Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump's pressure strategy against Iran may be reaching its breaking point, because Tehran's answer to more pressure is more war Treasury Sec. Scott Bessent says Washington is preparing to move from “Epic Fury” to “Economic Fury,” with unprecedented measures designed to isolate Iran and squeeze its economy even...

MarioNawfal's profile picture

Mario Nawfal

3,835,954 subscribers

281,298 Aufrufe • vor 7 Tagen •via X (Twitter)

Wissenschaft & TechnologieNachrichten & PolitikFinanzen
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

🇺🇸❌🇮🇷 Trump is preparing to tighten the economic noose around an already battered Iran, betting that unprecedented financial pressure can force Tehran into a deal without immediately returning to large-scale military strikes. According to Bloomberg, the Trump administration is preparing “unprecedented economic measures” against Iran, with the goal of forcing Tehran toward an agreement before the November midterm elections. The move suggests that, for now, Trump prefers economic pressure and diplomacy over renewed strikes, despite calls from parts of the U.S. military leadership for a tougher military approach. Washington’s strategy now appears to be straightforward: use Iran’s weakened post-war economy as the battlefield and sanctions as the weapon. Tehran may have survived the military campaign, but if the U.S. can further restrict its oil revenues, financial access and ability to rebuild, Trump could try to achieve through economic strangulation what another costly round of warfare might not guarantee. See the latest updates with us: Visioner
0:26

🇺🇸❌🇮🇷 Trump is preparing to tighten the economic noose around an already battered Iran, betting that unprecedented financial pressure can force Tehran into a deal without immediately returning to large-scale military strikes. According to Bloomberg, the Trump administration is preparing “unprecedented economic measures” against Iran, with the goal of forcing Tehran toward an agreement before the November midterm elections. The move suggests that, for now, Trump prefers economic pressure and diplomacy over renewed strikes, despite calls from parts of the U.S. military leadership for a tougher military approach. Washington’s strategy now appears to be straightforward: use Iran’s weakened post-war economy as the battlefield and sanctions as the weapon. Tehran may have survived the military campaign, but if the U.S. can further restrict its oil revenues, financial access and ability to rebuild, Trump could try to achieve through economic strangulation what another costly round of warfare might not guarantee. See the latest updates with us: Visioner

Visioner

18,048 Aufrufe • vor 6 Tagen

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump's immediate objective is simple: get the U.S. out of the Strait of Hormuz without allowing Iran to dictate who passes through it. The problem is that Tehran now sees Hormuz as its leverage. That may be the central problem with Washington's strategy. Economic warfare can avoid a ground invasion and nuclear escalation. But if Iran believes control of Hormuz is essential to its survival, sanctions may only convince Tehran to hold the strait tighter. The war may have moved from missiles to economics. The underlying confrontation hasn't moved an inch. Brandon Weichert
4:03

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump's immediate objective is simple: get the U.S. out of the Strait of Hormuz without allowing Iran to dictate who passes through it. The problem is that Tehran now sees Hormuz as its leverage. That may be the central problem with Washington's strategy. Economic warfare can avoid a ground invasion and nuclear escalation. But if Iran believes control of Hormuz is essential to its survival, sanctions may only convince Tehran to hold the strait tighter. The war may have moved from missiles to economics. The underlying confrontation hasn't moved an inch. Brandon Weichert

Mario Nawfal

68,357 Aufrufe • vor 23 Stunden

🇺🇸🇨🇳🇮🇷 Beijing's alternative payment networks aren't necessarily designed to kill the dollar. They're insurance. If Washington can threaten China with sanctions, tariffs and financial restrictions, China has an obvious incentive to build a system that makes those threats less effective. And that matters for Iran. Washington may be trying to use economic pressure to isolate Tehran, while its biggest economic partner is building ways to make that pressure harder to enforce. The irony is brutal: The more aggressively the U.S. weaponizes the financial system, the more incentive its rivals have to build a system that can operate without it. Brandon Weichert
2:39

🇺🇸🇨🇳🇮🇷 Beijing's alternative payment networks aren't necessarily designed to kill the dollar. They're insurance. If Washington can threaten China with sanctions, tariffs and financial restrictions, China has an obvious incentive to build a system that makes those threats less effective. And that matters for Iran. Washington may be trying to use economic pressure to isolate Tehran, while its biggest economic partner is building ways to make that pressure harder to enforce. The irony is brutal: The more aggressively the U.S. weaponizes the financial system, the more incentive its rivals have to build a system that can operate without it. Brandon Weichert

Mario Nawfal

60,078 Aufrufe • vor 23 Stunden

🇺🇸🇮🇷 The biggest concern isn't whether Iran will eventually concede, but what Washington is risking to force that concession. The U.S. is once again weaponizing the dollar while Treasury markets are already under pressure and foreign central banks are increasingly turning toward gold. That is the paradox. Even if economic warfare forces Tehran to give Washington something in the short term, the long-term cost could be a financial system that gives America's rivals even more reason to build alternatives to it. A tactical win in Iran could become a strategic loss for U.S. financial power. Brandon Weichert
4:11

🇺🇸🇮🇷 The biggest concern isn't whether Iran will eventually concede, but what Washington is risking to force that concession. The U.S. is once again weaponizing the dollar while Treasury markets are already under pressure and foreign central banks are increasingly turning toward gold. That is the paradox. Even if economic warfare forces Tehran to give Washington something in the short term, the long-term cost could be a financial system that gives America's rivals even more reason to build alternatives to it. A tactical win in Iran could become a strategic loss for U.S. financial power. Brandon Weichert

