(The Wall Street Journal, Reza Bundy, April 15, 2026)
The United States has developed a greater tolerance for instability in the Persian Gulf because its economy, as the world’s largest producer of oil and gas with robust capital markets, is best equipped to absorb shocks and attract capital seeking safety, while China’s growth heavily depends on hydrocarbon imports passing through the Strait of Hormuz.
Recent disruptions, such as the 2019 attack on the Saudi Abqaiq facilities that halted 5.7 million barrels per day and the rise in insurance costs in the Red Sea due to Houthi attacks, have shown that the global energy infrastructure is fragile and that such instabilities impose asymmetric costs on competitors without hitting America as hard.
In this context of rivalry with China, Washington no longer sees interdependence as a brake on conflict but as a map of vulnerabilities to exploit, preferring to shape the terms of instability rather than always restoring stability, thus consolidating its advantages in energy, capital, and alliances.
Eroded assumption about energy infrastructure
“For nearly half a century, the Persian Gulf energy infrastructure was considered untouchable. The assumption was that, being so crucial to the global economy, no country would deliberately disturb it. That assumption is eroding.”
American advantage from instability
“America, the architect of the system, is also the actor best positioned to benefit from its selective erosion. Our economy is better equipped than most to absorb shocks and attract capital seeking safety.”
Iran and calibrated disruption strategy
“Iran does not need a decisive military victory. Its leverage lies in calibrated disruption: pressure on maritime routes, targeted attacks on infrastructure, activation of proxy networks. The goal is to impose costs while preserving the regime.”
Lesson from the Abqaiq attack
“The episode demonstrated something the market could no longer ignore: the world’s most critical energy hub could be disabled overnight by a swarm of low-cost drones.”
Change in the liberal order
“The architects of the liberal order are now using it as it could always be used: as a pressure tool by those who designed it, directed at those most dependent on it.”
(Excerpt from the newsletter by Giuseppe Liturri)
