Great Powers’ Competition in the Persian Gulf: the Evolving Roles of China Amid a Recalibrating United States

Great power competition in the Persian Gulf is reshaping maritime security, energy routes, and port governance as China and Russia expand roles and U.S. influence recalibrates.

Why this topic matters for maritime operations

For centuries, the Persian Gulf has been a crossroads of trade, energy, and power. Today, it sits at the center of a renewed contest among major states—one defined less by direct confrontation and more by overlapping economic, naval, and diplomatic footprints. As China and Russia deepen their engagement across ports, energy projects, and security partnerships, the United States is recalibrating its long-standing role. For maritime professionals—shipowners, operators, insurers, port authorities, and seafarers—these shifts matter because they influence routing decisions, risk profiles, port access, sanctions exposure, and the reliability of global supply chains.

This article explains how great power competition is unfolding across the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, why it matters for maritime operations, and what trends are likely to shape the next decade. The analysis prioritizes practical implications, clear explanations, and real-world examples for a global audience, including non-native English readers.

The Persian Gulf–Hormuz corridor carries a significant share of the world’s seaborne oil and LNG. Even modest geopolitical frictions can ripple quickly through freight rates, insurance premiums, bunker planning, and port calls. When naval postures change, sanctions regimes tighten or loosen, or infrastructure investment shifts hands, ship operators feel the impact first—often before headlines catch up.

–

The strategic geography that anchors competition

Energy density and chokepoint risk

The Persian Gulf’s strategic value rests on two facts. First, it hosts dense clusters of upstream production, refineries, petrochemical complexes, and export terminals. Second, nearly all east–west flows converge at the narrow Strait of Hormuz. For shipping, this creates both efficiency and vulnerability: efficiency because routes are short and predictable; vulnerability because any disruption—political, military, or environmental—has global consequences.

Ports as power multipliers

Ports are no longer neutral logistics nodes. They are instruments of influence. Investment in terminals, digital port systems, ship repair yards, and bunkering hubs can translate into long-term presence and soft power. In the Persian Gulf, this logic underpins the growing interest of China and Russia, while the United States increasingly emphasizes freedom of navigation and coalition security rather than ownership of infrastructure.

 

The United States: from dominant guarantor to selective engager

For decades, the United States underwrote maritime security in the south of the Persian Gulf, ensuring open sea lanes and deterring state-on-state conflict. Its naval presence —to some extent— reassured insurers and operators that commercial traffic would continue. This role aligned with Washington’s energy dependence and alliance commitments.

In recent years, U.S. policy has shifted toward burden-sharing and selective engagement. The goal is not abandonment, but efficiency: fewer permanent deployments, more rotational presence, and greater reliance on partners. For maritime operators, this translates into a more complex security picture. Freedom of navigation remains a core principle, but responses to incidents may involve coalitions rather than unilateral action.

The core of contemporary U.S. policy, as outlined in its recent National Security Strategy, is an explicit “America First” doctrine where every region is assessed solely by how it serves American interests. While the U.S.-Israel alliance is a deep and vital partnership, the broader Middle East, including the Persian Gulf, is no longer considered a top strategic priority for Washington as attention shifts to the Asia-Pacific. The approach now emphasises managing interests through regional partners to ensure stability, rather than prioritizing one nation’s interests over another’s.

The recalibration affects daily decisions. Operators must track advisories, coordinate with naval coalitions, and plan contingencies for insurance and crew safety. The United States still shapes the rules of the road—through maritime law, sanctions enforcement, and naval norms—but it increasingly shares the stage with other powers.

China: economic statecraft meets maritime ambition

China’s interest in the Persian Gulf is straightforward: energy security. As one of the world’s largest importers of oil and LNG, Beijing seeks diversified supply routes, long-term contracts, and stable port access. This has translated into investments across terminals, storage facilities, and industrial zones—often bundled with financing and technology.

Chinese firms are active across container terminals, bulk facilities, and logistics parks, frequently integrating digital port systems that improve efficiency and data visibility. For maritime operators, these investments can mean modernized facilities and faster turnaround times. They also raise questions about data governance and strategic dependence—issues increasingly discussed in boardrooms and ministries alike.