Mario Nawfal

38,076 Aufrufe • vor 23 Stunden

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump may be making the biggest strategic miscalculation of the war. Geopolitical analyst Brandon Weichert believes the White House is assuming one overwhelming show of force will push Iran back to the negotiating table. He thinks the opposite will happen. According to reports discussed in the interview, Washington is weighing a large-scale campaign targeting not only military sites, but potentially Iran's energy infrastructure as well. Brandon believes the logic is simple. Hit Iran hard enough, demonstrate overwhelming American power, then negotiate from a position of strength. He doesn't think Tehran sees it that way. His argument is that Washington is treating Iran like a conventional state that responds primarily to military pressure. Iran, he says, defines legitimacy through resistance. The harder it's hit, the harder it becomes politically for Tehran to compromise. That's why Brandon believes a major U.S. campaign wouldn't be the final round. It would simply be the start of the next one. The U.S. may be able to destroy what it can find. But it can never be certain it found everything. Meanwhile, Iran only needs to keep enough capability intact to continue imposing costs. Brandon believes that asymmetry favors Tehran over time. If Iran refuses to bend, what started as escalation could well become an open-ended war neither side knows how to end. Brandon Weichert
42:29

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump may be making the biggest strategic miscalculation of the war. Geopolitical analyst Brandon Weichert believes the White House is assuming one overwhelming show of force will push Iran back to the negotiating table. He thinks the opposite will happen. According to reports discussed in the interview, Washington is weighing a large-scale campaign targeting not only military sites, but potentially Iran's energy infrastructure as well. Brandon believes the logic is simple. Hit Iran hard enough, demonstrate overwhelming American power, then negotiate from a position of strength. He doesn't think Tehran sees it that way. His argument is that Washington is treating Iran like a conventional state that responds primarily to military pressure. Iran, he says, defines legitimacy through resistance. The harder it's hit, the harder it becomes politically for Tehran to compromise. That's why Brandon believes a major U.S. campaign wouldn't be the final round. It would simply be the start of the next one. The U.S. may be able to destroy what it can find. But it can never be certain it found everything. Meanwhile, Iran only needs to keep enough capability intact to continue imposing costs. Brandon believes that asymmetry favors Tehran over time. If Iran refuses to bend, what started as escalation could well become an open-ended war neither side knows how to end. Brandon Weichert

Mario Nawfal

374,538 Aufrufe • vor 20 Tagen

‼️🇺🇸🇮🇷 BIG | President Donald Trump says the United States is currently "low-keying it" with Iran, signaling that Washington is holding back from another major military escalation while allowing economic pressure on Tehran to build. According to Axios, Trump said the U.S. is maintaining only limited negotiations with Iran while closely watching the country's deteriorating economic situation. "We're only semi-negotiating with them. We're just watching Iran with its huge inflation and the fact that they have no money," Trump said. The president argued that Iran is in "very bad shape" economically and is even struggling to pay its military personnel, while the U.S. naval blockade continues to intensify financial pressure on Tehran. Trump suggested that Washington is prepared to wait rather than immediately return to large-scale military operations, calculating that mounting economic pressure could eventually force Iran toward a more favorable agreement. "It will work out. It always works out. It's like a chess game," Trump said of the confrontation with Tehran. The remarks indicate that, for now, Washington appears willing to let economic pressure do much of the work while keeping military escalation available as leverage if diplomacy fails. See the latest updates with us: Visioner
0:30

‼️🇺🇸🇮🇷 BIG | President Donald Trump says the United States is currently "low-keying it" with Iran, signaling that Washington is holding back from another major military escalation while allowing economic pressure on Tehran to build. According to Axios, Trump said the U.S. is maintaining only limited negotiations with Iran while closely watching the country's deteriorating economic situation. "We're only semi-negotiating with them. We're just watching Iran with its huge inflation and the fact that they have no money," Trump said. The president argued that Iran is in "very bad shape" economically and is even struggling to pay its military personnel, while the U.S. naval blockade continues to intensify financial pressure on Tehran. Trump suggested that Washington is prepared to wait rather than immediately return to large-scale military operations, calculating that mounting economic pressure could eventually force Iran toward a more favorable agreement. "It will work out. It always works out. It's like a chess game," Trump said of the confrontation with Tehran. The remarks indicate that, for now, Washington appears willing to let economic pressure do much of the work while keeping military escalation available as leverage if diplomacy fails. See the latest updates with us: Visioner

