MANY MINDEDThirteen countries answered the Hormuz shock by closing exports
A Brookings policy brief published July 29 by Kari Heerman and David Wessel tallies the trade response to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz: 13 countries announced 26 export restrictions on agricultural and energy goods tied to the conflict, 21 of them in energy. Thailand banned most refined petroleum exports. South Korea capped refined product exports at last year's levels. China told large refiners not to sign new export contracts and to cancel existing ones, banned certain fertiliser exports, and joined Turkey in restricting sulphuric acid; after the strait closed in July it also banned helium exports, a material semiconductor manufacturing depends on.
The underlying shock is enormous. One-fifth of the world's oil, a third of its fertiliser and 9% of its aluminium normally move through the strait, and the World Bank calls this the largest oil supply shock on record. Over 80% of the crude and LNG that usually transits goes to Asia; the Philippines cut government offices to a four-day week and limited lift and air-conditioning use, and Indonesia capped daily fuel purchases per driver. Fertiliser prices are expected to run 31% higher in 2026.
The authors' argument is the part worth carrying. Export restrictions do not create supply, they reallocate it, and the cost falls hardest on countries that must import. Each one also teaches every other government that markets close under stress, pushing them toward stockpiles and subsidised domestic production — resilience bought permanently with public money instead of cheaply through trade.
This is analysis, not reporting, and its central claim concerns expectations, which are hard to measure. The authors cite the 2006-08 food crisis, where such policies were estimated to explain roughly 45% of the rise in world rice prices, as precedent.
Source: Google News