China’s naval footprint in the Persian Gulf remains modest compared with the United States, but it is growing in sophistication. Anti-piracy deployments, joint exercises, and port visits signal a desire to protect sea lines of communication without provoking confrontation. For shipping, this may add layers of security cooperation, particularly for Chinese-flagged or China-bound cargoes.

The emerging West-East corridor, often called the “New Silk Road” or part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), represents a major strategic overland route from Western China to Iran and onward to Turkey and Europe. This network, most directly realized by a railway linking Xi’an to Tehran, cuts through Central Asia and significantly reduces China’s dependence on vulnerable sea lanes like the Strait of Malacca and the Persian Gulf. For China, its importance is multifaceted, centering on securing trade, energy, and geopolitical influence.

Key Strategic Importance for China:

This corridor moves China closer to its long-term goal of creating a multipolar world where its trade, energy supplies, and strategic partnerships are insulated from Western pressure

Russia: opportunistic engagement and energy diplomacy

Russia’s role in the Persian Gulf has expanded through energy diplomacy and arms cooperation rather than large-scale port ownership. Moscow positions itself as a flexible partner, engaging with multiple Gulf states simultaneously. This approach allows it to leverage expertise in hydrocarbons, nuclear energy, and defense without heavy capital outlays.

Russian naval activity in the region is episodic but symbolically significant. Joint drills and port calls demonstrate reach and partnership, even if Russia lacks the sustained logistics network of the United States or China. For maritime professionals, the practical impact is limited day-to-day, but the signaling contributes to a more crowded security environment.

The International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) is a multi-modal network linking Russia to India via the Persian Gulf and Iran, primarily utilizing Iranian ports like Bandar Abbas. For Russia, this corridor is a strategic alternative to traditional Western routes, offering a reliable trade pathway to major Asian markets despite sanctions, while also bolstering its geopolitical influence in Central Asia and the Middle East. For India, it significantly reduces the cost and time of freight compared to the Suez Canal route, enhances energy security through improved access to Russian and Central Asian resources, and provides a crucial overland bridge to Eurasia, deepening its economic and strategic footprint. Together, it represents a cornerstone of their bilateral partnership, reducing mutual dependency on other global chokepoints.

Russia’s expanded engagement intersects with evolving sanctions regimes. Ship operators must be vigilant about charter-party clauses, cargo provenance, and payment channels. Compliance risk has become a core operational consideration, influencing which ports are called and how trades are structured.

India: strategic consumer becoming security stakeholder

India’s role in the Persian Gulf is defined by an inescapable geographic dependency: approximately 50% of its crude oil and 54% of its LNG imports transit the Strait of Hormuz, making regional stability a core national security interest. This imperative is transforming India from a passive consumer into an active, multi-aligned security partner for Persian Gulf states. It has established defense partnerships across the region, conducting regular naval exercises with Oman, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and others, while deploying its own naval vessels near the Persian Gulf’s mouth to protect shipping lanes. For maritime operators, this expanding Indian naval presence offers an additional layer of regional security coordination, particularly in anti-piracy and freedom of navigation.

However, this engagement is tempered by strategic limits. India pursues a bilateral, transactional approach focused on energy and economic ties, deliberately avoiding entanglements in regional conflicts and lacking an overarching security strategy to match U.S. or Chinese frameworks. Consequently, while India’s role as a reliable security partner is growing, it operates within a self-imposed constraint, balancing deep energy ties with Iran against strong defense relations with Israe.l and the Persian Gulf states, reflecting a cautious multi-alignment that seeks influence without over-commitment.

The International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) is a multi-modal network linking Russia to India via the Persian Gulf and Iran, primarily utilizing Iranian ports like Bandar Abbas. For Russia, this corridor is a strategic alternative to traditional Western routes, offering a reliable trade pathway to major Asian markets despite sanctions, while also bolstering its geopolitical influence in Central Asia and the Middle East. For India, it significantly reduces the cost and time of freight compared to the Suez Canal route, enhances energy security through improved access to Russian and Central Asian resources, and provides a crucial overland bridge to Eurasia, deepening its economic and strategic footprint. Together, it represents a cornerstone of their bilateral partnership, reducing mutual dependency on other global chokepoints.