Visioner

51,776 Aufrufe • vor 11 Tagen

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump is demanding reparations from Iran while Tehran is increasingly concluding there is no point negotiating with him at all. And while Washington waits for Tehran to crack, the Middle East is quietly building a security order designed to rely less on America. Trump told Axios that Washington is only "semi-negotiating" with Tehran and is essentially waiting for its economy to implode. Iran's currency has collapsed, inflation is crushing the country, and Trump thinks this pressure will eventually force Tehran to blink. There’s just one problem: Iran appears increasingly willing to wait him out. Tehran has already demonstrated that it can absorb enormous military and economic punishment without collapsing. And if Iranian leaders conclude Trump cannot be trusted to honour an agreement anyway, why make major concessions to an administration that will be gone in a few years? That creates a potentially dangerous stalemate, and Hormuz sits right in the middle. Trump may ultimately be prepared to walk away without meaningful concessions on the nuclear issue if he can just get the Strait properly reopened. Iran, however, is discussing a dramatically different future for Hormuz; one where Tehran decides which vessels can transit, hostile states face restrictions and violations can trigger fees or penalties. In other words: Trump wants the old Strait back, but Iran appears increasingly determined that version of it no longer exists. And despite his insistence that the economic pressure is working, the underlying energy problem hasn't disappeared. America's Strategic Petroleum Reserve is still being drawn down, China is also returning to the oil market after months of reduced buying, and so the clock isn't only ticking on Tehran, it's ticking on Washington too. And underneath all of this, something potentially much bigger is happening. Saudi Arabia, Turkey and nuclear-armed Pakistan are building a new defence partnership. Israel is openly alarmed, while Iran, surprisingly, is welcoming it. Tehran's foreign ministry now describes the pact as evidence that regional countries have realised they can no longer rely on the U.S and other outside powers to guarantee their security. That may ultimately be the biggest story here. America spent decades building a Middle Eastern security system with Washington at its centre. Instead, the region may now be moving in the opposite direction. Brandon Weichert
49:02

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump is demanding reparations from Iran while Tehran is increasingly concluding there is no point negotiating with him at all. And while Washington waits for Tehran to crack, the Middle East is quietly building a security order designed to rely less on America. Trump told Axios that Washington is only "semi-negotiating" with Tehran and is essentially waiting for its economy to implode. Iran's currency has collapsed, inflation is crushing the country, and Trump thinks this pressure will eventually force Tehran to blink. There’s just one problem: Iran appears increasingly willing to wait him out. Tehran has already demonstrated that it can absorb enormous military and economic punishment without collapsing. And if Iranian leaders conclude Trump cannot be trusted to honour an agreement anyway, why make major concessions to an administration that will be gone in a few years? That creates a potentially dangerous stalemate, and Hormuz sits right in the middle. Trump may ultimately be prepared to walk away without meaningful concessions on the nuclear issue if he can just get the Strait properly reopened. Iran, however, is discussing a dramatically different future for Hormuz; one where Tehran decides which vessels can transit, hostile states face restrictions and violations can trigger fees or penalties. In other words: Trump wants the old Strait back, but Iran appears increasingly determined that version of it no longer exists. And despite his insistence that the economic pressure is working, the underlying energy problem hasn't disappeared. America's Strategic Petroleum Reserve is still being drawn down, China is also returning to the oil market after months of reduced buying, and so the clock isn't only ticking on Tehran, it's ticking on Washington too. And underneath all of this, something potentially much bigger is happening. Saudi Arabia, Turkey and nuclear-armed Pakistan are building a new defence partnership. Israel is openly alarmed, while Iran, surprisingly, is welcoming it. Tehran's foreign ministry now describes the pact as evidence that regional countries have realised they can no longer rely on the U.S and other outside powers to guarantee their security. That may ultimately be the biggest story here. America spent decades building a Middle Eastern security system with Washington at its centre. Instead, the region may now be moving in the opposite direction. Brandon Weichert

Mario Nawfal

296,630 Aufrufe • vor 10 Tagen

Victor Davis Hanson: Iran May Be Preparing One Final Gamble Iran is facing mounting economic pressure after roughly 160 days of war, even as repeated negotiations with the Trump administration have failed to produce a lasting agreement. Sanctions, financial restrictions, and the blockade are costing Iran hundreds of millions of dollars a day while its military, missile, and nuclear capabilities have been severely weakened. With the midterm elections approaching, Iran may see political pressure inside the United States as one of its remaining sources of leverage. Higher gas prices, disruption in the Strait of Hormuz, and continued global uncertainty have made the conflict increasingly unpopular, creating an incentive for Tehran to prolong negotiations while looking for an opportunity to dramatically escalate the conflict. The possibility of an Iranian “October surprise”—including attacks against Israel, Gulf states, shipping, or U.S. forces—raises the question of whether the Trump administration should act preemptively against Iran's remaining military capabilities while maintaining the economic pressure and negotiations that are pushing the regime closer to a breaking point. Victor Davis Hanson
8:30

Victor Davis Hanson: Iran May Be Preparing One Final Gamble Iran is facing mounting economic pressure after roughly 160 days of war, even as repeated negotiations with the Trump administration have failed to produce a lasting agreement. Sanctions, financial restrictions, and the blockade are costing Iran hundreds of millions of dollars a day while its military, missile, and nuclear capabilities have been severely weakened. With the midterm elections approaching, Iran may see political pressure inside the United States as one of its remaining sources of leverage. Higher gas prices, disruption in the Strait of Hormuz, and continued global uncertainty have made the conflict increasingly unpopular, creating an incentive for Tehran to prolong negotiations while looking for an opportunity to dramatically escalate the conflict. The possibility of an Iranian “October surprise”—including attacks against Israel, Gulf states, shipping, or U.S. forces—raises the question of whether the Trump administration should act preemptively against Iran's remaining military capabilities while maintaining the economic pressure and negotiations that are pushing the regime closer to a breaking point. Victor Davis Hanson

