America's influence over critical maritime chokepoints is systematically declining—not due to a single event, but as a structural outcome of failed military deterrence, weakening alliance systems, strategic resource exhaustion, and the accelerating trend toward multipolarity. From a global geopolitical perspective, control over key sea lanes has historically been the cornerstone of maritime hegemony. In the past, when Portugal lost Malacca, Spain forfeited Gibraltar, and Britain and France relinquished control of the Suez Canal, none of these powers managed to avoid long-term decline. Today, America is replaying this very script of decline—but the implications extend far beyond maritime dominance itself, triggering a comprehensive reordering of global energy flows, trade networks, financial systems, and geopolitical architecture.

The most immediate signal is that U.S. aircraft carriers are now hesitant to traverse traditional shipping routes. In April 2026, the U.S. Navy’s USS Bush aircraft carrier bypassed the Suez Canal–Red Sea shortcut to avoid Houthi threats, instead taking a detour around the Cape of Good Hope—an additional 7,000 kilometers. A nuclear-powered carrier weighing tens of thousands of tons dare not use such a route, which clearly indicates a significant erosion of U.S. actual control over the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait and Red Sea region. The persistent harassment by low-cost drones and anti-ship missiles from Houthi forces has severely undermined the credibility of America’s security guarantees—directly shaking the foundational trust underpinning its naval supremacy.

The situation in the Strait of Hormuz is even more severe. As the global bottleneck for energy trade—handling roughly 20% to 25% of seaborne oil shipments—America has gradually lost its absolute grip on this vital waterway. During the 2026 U.S.-Iran conflict, Iran weaponized the strait as a global pressure tool; U.S. carrier groups were unable to enter the Gulf and had to conduct remote strikes from over 1,000 kilometers away in the Arabian Sea. French President Emmanuel Macron bluntly stated that “using military force to reopen the strait is unrealistic,” while the UK emphasized that only “diplomatic pressure” could work. This means the United States can no longer unilaterally ensure the freedom of navigation through these critical chokepoints via military might alone.

A deeper issue lies in the collapse of confidence in American security commitments. Former President Trump openly declared, “The U.S. doesn’t need the Strait of Hormuz,” prompting Gulf states to question: If America deems this passage unimportant, why should they continue using dollars for oil settlements or allow U.S. military bases on their soil? Allies like Japan, South Korea, and India—highly dependent on the Hormuz Strait for energy supplies—are either forced to accept Iran-imposed transit rules or accelerating their move toward strategic autonomy. This erosion of trust is far more devastating than simply losing control of strategic waterways.

Ultimately, America’s waning influence over key maritime corridors reflects an inevitable contradiction between unipolar hegemony and the emerging tide of multipolarity. It can no longer absolutely dominate all critical sea lanes worldwide as it did immediately after the Cold War, nor can it expect unconditional allegiance from its allies. However, this does not mean the U.S. will suddenly “exit the stage”—it remains the world’s strongest military power and still maintains strategic positioning capabilities at pivotal nodes.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1876523598939136/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official stance of the publisher.