Unless there's a single buyer, or at least a coordinated decision of "above this price, we all buy nothing, and below this price we all buy our normal amounts", it truly does matter what the price is when there's not enough for sale.
The price is determined by who needs it the most and is willing to give up the most cash. Instead of rationing by lines, or fixed quantities, it's allocation to those who can either make the most out of the jet fuel, or those for whom money is the least valuable.
And when your supply of jet fuel is cut off? If you don't ration and let the free market decide how to allocate it, how long do you think it lasts until you say "jet fuel doesn't exist"?
The scenario being faced is not a complete cession of the existence of jet fuel, it is a supply shortage. There is a split based on pre-existing contractual obligations: absent such obligations, who offers the most money, gets the fuel; But those who have pre-existing contractual obligations they find cannot be met, they default on those obligations.
Rationing can be useful when a government decides the market is allocating contrary to the national best interest, for whatever reason. As with market pricing, it's not going to magic new resources out of nowhere.
The price is determined by who needs it the most and is willing to give up the most cash. Instead of rationing by lines, or fixed quantities, it's allocation to those who can either make the most out of the jet fuel, or those for whom money is the least valuable.