Daily Signal

28,998 Aufrufe • vor 9 Tagen

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump may have reached the point where every option makes America's position worse. Middle East expert Joshua Landis says Iran isn't just retaliating to U.S. pressure anymore. It's deliberately expanding the battlefield to convince Washington that escalation carries a higher cost than compromise. Start with the recent strikes. An American response inside Iran is followed by Iranian attacks on U.S. assets in Jordan and on ships in Egypt. If Washington turns to economic warfare or tries to blockade Iran, Tehran will simply drag the conflict back into military escalation. Landis agrees. He argues the White House still believes it can force Iran to back down by gradually degrading its economy, missile capabilities and military infrastructure. But every new round of pressure pushes Iran to widen the conflict instead, creating economic pain for America's regional partners and demonstrating that no country is insulated from the consequences. Egypt is the perfect example. Even if American ships are the intended target, attacks near Egypt threaten tourism, Suez Canal traffic and one of the region's most fragile economies. The point isn't necessarily Egypt itself. It's proving that pressure on Iran can quickly become pressure on everyone else. That brings Landis to the real issue: the Strait of Hormuz. He argues this war is ultimately about who controls one of the world's most important energy chokepoints. For decades, American dominance in the Gulf has underpinned its global influence. But Landis says preserving that dominance through military force is becoming increasingly difficult. His argument is that even if Washington steps back, Iran cannot simply shut off global oil forever. Tehran also depends on exporting its own energy, meaning every Gulf state ultimately has an incentive to reach some form of accommodation. The real question isn't whether oil will keep flowing, but whether the United States remains the power that guarantees it. Landis warns that continuing to escalate may actually accelerate the decline Washington is trying to prevent. Joshua Landis
20:55

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump may have reached the point where every option makes America's position worse. Middle East expert Joshua Landis says Iran isn't just retaliating to U.S. pressure anymore. It's deliberately expanding the battlefield to convince Washington that escalation carries a higher cost than compromise. Start with the recent strikes. An American response inside Iran is followed by Iranian attacks on U.S. assets in Jordan and on ships in Egypt. If Washington turns to economic warfare or tries to blockade Iran, Tehran will simply drag the conflict back into military escalation. Landis agrees. He argues the White House still believes it can force Iran to back down by gradually degrading its economy, missile capabilities and military infrastructure. But every new round of pressure pushes Iran to widen the conflict instead, creating economic pain for America's regional partners and demonstrating that no country is insulated from the consequences. Egypt is the perfect example. Even if American ships are the intended target, attacks near Egypt threaten tourism, Suez Canal traffic and one of the region's most fragile economies. The point isn't necessarily Egypt itself. It's proving that pressure on Iran can quickly become pressure on everyone else. That brings Landis to the real issue: the Strait of Hormuz. He argues this war is ultimately about who controls one of the world's most important energy chokepoints. For decades, American dominance in the Gulf has underpinned its global influence. But Landis says preserving that dominance through military force is becoming increasingly difficult. His argument is that even if Washington steps back, Iran cannot simply shut off global oil forever. Tehran also depends on exporting its own energy, meaning every Gulf state ultimately has an incentive to reach some form of accommodation. The real question isn't whether oil will keep flowing, but whether the United States remains the power that guarantees it. Landis warns that continuing to escalate may actually accelerate the decline Washington is trying to prevent. Joshua Landis

Mario Nawfal

272,598 Aufrufe • vor 22 Tagen

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump just declared economic war on anyone keeping Iran alive. There's just one HUGE problem: China. Trump's “Economic D-Day” is an attempt to financially isolate Iran on a scale Washington says has never been attempted before. And Treasury Sec. Bessent made the objective brutally clear: They want to collapse the Iranian regime. That means targeting not just Iran, but the countries, banks and businesses that continue trading with it. Which brings Washington directly into collision with Beijing. China buys the overwhelming majority of Iran's shipped oil. So if Trump genuinely intends to economically strangle Tehran, eventually he has to answer the question everyone is asking: What happens when China refuses to stop? He faces two choices: Don't enforce the sanctions aggressively against China, and Tehran retains the economic lifeline Washington is trying to sever. Enforce them, and what began as an economic war against Iran starts becoming an economic confrontation with the world's second-largest economy. And China isn't Iran. Beijing has economic weapons of its own: Rare earths, manufacturing, critical supply chains, and, crucially, an alternative financial architecture it's spent years developing precisely because it never wanted Washington to possess a permanent veto over Chinese commerce. That's the part of this story that could become far more consequential than whatever happens in Hormuz. America's greatest economic weapon isn't an aircraft carrier, it's the dollar. Access to the dollar system gives Washington an extraordinary ability to punish governments, banks and companies almost anywhere on Earth. But that power only remains overwhelming for as long as the rest of the world has no viable alternative. Every time Washington weaponises it, it creates another incentive to build one. And Trump is now threatening to demonstrate that vulnerability on an enormous scale. China doesn't need to overthrow the dollar tomorrow; it just needs enough infrastructure to continue trading when Washington says: Stop, or else. And once that infrastructure exists, other countries gain access to the same insurance policy. Trump's war on Iran exposed the limits of American military power. His economic war may be about to expose the limits of America's financial power too. Brandon Weichert
55:19