 

Multipolar dynamics: competition without a single hegemon

Overlapping partnerships

One defining feature of the current era is overlap. Gulf states maintain security ties with the United States, economic partnerships with China, and pragmatic cooperation with Russia. This multipolarity reduces dependence on any single power but increases complexity for maritime operations.

Maritime governance under strain

Institutions and norms—such as those developed by the International Maritime Organization—remain the backbone of safety and environmental protection. Yet enforcement and interpretation increasingly reflect geopolitical realities. Operators must navigate global rules applied in regional contexts shaped by power politics.

–

Challenges and practical solutions for maritime stakeholders

Insurance, security, and crew welfare

Periods of tension can raise war risk premiums and complicate crew rotations. Practical solutions include flexible routing, real-time intelligence, and robust crew welfare protocols. Transparent communication with seafarers is essential to maintain trust and morale.

Port access and sanctions risk

As competition intensifies, ports may become associated—rightly or wrongly—with particular geopolitical blocs. Operators should maintain diversified port options and conduct rigorous due diligence. Legal counsel and P&I clubs are indispensable partners in this environment.

Digital resilience

With increased reliance on digital port systems and navigation tools, cyber risk grows. Best practice includes redundancy, crew training, and alignment with classification society guidance from bodies such as Lloyd’s Register and DNV.

–

Case studies and real-world applications

–  Energy exports during heightened tensions

When regional tensions rise, export schedules tighten and vessels cluster at anchorages. Operators who pre-arrange bunkers, crew changes, and documentation fare better than those reacting at the last minute. The lesson is simple: preparation is a competitive advantage.

–  Port investment as diplomacy

Chinese-backed terminal upgrades have improved efficiency in several Gulf ports, benefiting global liners. At the same time, U.S.-led security initiatives reassure insurers. The coexistence of these approaches illustrates how competition can yield tangible operational benefits—if managed carefully.

–

FAQ

1. Is the United States leaving the Persian Gulf?
No. The United States is recalibrating its presence, emphasizing partnerships and flexibility rather than permanent dominance.

2. Why is China investing so heavily in Gulf ports?
To secure energy supplies, integrate logistics chains, and expand economic influence through infrastructure.

3. Does Russia pose a direct challenge to U.S. naval power in the Gulf?
Russia’s challenge is indirect, focusing on diplomacy and selective maritime signaling rather than sustained naval presence.

4. How does this competition affect shipping costs?
It can influence insurance premiums, security surcharges, and port efficiency—sometimes raising costs, sometimes improving services.

5. What should ship operators prioritize?
Risk awareness, compliance diligence, diversified port strategies, and strong communication with crews and insurers.

6. Will international maritime rules change?
The rules are stable, but enforcement and interpretation may vary by context, making local knowledge essential.

–

Future outlook and maritime trends

A steadier but more complex equilibrium

The most likely scenario is not dramatic withdrawal or dominance by a single power, but a steadier equilibrium with shared influence. The United States remains the primary security guarantor; China deepens economic integration; Russia acts as a strategic balancer. For maritime operators, this means planning for continuity amid complexity.

Energy transition reshapes competition

As LNG, alternative fuels, and decarbonization advance, competition will extend to new infrastructures—LNG bunkering, green corridors, and digital compliance systems. Early movers among Gulf ports may attract disproportionate traffic, reinforcing the link between geopolitics and maritime innovation.

To conclude, the great power competition in the Persian Gulf is reshaping the maritime landscape in subtle but important ways. As China and Russia expand their roles and the United States refines its approach, shipping remains both beneficiary and barometer of change. For maritime professionals, success lies in understanding these dynamics, preparing for complexity, and leveraging opportunities without underestimating risk. The Persian Gulf will remain a vital artery of global trade—and those who navigate its evolving geopolitics with insight and flexibility will be best positioned for the years ahead.

–

Main References

• International Maritime Organization – Safety, environmental, and security frameworks for global shipping.

• UNCTAD – Maritime transport statistics and trade analysis.

• World Bank – Port development and infrastructure finance insights.

• Lloyd’s List Intelligence – Market intelligence on shipping and geopolitics.

• Marine Policy – Peer-reviewed analysis of maritime governance and geopolitics.