command authority Trump did not say o have China take the lead in doing it rather than coming here to stand side by side with us and submit to our coordination us That is Washington remains the center of the security mechanism while other countries are invited Participation is merely supportive playing a secondary role while the main actor remains the United States That's a huge difference Fundamentally Trump isn't stepping down from leadership and he's only demanding Forcing others to bear the costs paying militarily and politically in the very essence where the U S continues to hold the reins And this also aligns perfectly with how Mr Trump views organizations such as NATO America's Asian allies and all of its security structures The U S does not step back from its leadership role but also didn't want to keep bearing the entire burden alone Major media outlets like Reuters have also must acknowledge that Trump even tied his allies' attitudes to NATO's future showing that he Linking the Strait of Hormuz to the broader narrative of burden-sharing within the Fangcai Alliance For Japan and South Korea that call carries an additional crucial implication: it reminds them tha energy security and military security are no longer separate Japan and South Korea are no longer just countries gh-consuming they also serve as crucial links industrial chains such as semiconductors and shipbuilding e wealth and logistics of the faction led by the United States With the Strait of Hormuz blocked in this manner That kind of thing is about transportation costs electricity prices and input chemicals Inflation and industrial pressure are both rising accordingly so Trump is leveraging a shock in the Middle East o strengthen strategic discipline within the Asian alliance Security advancing into the Middle Eas s also Northeast Asian economic security and this helps the United States draw Tokyo and Seoul deeper into that mindset strategic regional linkage Some sources indicate that Iran has signaled that this matter whether to allow passage or not is up to their military and there have been attempts to request safe passage other countries It is precisely that detail that highlights even more Trump's desire to undermine the system by playing by his own rules a public call to action On the surface it is a rallying cry in its depths it is a The power struggle at stake By March 16 the response from the countries America has named It's still fairly bland Although not formally committed most countries acknowledge that the Strait of Hormuz must remain open freedom of navigation must be recognized and protected This establishes something crucial e strategic legitimacy for U S actions If the U then launches a large-scale naval campaign to clear mines or strike Iranian bases along the coast Washington could claim it is protecting the supply line global energy not just for personal gain They have another reason to escalate o thoroughly address this Iran issue Currently countries specifically named include Britain Meanwhile Japan is highly likely to join and South Korea is also considering it As for France the EU has already deployed its own mission China alone has yet to respond ey are remaining silent as usual But it is precisely China's cold indifference in response to the call that stands out Trump's actions could trap Beijing in a strategic dilemma orchestrated by Trump as we have analyzed Because if China does not join in protecting Hormuz Washington could exploit that very absence o undermine Beijing's strategic legitimacy in the South China Sea the Taiwan Strait and even the Yellow Sea The reason is that Trump is trying to turn Hormuz into a global test of maritime morality Who truly safeguards freedom of movement and who merely benefits from it—this is what we have just analyzed Everyone understands that Hormuz is about more than just oil—it's a critical point for roughly 20% of the world's oil and LNG shipments The route passes through and most of that cargo flows toward Asia This is the strategic crux If Beijing avoids Hormuz the U S will have a powerful countermove in the South China Sea because China has long claimed that the United States is militarizing the Asian seas using the pretext of maritime freedom to encroach deeply into other nations' backyards But even at Hormuz where China itself is heavily dependent on energy Beijing still refuses to take responsibility for safeguarding the shipping lane rade Washington could counter that China only talks about freedom of navigation when it comes to oil They only speak up when their own safety is threatened but stay silent when real responsibility is required If this rhetorical move succeeds the U S could bring it back to the Taiwan Strait There Washington always states that this maritime line is not just a matter for China alone but rather the benefit of global trade If China refuses to share the burden at Hormuz The United States will have additional grounds to tell its allies that Beijing does not safeguard global maritime security They only seek to control seas that serve their interests In strategic competition such imagery holds value no less than warships Even more subtle is Trump attempting to force China into a snowballing dilemma If Beijing joins the United States in the Hormuz it would indirectly accept a principle that the U S holds extremely dear preferred that is the navies of the major powers having the right to be present to ensure freedom of navigatio along vital shipping routes But once China had accepted the principle At Hormuz denying involvement in the South China Sea or Taiwan would be extremely difficult placing Beijing in a tough position Why the presence of international naval forces in Hormuz is justified As for the South China Sea it's described as an intrusion With the East Sea this move of theirs is even more so Hai is more aligned with the northern Chinese power center than Huang Hai is far more than the South China Sea If Washington wants to increase pressure they don't need to talk about countering China They only need to refer to a broader maritime and international airspace corridor must be maintained open stable and free from threat by any major power When the U S dragged China into the Hormuz affair they were laying the groundwork for a reusable moral framework We Protecting the global maritime order in Hormuz is no different than doing so in the South China Sea or the Western Pacific Enough