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump just declared economic war on anyone keeping Iran alive. There's just one HUGE problem: China. Trump's “Economic D-Day” is an attempt to financially isolate Iran on a scale Washington says has never been attempted before. And Treasury Sec. Bessent made the objective brutally clear: They want to collapse the Iranian regime. That means targeting not just Iran, but the countries, banks and businesses that continue trading with it. Which brings Washington directly into collision with Beijing. China buys the overwhelming majority of Iran's shipped oil. So if Trump genuinely intends to economically strangle Tehran, eventually he has to answer the question everyone is asking: What happens when China refuses to stop? He faces two choices: Don't enforce the sanctions aggressively against China, and Tehran retains the economic lifeline Washington is trying to sever. Enforce them, and what began as an economic war against Iran starts becoming an economic confrontation with the world's second-largest economy. And China isn't Iran. Beijing has economic weapons of its own: Rare earths, manufacturing, critical supply chains, and, crucially, an alternative financial architecture it's spent years developing precisely because it never wanted Washington to possess a permanent veto over Chinese commerce. That's the part of this story that could become far more consequential than whatever happens in Hormuz. America's greatest economic weapon isn't an aircraft carrier, it's the dollar. Access to the dollar system gives Washington an extraordinary ability to punish governments, banks and companies almost anywhere on Earth. But that power only remains overwhelming for as long as the rest of the world has no viable alternative. Every time Washington weaponises it, it creates another incentive to build one. And Trump is now threatening to demonstrate that vulnerability on an enormous scale. China doesn't need to overthrow the dollar tomorrow; it just needs enough infrastructure to continue trading when Washington says: Stop, or else. And once that infrastructure exists, other countries gain access to the same insurance policy. Trump's war on Iran exposed the limits of American military power. His economic war may be about to expose the limits of America's financial power too. Brandon Weichert

Mario Nawfal

523,315 Aufrufe • vor 23 Stunden

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Bombs are still falling, and Tehran is already saying it will never be the first to ask for talks. Joshua Landis breaks down why military pressure may be doing the opposite of what Washington intends. "If the US believes that it can force the Islamic Republic to request negotiations by increasing pressure and military action against Iran, it is gravely mistaken." The Strait of Hormuz is still on the table, and nobody knows what the Iranians told the Omanis the day before they closed it. Joshua Landis
2:05

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Bombs are still falling, and Tehran is already saying it will never be the first to ask for talks. Joshua Landis breaks down why military pressure may be doing the opposite of what Washington intends. "If the US believes that it can force the Islamic Republic to request negotiations by increasing pressure and military action against Iran, it is gravely mistaken." The Strait of Hormuz is still on the table, and nobody knows what the Iranians told the Omanis the day before they closed it. Joshua Landis

Mario Nawfal

116,783 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

The US may only be able to sustain its aggression for about another month — but the most dangerous part for Washington is that Iran knows it. Tehran understands the weapons math, the Strait of Hormuz, the pressure on gas prices — all of it. For Iran, this is existential. For Trump, it’s political. The clock is ticking on America’s arsenal — and Iran, along with the rest of the world, is waiting for the alarm to ring. Watch LIVE on BitChute at 5:30 Moscow time (2:30 GMT):
1:35

The US may only be able to sustain its aggression for about another month — but the most dangerous part for Washington is that Iran knows it. Tehran understands the weapons math, the Strait of Hormuz, the pressure on gas prices — all of it. For Iran, this is existential. For Trump, it’s political. The clock is ticking on America’s arsenal — and Iran, along with the rest of the world, is waiting for the alarm to ring. Watch LIVE on BitChute at 5:30 Moscow time (2:30 GMT):

Rick Sanchez

18,654 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

🇮🇷🇺🇸 Iran is turning Hormuz into the price of ending the war, and the U.S may now face an impossible choice. Shipping through the Strait has reportedly fallen from roughly 130–140 vessels a day before the war to just SIX yesterday, and the positions on both sides appear to be getting further apart. Iran is now tying the full reopening of Hormuz to a much bigger package of demands: End the war and blockade, release frozen Iranian assets, and secure a broader regional ceasefire encompassing Lebanon and Gaza. Only then does the Strait fully reopen. Iran and Oman may be getting closer to agreeing HOW shipping would operate through Hormuz, but that doesn't mean Tehran has agreed to actually reopen it yet. And while the diplomacy drags on, the physical situation is getting worse. Kpler figures suggest oil flows have fallen to around 2.2 million barrels per day, compared with roughly 20 million barrels of oil and petroleum products transiting daily before the war. Which brings us to what may be the biggest strategic shift of the entire conflict. According to a U.S military intelligence assessment, Iran's strategic priority may increasingly be moving away from its nuclear program, and toward control of Hormuz itself. Think about what that means. For decades, Iran sought deterrence through its nuclear program, ballistic missiles and regional allies. But this war may have accidentally handed Tehran something capable of inflicting immediate economic pain on the entire world: Hormuz. "The Strait of Hormuz IS their nuclear weapon." Not literally as a military deterrent, but economically, the leverage is extraordinary, and that leaves Trump with horrible options. Accept some version of Iran's demands and potentially end the war with Tehran exercising MORE authority over Hormuz than it had before the fighting began. Or attempt to break Iranian control militarily. But the U.S military assessment warns that doing so could be lengthy, costly, and deadly, with no guarantee it would even work. The Iran war may not actually be ending; it may simply be frozen, with both sides waiting for the moment when they think they can win the next round.
57:26

