MacroVoices #541 Dr. Anas Alhajji: Bab el-Mandeb: The Next Oil Chokepoint Nobody's Watching

In this extended interview, Dr. Anas Al-Hajji presents a geopolitical thesis arguing that the Trump administration intentionally orchestrated the closure of the Strait of Hormuz not as a response to Iranian nuclear threats, but as a strategic demonstration of U.S. energy and AI dominance to China. He claims the U.S. signaled this intention a year before the conflict erupted and that China responded by building massive strategic petroleum reserves in anticipation.

According to Al-Hajji, the Hormuz closure was executed cleverly through insurance companies rather than military force. The U.S. Navy's attack on an Iranian boat near Sri Lanka triggered EU solvency rules requiring insurance companies to expand coverage to the entire Indian Ocean, causing them to cancel all war policies within seven days. This legal mechanism trapped tankers in the Persian Gulf without firing a shot, demonstrating the administration's control over energy flows.

However, the strategy went awry when IRGC hardline extremist elements, who have profited enormously from sanctions and the black market, refused to cooperate with the Iranian government's negotiators seeking to reopen the strait. Al-Hajji characterizes these elements as acting like a drug cartel—unwilling to surrender control, bribes, and prestige that the strait's closure provides them. The Trump administration underestimated their power and lack of desire to negotiate, leaving the U.S. unable to reopen the strait despite signing an initial MOU.

Al-Hajji shifts focus to Bab el-Mandeb, the southern entrance to the Red Sea, as the next critical chokepoint. A recent Houthi attack on a Saudi airport broke a previously stable ceasefire agreement between Saudi Arabia and the Houthis, raising the risk of renewed attacks on ships carrying approximately 6 million barrels daily of Russian and Saudi oil. Even temporary closures could trigger insurance cancellations, with severe consequences for global supply.

On market dynamics, Al-Hajji explains that the perception of massive global inventory declines is misleading. Most reductions came from strategic petroleum reserves, not commercial inventories, particularly in the U.S. and Japan. Commercial inventories remain ample. He emphasizes that the real crisis is in refined products, not crude, noting that medium-sour crude prices exceeded $170 in Asia during the conflict—far above Brent and WTI prices that analysts typically cite. This demand destruction already occurred at these elevated prices, reducing the likelihood of future price spikes to $100-150 unless additional chokepoints close.

Al-Hajji criticizes the administration's energy dominance strategy for focusing on upstream production while neglecting refining capacity expansion. U.S. refineries operate at 96-97% capacity, constraining the ability to process additional crude. The diesel shortage proved particularly severe, with three major Gulf refineries losing export capacity and other countries panicking and restricting petroleum product exports, exacerbating global shortages.

On the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, he argues the U.S. can legally and technically drain it far below the 250 million barrel floor (which is legal, not technical) without major consequences, given America's net exporter status and shale production. He notes the asymmetry between release rates (up to 1.9 million barrels daily) and injection rates (maximum 400,000 barrels daily), meaning SPR refilling will not significantly support prices.

For post-Hormuz solutions, Al-Hajji proposes that OPEC+ focus on building massive distributed strategic reserves with consuming nations—particularly India—rather than constructing vulnerable pipelines. This creates strategic interdependence and ensures producer revenues survive even if major straits close. He recommends changing OPEC+ bylaws from production-focus to export-focus and including all liquids, not just crude.

Al-Hajji identifies what he calls the "ghost of Hormuz"—a permanent sensitivity where any event, tweet, or unconfirmed report about the strait immediately impacts oil prices. He argues this is irreversible; even with a final settlement, future opportunists will exploit the market's knowledge of the strait's criticality.

For investment strategy, he strongly recommends U.S. LNG and coal companies as beneficiaries of governments prioritizing energy security alongside AI development. The combination of geopolitical risk, AI's massive power demands, and energy security concerns creates structural demand for natural gas and coal for decades.