It's merely safeguarding the integrity of the central space Here we see that Japan and South Korea are two extremely important links We already know that they are Heavily dependent on Middle Eastern energy yet the response so far has remained notably cautious Nevertheless just the fact that they've been drawn into this discussion is already beneficial for the United States From now on Washington can tell Tokyo and Seoul that Middle Eastern security Energy security and East Asian security are interconnected When the Strait of Hormuz is disrupted it's not just oil prices that rise but also industrial costs Supply chains petrochemicals power transportation and chip manufacturing across Northeast Asia have also been disrupted And once Japan and South Korea accept that logic of connectivity they will find it easier to accept the idea of The U S is calling for closer coordination in the East Sea the South China Sea or the Taiwan Strait It serves as an example for Japan and Korea showing how everything is interconnected This is how Trump leverages a strategic bottleneck in the Middle East to tighten strategic pressure in East Asia where they will face China head-on in just a short while Looking deeper I see that Trump is trying to distance China from the role of victim in the instability and pushes Beijing closer to the role of being held accountable for the choice Beijing often benefits from occupying that intermediary position buys oil maintains ties with Iran criticizes the U S but refuses to shoulder the responsibility of keeping the seas open Trump is undermining that open arena by explicitly naming China forcing Beijing to confront a very difficult question Does he want to be seen as a global superpower or merely the world's largest oil buyer yet avoid security risks And in such a situation if China gives the wrong answer to this question the cost would extend far beyond the Middle East and even surged back across the entire coastal belt surrounding China On the morning of March 16 the Institute for Strategic Studies released a special report The conflict in Iran is currently at a stage where the military trajectory is relatively positive The U S is gradually undermining Iran's ability to use its most essential tool in the conflict The elders launched attacks using UAVs and missiles which formed the foundation of the entire conflict Another thing is that the United States is gradually undermining Iran's actual military capability Recent military developments over the past few days reveal a crucial point: The U S is not only targeting specific objectives but is systematically dismantling the very foundation of Iran's war capability It's a network of UAVs and missiles The number of missiles Iran has fired over the past two or three days has decreased significantly In the early stages of the conflict Iran had launched dozens of missiles per day reaching up to 30–50 missiles targeting areas and bases linked to the U S and Israel At that time Tehran's tactic was to launch continuous missile barrages to overwhelm defenses However according to Israeli security officials the frequency of rocket launches in recent days has dropped significantly Instead of dozens they now launch only one to three missiles per day and on some days there are no major attacks at all It shows that Iran's attack pace has dropped by more than 90% compared to the initial phase And that means they are gradually being pushed from a position of active pressure to one of defense prolonging the war with weaker tools As Iran gradually loses its strategic warfare tools China finds itself in an even deeper predicament Supporting Iran means directly confronting the United States and the major economies dependent on oil Standing apart or joining forces with the U S alike undermines their own strategic argument the seas near China In other words Iran is gradually losing its military strength But China is now caught in a strategic dilemma with no easy solution And that is precisely the most dangerous depth of this storm of suffering Looking at the global picture today from Cuba and Venezuela to Iran There is a very clear rule: no country collapses solely due to strong external pressure But the internal pressure had already reached its breaking point externally it was merely the final push Iran is a very典型 example It is a theocratic regime where politics and religion are intertwined when political power is draped in sacred attire The state not only governs society but also positions itself as the representative of religious truth But precisely at that point the greatest contradiction emerged For when political power begins When imposed on personal life and social morality it easily equates belief with power In Iran reality shows that many controversial customs continue to exist under the current legal system Under current law girls may marry at the age of 13 and even earlier if permitted by a court and a male guardian Between 2017 and 2022 approximately 184 000 cases of child marriages involving young girls occurred Under 15 years old were recorded highlighting a profound contradiction When a political system invokes religion to govern society but permits certain practices when viewed by many as contrary to ethics and human rights the beliefs of society and its system Cracks will begin to appear And when inner confidence weakens external pressures become truly dangerous And in recent years Iran has witnessed multiple waves of social unrest from the women's protests following the death of Mahsa Amini to the street demonstrations due to economic and inflationary factors This indicates that Iran's crisis did not begin with the war Punishment or resistance—it all stems from the growing rift between the state and society When a nation reaches that point external pressures—whether sanctions war or isolation— It merely serves as the catalyst that accelerates a process already set in motion from within Therefore when looking at the daily suffering in the Middle East today we must also understand that Ira ot only facing military or geopolitical pressure but also confronting a certain reality e crisis of trust within its own society And in such circumstances The survival of any regime is merely a matter of time Let's wait and see At this point today's program would like to take a brief pause We invite you to share your personal thoughts on this topic Le Minh says goodbye and looks forward to seeing you again