🇮🇷🇺🇸 Iran is turning Hormuz into the price of ending the war, and the U.S may now face an impossible choice. Shipping through the Strait has reportedly fallen from roughly 130–140 vessels a day before the war to just SIX yesterday, and the positions on both sides appear to be getting further apart. Iran is now tying the full reopening of Hormuz to a much bigger package of demands: End the war and blockade, release frozen Iranian assets, and secure a broader regional ceasefire encompassing Lebanon and Gaza. Only then does the Strait fully reopen. Iran and Oman may be getting closer to agreeing HOW shipping would operate through Hormuz, but that doesn't mean Tehran has agreed to actually reopen it yet. And while the diplomacy drags on, the physical situation is getting worse. Kpler figures suggest oil flows have fallen to around 2.2 million barrels per day, compared with roughly 20 million barrels of oil and petroleum products transiting daily before the war. Which brings us to what may be the biggest strategic shift of the entire conflict. According to a U.S military intelligence assessment, Iran's strategic priority may increasingly be moving away from its nuclear program, and toward control of Hormuz itself. Think about what that means. For decades, Iran sought deterrence through its nuclear program, ballistic missiles and regional allies. But this war may have accidentally handed Tehran something capable of inflicting immediate economic pain on the entire world: Hormuz. "The Strait of Hormuz IS their nuclear weapon." Not literally as a military deterrent, but economically, the leverage is extraordinary, and that leaves Trump with horrible options. Accept some version of Iran's demands and potentially end the war with Tehran exercising MORE authority over Hormuz than it had before the fighting began. Or attempt to break Iranian control militarily. But the U.S military assessment warns that doing so could be lengthy, costly, and deadly, with no guarantee it would even work. The Iran war may not actually be ending; it may simply be frozen, with both sides waiting for the moment when they think they can win the next round.

Mario Nawfal

366,811 Aufrufe • vor 9 Tagen

🇮🇷🇺🇸 Iran has reportedly given Washington a new ultimatum: return to diplomacy and lift the naval blockade within “a few weeks,” or Tehran will expand the war. Iran says the previous 60-day MOU deadline is meaningless because Washington violated the agreement before negotiations even began. The new deadline is different. This one is coming from Tehran. And the pressure is already visible. Shipping through the Strait of Hormuz has fallen to a near standstill, with only five commodity vessels reportedly transiting Saturday and none Sunday, compared with 31 the previous weekend. The dispute at the center of everything is Hormuz. Iran wants control over passage and the ability to charge fees. Washington appears unwilling to accept that, making the Strait the central bargaining chip in the entire conflict. Trump, meanwhile, claims the U.S. has “total control” of Hormuz, says he is communicating with the IRGC, and has threatened Oman if it obstructs efforts to reopen the Strait. The IRGC has publicly denied that any backchannel negotiations with Washington are taking place. That leaves both sides claiming leverage while preparing for another round of escalation. Iran is reportedly shifting from a defensive posture to an offensive one, with officials warning that a failed diplomatic process could bring attacks on Gulf infrastructure, internet cables and other regional targets. The bigger concern is that Tehran appears to be preparing for a long war rather than assuming another ceasefire will hold. Inside Iran, authorities are also tightening restrictions, including proposed criminal penalties for unauthorized contact with foreign media, foreign-funded organizations and scientific institutions. Meanwhile, the U.S. is dealing with growing questions about military morale, political constraints and whether Washington actually has a viable off-ramp. The core problem is becoming increasingly difficult to escape: Iran believes Washington will eventually try to escalate again. Washington cannot easily accept Iran gaining control over Hormuz. And neither side appears willing to concede the point that matters most. The next few weeks could determine whether this remains a standoff or becomes the next phase of the war. Brandon Weichert
50:20

🇮🇷🇺🇸 Iran has reportedly given Washington a new ultimatum: return to diplomacy and lift the naval blockade within “a few weeks,” or Tehran will expand the war. Iran says the previous 60-day MOU deadline is meaningless because Washington violated the agreement before negotiations even began. The new deadline is different. This one is coming from Tehran. And the pressure is already visible. Shipping through the Strait of Hormuz has fallen to a near standstill, with only five commodity vessels reportedly transiting Saturday and none Sunday, compared with 31 the previous weekend. The dispute at the center of everything is Hormuz. Iran wants control over passage and the ability to charge fees. Washington appears unwilling to accept that, making the Strait the central bargaining chip in the entire conflict. Trump, meanwhile, claims the U.S. has “total control” of Hormuz, says he is communicating with the IRGC, and has threatened Oman if it obstructs efforts to reopen the Strait. The IRGC has publicly denied that any backchannel negotiations with Washington are taking place. That leaves both sides claiming leverage while preparing for another round of escalation. Iran is reportedly shifting from a defensive posture to an offensive one, with officials warning that a failed diplomatic process could bring attacks on Gulf infrastructure, internet cables and other regional targets. The bigger concern is that Tehran appears to be preparing for a long war rather than assuming another ceasefire will hold. Inside Iran, authorities are also tightening restrictions, including proposed criminal penalties for unauthorized contact with foreign media, foreign-funded organizations and scientific institutions. Meanwhile, the U.S. is dealing with growing questions about military morale, political constraints and whether Washington actually has a viable off-ramp. The core problem is becoming increasingly difficult to escape: Iran believes Washington will eventually try to escalate again. Washington cannot easily accept Iran gaining control over Hormuz. And neither side appears willing to concede the point that matters most. The next few weeks could determine whether this remains a standoff or becomes the next phase of the war. Brandon Weichert

