‘Not our war’: Germany, Japan, Italy flatly reject Trump’s Hormuz warship demand

Several United States allies formally rejected President Donald Trump’s demand that they dispatch warships to the Strait of Hormuz on Monday, drawing pointed public criticism from the president, who accused Western partners of ingratitude after what he described as decades of American support. Germany, Japan, Australia, Italy, Spain and Luxembourg all declined to commit naval vessels to escort tankers through the strait, even as crude oil prices hovered near one hundred dollars a barrel and approximately one thousand oil tankers remained stranded or diverted in the wider Gulf region.

The United States and Israel launched military operations against Iran on 28 February 2026, triggering a graduated Iranian response that has effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz to vessels affiliated with the United States and its allies. Iran has described the closure as targeted rather than total, with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi telling the American broadcaster CBS that Tehran was blocking only ships linked to the United States and Israel, while remaining open to negotiations with other nations. The strait is the world’s most significant maritime oil chokepoint, through which approximately one-fifth of globally traded oil and liquefied natural gas normally passes.

Trump had posted on his Truth Social platform over the weekend calling on China, France, Japan, South Korea, the United Kingdom and others to send warships to keep the strait “open and safe,” arguing that the waterway mattered more to oil-dependent allies than to the United States. Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One on Sunday, Trump framed the request as a demand rather than an appeal. “I am demanding that these countries come in and protect their own territory, because it is their own territory,” he said, adding: “Whether we get support or not, I can say this, and I said it to them: We will remember.”

Trump subsequently threatened that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization faced a “very bad” future if member states refused to assist in securing the strait. He then extended an open invitation to all nations that receive oil through the Strait of Hormuz to contribute warships, with the United States offering to provide significant logistical support to participants.

Why did Germany, Japan, Australia and Italy decline to send warships to the Strait of Hormuz?

Germany issued the most direct public rejection. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius told reporters in Berlin on Monday that the conflict was not Germany’s to fight. “This is not our war; we did not start it,” Pistorius said. “We want diplomatic solutions and a swift end to the conflict, but sending more warships to the region will likely not help achieve that.” A spokesperson for German Chancellor Friedrich Merz added that Germany had not been consulted before the United States and Israel initiated military action against Iran, and that Washington had explicitly stated at the start of the war that European assistance was neither necessary nor desired. German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul said he did not see the North Atlantic Treaty Organization making any decisions to assume responsibility for the Strait of Hormuz.

Japan declined on constitutional and legal grounds. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi told parliament that Tokyo had made no decisions regarding the dispatch of escort ships and was examining what Japan could do independently within its legal framework. Japan’s constitution imposes strict limits on overseas military deployments, and Takaichi indicated that operations in the Strait of Hormuz might not satisfy domestic legal requirements. The issue is expected to feature prominently when Takaichi visits the White House on Thursday.

Australia said it had not been formally asked to join a naval coalition and ruled out sending ships in any case. Italy also declined, with Italian Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini stating that sending military vessels into a war zone would constitute entry into the conflict. Spain similarly refused to commit naval assets. Luxembourg’s Foreign Minister Xavier Bettel offered a notably blunt response, stating that blackmail was not the approach he welcomed, and adding that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s collective defense clause under Article 5 had not been triggered because none of the alliance members had been directly attacked.

What position have the United Kingdom, France and the European Union taken on Hormuz naval escort operations?

The United Kingdom stopped short of either committing or refusing. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer told reporters on Monday that reopening the strait was not a simple task and that London was working with European partners to develop a viable collective plan to restore freedom of navigation. British Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said the United Kingdom was intensively examining, alongside allies, what could be done to reopen the passage. Starmer acknowledged that Britain would take necessary action to defend itself and its allies, but said the United Kingdom would not be drawn into the wider conflict.

France had previously signaled a more measured openness to an international escort mission. President Emmanuel Macron indicated France was engaged in discussions with partners in Europe, India and Asia about a possible coordinated mission, but stressed it would only be feasible when circumstances permitted, meaning after active hostilities had subsided. European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said she had spoken with United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres about unblocking the strait and that European foreign ministers were discussing options, while the bloc’s foreign ministers decided against expanding existing European Union naval operations in the region for the time being.

How has China responded to Trump’s call for warships to help secure the Strait of Hormuz?

China declined to commit naval vessels while framing its response in terms of broader de-escalation. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian reiterated Beijing’s position on Monday, calling on all parties to immediately halt military operations and avoid further escalation, warning that regional instability would have severe consequences for the global economy. United States Secretary of Energy Chris Wright had told NBC broadcaster on Sunday that he had been in dialogue with some of the named countries and expected China to act as a constructive partner in reopening the strait. However, the Chinese government did not indicate any willingness to contribute warships.

Iran’s position adds a further layer of complexity to any proposed naval coalition. Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs Abbas Araghchi stated that Tehran was blocking only vessels linked to the United States and Israel, not all shipping. Brigadier-General Ali Mohammad Naini, a spokesman for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, rejected United States claims that Iran’s navy had been materially degraded, and stated that the Strait of Hormuz had not been militarily blocked but was merely under Iranian control. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps naval commander Alireza Tangsiri similarly dismissed American assertions about providing safe escort for oil tankers.

