The most common critique to my view that Beijing played a fundamental role in stabilizing the oil market says China’s oil imports simply fell along with imports by every other country in Asia because Hormuz was closed. I disagree. The critique appears to be based on import data up to April, which misses the huge recovery in Asia ex-China oil imports in May (and accelerating in June-to-date data). One example: after a large drop in March and April, India's crude imports in May 2026 were HIGHER than in May 2025.
Yes, initially oil imports everywhere in Asia – including China - fell, but most countries actively sought to replace SoH barrels, reversing the trend (May, June-to-date). China, for whatever reason, decided not to bid up the market to replace the barrels it lost at all. Actually, Beijing did the opposite: it re-sold large amounts of West Africa and Latam barrels it had procured in Mar and early Apr, rather than importing them itself in May and Jun. Below is my chart/analysis based on Vortexa data. I’m not saying that China was benevolent; we don’t know the reasons why Beijing did what it did, and many of the potential explanations are far from benevolent. But the data clearly shows that from mid-April onward, China played a big role in stabilizing the global oil market.
(Note that if rather than using actual June 1-15 arrivals, I had used the estimate for the full month, based on tanker arrivals expectations, Chinese import volume would be even lower, and Asia ex-China would be higher at >14m b/d. I preferred to use the most conservative -- and negative to my own view -- data available).
Disagree on this. China's oil imports fell because the Strait of Hormuz was closed. China's imports fell along with imports by every other country in Asia. This is a total red herring and it's important to be clear on that. China did not play some benevolent stabilizing role...