Mario Nawfal

296,727 Aufrufe • vor 3 Tagen

🇮🇷🇺🇸 Iran may be transforming a strategic victory into a catastrophic miscalculation. Geopolitical analyst Brandon Weichert says that for weeks, Iran had gained the upper hand. America's long-range missile stockpiles were running low, its Gulf posture had become more vulnerable, regional states wanted the fighting to stop, and Tehran had the leverage. Now, Brandon thinks Iran may be pushing that leverage too far. During the interview, reports emerged that Iranian lawmakers were preparing legislation that would reportedly: - Ban U.S and Israeli vessels from transiting the Strait of Hormuz. - Block cargo linked to Israel. - Demand compensation from countries that supported the war. - And impose penalties of up to 20% of the cargo value on violators. At the same time, reports suggested Iran was seeking transit fees of between 5% and 7% of each cargo's value. If those numbers hold, Brandon believes the entire diplomatic process could collapse. Not because Iran lacks leverage, but because it may be asking for more than the world is prepared to accept. His concern isn't Washington, it's everyone else. Countries that quietly shifted toward Iran after the war may begin asking whether Tehran is now overplaying its hand. And if that happens, Trump gets exactly what he needs. A political justification to walk away from negotiations, argue that Iran was never serious about peace, and escalate the war. Brandon believes that changes everything. Because the fastest way to lose a winning position is convincing your opponent they have nothing left to lose. Brandon Weichert
41:09

🇮🇷🇺🇸 Iran may be transforming a strategic victory into a catastrophic miscalculation. Geopolitical analyst Brandon Weichert says that for weeks, Iran had gained the upper hand. America's long-range missile stockpiles were running low, its Gulf posture had become more vulnerable, regional states wanted the fighting to stop, and Tehran had the leverage. Now, Brandon thinks Iran may be pushing that leverage too far. During the interview, reports emerged that Iranian lawmakers were preparing legislation that would reportedly: - Ban U.S and Israeli vessels from transiting the Strait of Hormuz. - Block cargo linked to Israel. - Demand compensation from countries that supported the war. - And impose penalties of up to 20% of the cargo value on violators. At the same time, reports suggested Iran was seeking transit fees of between 5% and 7% of each cargo's value. If those numbers hold, Brandon believes the entire diplomatic process could collapse. Not because Iran lacks leverage, but because it may be asking for more than the world is prepared to accept. His concern isn't Washington, it's everyone else. Countries that quietly shifted toward Iran after the war may begin asking whether Tehran is now overplaying its hand. And if that happens, Trump gets exactly what he needs. A political justification to walk away from negotiations, argue that Iran was never serious about peace, and escalate the war. Brandon believes that changes everything. Because the fastest way to lose a winning position is convincing your opponent they have nothing left to lose. Brandon Weichert

Mario Nawfal

438,646 Aufrufe • vor 14 Tagen

🇺🇸🇮🇷⚠️ Trump hoped reopening the Strait of Hormuz would give him an opportunity to declare victory and wind down the war with Iran, even without securing a nuclear agreement. Tehran, however, has dramatically raised the price of a deal. According to The Wall Street Journal, Iran is demanding the withdrawal of U.S. forces from the region, an end to the naval blockade, the lifting of sanctions, the release of frozen Iranian assets, and billions of dollars in war reparations before fully reopening the Strait of Hormuz. Those demands have significantly narrowed the Trump administration’s room for maneuver. Tehran reportedly believes Washington is increasingly eager to find an exit from the conflict and is therefore using its ability to disrupt the Strait of Hormuz, and consequently a crucial portion of global oil flows, as leverage at the negotiating table. The pressure is also growing inside the United States. Gasoline prices are hovering around $4 per gallon, while the approaching midterm elections give the Trump administration a strong political incentive to stabilize energy markets and reach an agreement with Iran. The situation leaves Washington facing an increasingly difficult calculation. Accepting Tehran’s sweeping demands would represent a major concession, while renewed military escalation risks further disruption of Hormuz and another surge in global energy prices. Iran appears to understand that pressure on the Strait directly translates into economic and political pressure on Washington, and Tehran is attempting to exploit that leverage to extract concessions it could never obtain under normal circumstances.
0:26

🇺🇸🇮🇷⚠️ Trump hoped reopening the Strait of Hormuz would give him an opportunity to declare victory and wind down the war with Iran, even without securing a nuclear agreement. Tehran, however, has dramatically raised the price of a deal. According to The Wall Street Journal, Iran is demanding the withdrawal of U.S. forces from the region, an end to the naval blockade, the lifting of sanctions, the release of frozen Iranian assets, and billions of dollars in war reparations before fully reopening the Strait of Hormuz. Those demands have significantly narrowed the Trump administration’s room for maneuver. Tehran reportedly believes Washington is increasingly eager to find an exit from the conflict and is therefore using its ability to disrupt the Strait of Hormuz, and consequently a crucial portion of global oil flows, as leverage at the negotiating table. The pressure is also growing inside the United States. Gasoline prices are hovering around $4 per gallon, while the approaching midterm elections give the Trump administration a strong political incentive to stabilize energy markets and reach an agreement with Iran. The situation leaves Washington facing an increasingly difficult calculation. Accepting Tehran’s sweeping demands would represent a major concession, while renewed military escalation risks further disruption of Hormuz and another surge in global energy prices. Iran appears to understand that pressure on the Strait directly translates into economic and political pressure on Washington, and Tehran is attempting to exploit that leverage to extract concessions it could never obtain under normal circumstances.

