Australia has not been asked to join a naval coalition to secure the Strait of Hormuz and ruled out sending ships to do so, Defence Minister Richard Marles told media on Tuesday. His statement came as Trump identified China, France, Japan, South Korea, and the United Kingdom as countries that should join the coalition, though no country has confirmed its involvement in the operation.
The Strait of Hormuz, through which one-fifth of the world's oil shipments transit, has seen tanker traffic dropping first by approximately 70% and over 150 ships anchoring outside the strait to avoid risks. Global oil prices have shot up by 40 to 50 percent amid repeated Iranian attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz. The closure threatens supply chains worldwide, with consequences rippling through energy markets and inflation pressures.
Australia's position reflects a broader pattern of allied rejection. Australia, Japan, Poland and Sweden and Spain have said they had no intentions of sending military ships. Foreign ministers from EU countries discussed options to secure the Strait of Hormuz but decided against expanding their naval operations in the region. German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius asked what Trump expected "a handful or two handfuls of European frigates" could do in the Strait of Hormuz that the powerful US Navy could not.
Canberra has not abandoned the region entirely. The Royal Australian Air Force will send an E7A Wedgetail surveillance aircraft and supporting personnel to "protect and secure airspace above the Gulf" for the next four weeks, and help the region with its "collective self-defence". Australia will also send advanced medium-range air-to-air missiles to the United Arab Emirates, following a phone call with UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan.
The distinction matters. Australia's air support targets defence of the Gulf region itself, protecting allies from Iranian drone and missile attacks. A naval deployment to the Strait of Hormuz would represent a different commitment, one closer to direct involvement in force-reopening operations contested by Iran. For a government already managing the evacuation of Australians from the Middle East, that boundary appears deliberate.
Analysts note practical complications beyond political reluctance. There's a practical issue; if you want naval support for some kind of coalition protection operation, it takes you a long time to get ships to sail to that area. In the short term it is possible to escort 3-4 commercial ships a day with 7-8 destroyers providing air cover, depending on the risk from Iranian midget submarines. However, doing so sustainably for months requires more resources.
Trump has made clear that allied compliance matters to him personally. "Whether we get support or not, I can say this, and I said it to them: We will remember," he said. Yet allies remain unconvinced that military deployments address the core problem. "This is not Europe's war, but Europe's interests are directly at stake," Kallas said, highlighting the tensions between strategic interest and military participation.
For Australia, the calculus is different again. The Royal Australian Navy's three-decades-long naval deployment to the region was announced by the Morrison government in October 2020. Since the 2000 Defence White Paper, Australia has sent special forces and conventional infantry, cavalry, and engineer-led task groups to Iraq and Afghanistan, a history that shapes current caution. Helping defend allies against direct attack remains within Canberra's remit. Reopening a contested waterway at gunpoint is another matter entirely.