Which countries are independently negotiating safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz without US military involvement?

India has pursued independent diplomatic channels. Indian Minister of External Affairs S Jaishankar confirmed to The Financial Times that negotiations with Tehran had allowed two Indian-flagged gas tankers to pass through the strait over the preceding weekend. Jaishankar said he remained engaged in ongoing discussions with Iranian counterparts and that from India’s perspective it was preferable to resolve the matter through reason and coordination. Reuters separately reported that Iran had asked India to release three tankers seized in February as part of broader talks on safe passage for Indian-flagged or India-bound vessels through the Gulf of Oman.

United States Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told the American broadcaster CNBC on Monday that Washington was prepared to allow some Iranian fuel vessels through the strait and believed that Indian and Chinese tankers had also passed through in recent days. The Indian Navy was reported to be escorting Indian-flagged crude oil tankers out of the Gulf of Oman. The White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt on Monday reiterated that the administration was working to form a multi-nation coalition, though no country had publicly announced firm plans to deploy warships.

What is the broader diplomatic and alliance context behind allied refusals to join a Hormuz naval coalition?

European, American and Asian diplomats expressed growing frustration with what several described as the Trump administration’s reluctance to use traditional diplomatic channels in managing the conflict with Iran. Diplomatic sources cited by CNN said they had no clear picture of who was leading the administration’s coordinated effort to build allied support for reopening the strait at the working level. Secretary of State Marco Rubio was described as actively engaged, primarily in his capacity as acting national security adviser, but a robust multilateral diplomatic process had not been established to complement direct presidential outreach.

A central grievance among allied governments was that the United States and Israel had not consulted European or Asian partners before launching military operations against Iran. Germany’s response made this explicit. Allied governments in Europe and Asia are significantly more exposed to Middle Eastern oil imports than the United States, which further complicated the political calculus of contributing military assets to a conflict they had no role in initiating. United States Senator Chris Murphy, a Democrat, wrote publicly that the administration had no plan for reopening the Strait of Hormuz at the outset of military operations.

Notably, the United States Navy had itself not been escorting commercial ships through the strait. Reuters reported that the United States Navy had declined near-daily requests from the shipping industry to provide escorts, citing three shipping industry sources familiar with the matter. This created a strategic tension in Trump’s demand that allied navies perform a task the American Navy was itself declining to carry out. The War Zone previously noted that the United States has only three mine-countermeasure-equipped Littoral Combat Ships in the region, and that the Washington Institute had estimated years earlier that clearing the Strait of Hormuz could require as many as sixteen Avenger-class mine countermeasure vessels.

What is happening to global oil markets and strategic reserves as the Hormuz blockade continues?

Crude oil prices remained elevated but showed signs of partial stabilisation on Monday. United States West Texas Intermediate futures were trading at approximately ninety-nine dollars per barrel and the global benchmark Brent crude was at approximately one hundred and four dollars and eighty-four cents. The prices had exceeded one hundred dollars per barrel for much of the preceding period as the blockade disrupted supply chains and raised inflation concerns across multiple economies.

The International Energy Agency announced on Sunday that emergency oil stocks would begin flowing to global markets, describing the coordinated release as by far the largest in the agency’s history. The International Energy Agency updated an earlier estimate of four hundred million barrels to nearly four hundred and twelve million barrels. Asian member countries of the International Energy Agency planned to release stocks immediately, with reserves from Europe and the Americas to follow from the end of March 2026.

The conflict itself entered its third week with no confirmed off-ramps. Iran continued to fire missiles and drones toward Israel and toward countries across the wider Middle East. Turkey, a North Atlantic Treaty Organization member that borders Iran, reported that NATO air defenses had intercepted three Iranian missiles headed toward Turkish territory. Gulf states including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates reported Iranian strikes and casualties. A drone struck a fuel tank at Dubai International Airport, causing a fire. Separately, at least ten oil tankers had been hit, targeted or had reported attacks since the conflict began on 28 February 2026, according to data from the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations and the International Maritime Organization.

Key takeaways on what allied refusals to join a Hormuz naval coalition mean for global oil markets, NATO and United States diplomacy

• Germany, Japan, Australia, Italy, Spain and Luxembourg all declined President Trump’s call to send warships to the Strait of Hormuz on 17 March 2026, with Germany and Italy citing the conflict’s origins and Japan citing constitutional restrictions on overseas military deployments.
• Iran has maintained that the Strait of Hormuz is closed only to vessels affiliated with the United States and Israel, and Iranian officials have engaged separately with India and other non-aligned states to facilitate selective passage, complicating the argument for a broad military coalition.
• The United States Navy has itself declined near-daily requests from commercial shipping to provide escorts through the strait, creating a significant credibility gap in Trump’s demand that allied navies undertake the same mission.
• The International Energy Agency announced a coordinated emergency release of approximately four hundred and twelve million barrels of strategic reserves, the largest such release in the agency’s history, in an effort to stabilise oil prices that had risen above one hundred dollars per barrel.
• Trump’s threat that NATO faces a “very bad” future if member states refuse to support the Hormuz mission marks a significant escalation of transatlantic friction, compounded by allied governments’ stated grievance that neither the United States nor Israel consulted them before initiating military operations against Iran.