Trump does to Iran what Putin did to Ukraine, progressively tightening the rope around its neck. That's why he wants Hormuz so bad.

The Greek Courier

As the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran enters its eleventh day, President Trump casually addressed the killing of 178 schoolgirls by a US missile and emphasized his belief that the military operation is progressing "very far ahead of schedule." He claimed the Iranian military is devastated, stating they have "no navy, no communications," and warning of severe repercussions if they block oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz. Trump knows that control of the Strait is the key to unlocking Iran and forcing it to surrender. Not only because bombing Iran's infrastructure will be easier, but mainly because the U.S. will be able to restrict Tehran's oil export capabilities, which could severely damage Iran’s economy and pressure the regime to the brink of collapse.

 

Iran, of course, has not said its final word. Not yet.

CBS reports: "Iran launched new attacks Tuesday at Gulf Arab countries as it keeps up pressure on the region. Incoming missile sirens sounded early in the morning in Dubai in the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, while Saudi Arabia said it had destroyed two drones over its oil-rich eastern region and Kuwait's National Guard said it had show down six drones. Israeli strikes also hit southern and eastern Lebanon overnight, state media reported Tuesday, as Israel targets the Lebanese group Hezbollah, a powerful Iran proxy. In addition to firing missiles and drones at Israel and American bases in the region, Iran has been targeting energy infrastructure, which, combined with its stranglehold on the Strait of Hormuz, has sent oil prices soaring. CBS/AP"

Casually Numb

Controversially, Trump addressed a recent attack that targeted a girls' school, stating he had suggested Iran might be responsible for the bombing, despite preliminary U.S. assessments pointing to an accidental U.S. strike. 

"I'm willing to live with that report," he declared, indicating his casual approach to the tragic incident. He is also gonna have to live with all the phantoms of the children killed in Gaza, by the bombs he sold to Netanyahu. But I guess once you get used to killing thousands, 178 schoolgirls is something you can live with.

While the crossfire lasts, with casualties rising — including nearly 400 people in Lebanon and a seventh U.S. service member  — the effectiveness and legitimacy of Trump's claims raise questions regarding the actual objectives of this operation. With the potential to establish control over the Strait of Hormuz looming, it seems Trump's ambitions may extend beyond mere military success. 

What are the implications of controlling the Strait of Hormuz?

It is in the Hegemony's interest to maintain control of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint for global oil trade, because it carries significant geopolitical and economic implications, as outlined in President Trump’s recent statements. 

Trump’s grab of the Strait will position the U.S. as a police force that will "guarantee" stability in global oil markets. Given that approximately 20% of the world’s oil passes through the strait, controlling this waterway would allow the U.S. and its allies to regulate the flow of oil as they like. If they manage to alleviate sharp price increases and stabilize energy markets, that's a trillion-dollar question. Trump has also pledged to offer political risk insurance to shippers, yet many oil transporters are still reluctant to enter the Straits. 

Geopolitical Implications

Trump's remarks suggest a willingness to pursue a more proactive military stance in the future. By potentially escorting tankers and establishing a military presence in the Strait of Hormuz, the U.S. aims to deter Iranian retaliation and assert control over maritime operations, signaling a shift from reactive to proactive military strategies. Additionally, controlling the Strait of Hormuz would grant the U.S. significant leverage over Iran by restricting its oil export capabilities, which could severely damage Iran’s economy, pressure the regime, and force it to capitulate either to an external army or to an internal revolt. 

Learning from the Russians

This is a New Age of War, both in technology and tactics, and Trump, with his generals, seems to be adopting a strategy similar to Putin's approach in Ukraine, progressively tightening the screws on Iran by bombing its infrastructure and destroying its economy. The American president revealed that the U.S. has already targeted over 5,000 sites but has deliberately withheld some of the most crucial targets for later strikes. 

"We've left some of the most important targets for later," he stated, highlighting key infrastructures like electricity production. "These are the kinds of things that are very easy to hit but can be devastating when struck. We are waiting to see what happens before we launch those attacks."

This method of systematically crippling a nation's infrastructure aims to weaken the regime and disrupt the daily lives of its population. It can also be a prelude to a ground invasion. However, the feasibility of such a strategy in Iran is complex. Unlike in Venezuela and Cuba, where the U.S. faced limited military capabilities and responses, and the countries were starved into submission, Iran possesses a more formidable military, a more robust market, and regional influence. Also, striking at vital infrastructure - like Israel did by hitting the oil industry - could exacerbate tensions and provoke a fierce retaliation, making this approach a high-stakes gamble for the American military machine. 

Nonetheless, control of the Straits of Hormuz is vital for the US military campaign. But to achieve this outcome, the U.S. will need the support of Gulf Arab states, which rely on the stability of the strait for their economic survival. Although these countries were drawn into this conflict by the U.S., they have little choice but to strengthen cooperation with the U.S. and enhance military collaboration.

Significant backlash is expected

While asserting control over the strait could deter Iranian actions, it could also escalate tensions further. Iran has historically considered its control over the strait a matter of national sovereignty, and any attempt by the U.S. to assert dominance could provoke significant backlash, including military engagements and asymmetric warfare tactics.

Trump's statements highlight the strategic importance of the Strait of Hormuz beyond just oil flow; controlling it not only shapes economic stability but also transforms military dynamics and broader regional power structures. Yet, while such control could enhance U.S. influence and dominance, it also poses substantial risks of escalation and long-term conflict in the region. The broader implications of these actions thus hinge on the delicate balance of power and the responses from Iran and the Shiite world.