US reroutes jet fuel supplies to Pacific bases amid Strait of Hormuz tensions, exposing fragility of global oil-military logistics

Indigenous communities near US military logistics hubs face compounded harms: the Lummi Nation's opposition to BP's Cherry Point refinery stems from treaty rights violations and ecological degradation, while Filipino activists warn of renewed militarisation of Subic Bay displacing local fishermen. These groups' knowledge of sustainable land and marine stewardship is systematically excluded from energy-security narratives, despite offering alternatives to fossil-fuel dependency. Their perspectives reveal how 'energy security' for militaries often translates to insecurity for Indigenous peoples.

The US's reliance on Pacific fuel routes echoes Cold War-era arrangements, such as the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty with the Philippines, which institutionalised American military access in exchange for energy and logistical support. The Strait of Hormuz's closure risks mirroring the 1973 oil shock, when OPEC embargoes exposed the fragility of Western energy systems built on extraction and geopolitical leverage. Subic Bay's history as a US naval base (1898–1992) shows how military logistics hubs become sites of environmental and social conflict, with long-term legacies of pollution and displacement.

In Southeast Asia, energy security is often framed through the lens of sovereignty, with countries like Vietnam and Indonesia balancing US military partnerships against China's economic influence. Japan's post-Fukushima energy policy, which prioritised renewables over fossil fuels, contrasts with its current military fuel dependence, revealing a tension between short-term security and long-term resilience. Pacific Island nations, meanwhile, face existential threats from climate change exacerbated by fossil fuel extraction, yet their calls for renewable transitions are sidelined in great-power energy strategies.

Military fuel logistics are a critical but understudied node in global oil supply chains, with the US Department of Defense consuming ~85% of the US government's jet fuel in 2022. The Strait of Hormuz's closure would disrupt ~20% of global oil transit, but the US's Pacific rerouting strategy assumes stable weather and geopolitical conditions—a high-risk assumption given climate-induced disruptions. Studies show that military bases are disproportionately sited in biodiversity hotspots, exacerbating ecological damage from fuel spills and emissions.

Artists in the Philippines have long used protest music and visual art to critique US military presence, framing it as a violation of ancestral lands and waters. In the US, Indigenous-led performances at Cherry Point refinery sites blend spiritual ceremonies with environmental activism, asserting treaty rights as a form of resistance. These creative acts challenge the militarised narrative of 'energy security,' instead proposing a spiritual duty to protect land and water for future generations.

Scenario modelling suggests that a prolonged Strait of Hormuz closure could trigger a 10–15% spike in global oil prices, straining US-Pacific logistics and accelerating shifts toward renewable military fuels. Alternative futures include regional alliances (e.g., ASEAN energy grids) that reduce dependence on US fuel routes, or escalating conflicts over chokepoints like Malacca and Lombok Straits. Climate change will further destabilise these routes, necessitating adaptive strategies that prioritise resilience over extraction.

Filipino fisherfolk near Subic Bay report declining catches linked to military pollution, yet their testimonies are excluded from energy-security debates. Lummi Nation elders warn that BP's refinery expansions threaten sacred sites, with no federal consultation despite treaty obligations. In Japan, Okinawa's anti-base movement highlights how local communities bear the brunt of US military logistics, from noise pollution to fuel spills, while national security narratives silence their dissent.