Developments in the Persian Gulf over the past day have revealed a simple yet decisive reality: any unilateral attempt to “secure” the Strait of Hormuz can, in practice, make this vital passage even more dangerous. Following the US announcement of the “Freedom Project” and the deployment of naval escorts, calm did not return to the region. Instead, intense clashes, explosions on several commercial vessels, and damage to oil facilities in Fujairah significantly escalated tensions.

In this context, Washington’s claim that a commercial vessel from the Maersk fleet successfully transited under escort has faced serious skepticism. Neither independent sources nor maritime tracking data support the narrative. This gap between official claims and available data has itself become a driver of distrust in markets and among shipping actors. The direct result has been an increase in perceived risk and, consequently, a reduced willingness by vessels to transit the Strait of Hormuz, even under military escort.

More importantly, parts of maritime traffic had previously been coordinated with Iran, which helped maintain a degree of stability. Those relatively predictable routes have now also been disrupted. The swift reaction of oil markets and the notable rise in prices over the past 24 hours are clear indicators of this heightened risk. On this basis, it can be said that Donald Trump’s “Project Freedom” has failed at its very first step, like a stillborn child.

In this context, the strategic importance of Fujairah has become more pronounced than ever. Located on the coast of the Gulf of Oman, Fujairah is the only major port in the United Arab Emirates that connects directly to open waters without passing through the Strait of Hormuz. As such, it is considered a critical alternative route for energy exports. With its vast storage capacity and key role in maritime refueling, the port handles between 1.5 and 2 million barrels of oil and petroleum products daily, and tens of millions of tons of goods annually.

However, recent events have shown that even these alternative routes are not immune from risk. The explosion at Fujairah facilities served as a stark warning about the vulnerability of energy infrastructure under conditions of escalating tension. Should conflict expand further, not only the Strait of Hormuz but also alternative corridors such as Fujairah could face disruption, a scenario that would place additional pressure on global energy supply.

The consequences of such a scenario extend far beyond the region. Disruptions in Fujairah’s operations could reduce UAE oil exports, increase logistics costs, and destabilize supply chains. Globally, reduced supply and disruptions in maritime fueling would drive higher energy prices, raise transportation costs, and ultimately intensify inflation across multiple economies.

What unfolded in the Persian Gulf yesterday demonstrates that the options Trump is relying on to navigate the current crisis will not resolve America’s complex position in the region. Instead, they amount to choices between worse and even worse outcomes. It has now become clear to all that security in this region cannot be achieved through symbolic or unilateral actions, but only through sustainable arrangements and recognition of the role and standing of influential regional actors. Yesterday’s experience delivers a clear message: increasing reliance on military tools to escape the current crisis will not secure stability, instead, it becomes a factor of instability itself.