NSTRIKE

19,620 Aufrufe • vor 11 Tagen

🇺🇸🇨🇳 The U.S. is burning through some of its hardest-to-replace weapons against Iran, while Tehran claims 85% of its air-defense production capacity survived the war. Open-source estimates suggest America has already expended around 80% of its pre-war THAAD interceptors and roughly half or more of key Patriot stocks. America can't solve its growing munitions problem simply by throwing more money at defense contractors. Beijing dominates the processing of several critical minerals used in American missiles, radars and aircraft, giving it another potential pressure point over Washington. China needs Middle Eastern oil routes reopened, but restricting those supplies could make it even harder for America to sustain a prolonged war while Iran tries to outlast it. Beijing would likely decide that some short-term economic pain is worth helping Iran force Washington to fold. Writer: Mhedi
3:32

🇺🇸🇨🇳 The U.S. is burning through some of its hardest-to-replace weapons against Iran, while Tehran claims 85% of its air-defense production capacity survived the war. Open-source estimates suggest America has already expended around 80% of its pre-war THAAD interceptors and roughly half or more of key Patriot stocks. America can't solve its growing munitions problem simply by throwing more money at defense contractors. Beijing dominates the processing of several critical minerals used in American missiles, radars and aircraft, giving it another potential pressure point over Washington. China needs Middle Eastern oil routes reopened, but restricting those supplies could make it even harder for America to sustain a prolonged war while Iran tries to outlast it. Beijing would likely decide that some short-term economic pain is worth helping Iran force Washington to fold. Writer: Mhedi

Mario Nawfal

44,128 Aufrufe • vor 4 Tagen

🇮🇷🇺🇦 What happens when a great power has no clear path to victory, but also no politically acceptable way to admit defeat? That may be the central problem facing Washington in Iran, according to Prof. Glenn Diesen. Diesen argues that Iran has effectively defeated the United States, but Tehran's demands for sanctions relief, unfrozen assets, reconstruction payments and an end to the wider regional wars create a dilemma for Washington: accepting those terms could be politically impossible, while refusing them risks trapping the U.S. in a war it has no obvious way to win. Trump may therefore try to declare victory and walk away, pointing to Iran's supposedly destroyed nuclear capabilities and arguing that the Strait of Hormuz is no longer strategically important. But Iran has leverage. Tehran can make an American withdrawal politically painful while maintaining enough pressure to prevent Washington from simply resetting the conflict and returning later. And this is where Diesen's warning matters. A great power pushed between humiliation and escalation may choose escalation. Iran therefore has to be careful not to push Trump so far that he concludes there is nothing left to lose. Meanwhile, the war is becoming harder to contain. Fighting is spreading through Yemen, with the Houthis striking Saudi-backed targets and reportedly hitting Saudi-linked shipping and infrastructure. Diesen argues that treating these groups simply as Iranian proxies misses the bigger problem: many have their own interests and conflicts that could continue even if Tehran wanted the war to end. The same applies to the emerging Middle Eastern security order. As confidence in permanent American protection declines, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Pakistan and potentially Egypt are moving toward a new regional security architecture. Diesen sees two possible futures: competing blocs, where states seek security against one another, or an inclusive system that eventually brings Iran, and perhaps even Israel, into the same framework. The first creates another cycle of escalation. The second attempts to make security indivisible, so one country's security does not require another country's permanent insecurity. And then there is Ukraine. Diesen argues that the battlefield is increasingly becoming a war of attrition that Russia is slowly winning. Ukraine faces worsening manpower and ammunition problems, while a shortage of interceptor missiles is allowing Russia to use more air power and increasingly devastating glide bombs. Russia is also expanding attacks against Ukrainian logistics, ports, bridges, warehouses and energy infrastructure, while Ukraine continues striking deeper inside Russia to create pressure for negotiations. But if Moscow sees NATO expansion and Ukraine's role as a Western frontline as an existential threat, hurting Russia may not convince it to compromise. It may convince Russia that it has even more reason to continue fighting. Diesen's conclusion is bleak: both sides want the war to end, but they fundamentally disagree over what ending it means. For Russia, that means Ukrainian neutrality, territorial concessions and a political settlement. For Ukraine and its European backers, an unconditional ceasefire risks freezing the battlefield and giving Kyiv time to rebuild. So the wars in Iran and Ukraine are beginning to reveal the same dangerous pattern. The longer a conflict continues, the harder it becomes to separate victory from survival, and the harder it becomes for either side to back down without believing it is surrendering something existential. When the off-ramp disappears, escalation starts looking less like a choice and more like the only road left. Diesen's final warning was almost an afterthought: let's hope the conflict doesn't spread to Japan. He may have been joking. But these are not particularly reassuring times. Glenn Diesen
33:45

🇮🇷🇺🇦 What happens when a great power has no clear path to victory, but also no politically acceptable way to admit defeat? That may be the central problem facing Washington in Iran, according to Prof. Glenn Diesen. Diesen argues that Iran has effectively defeated the United States, but Tehran's demands for sanctions relief, unfrozen assets, reconstruction payments and an end to the wider regional wars create a dilemma for Washington: accepting those terms could be politically impossible, while refusing them risks trapping the U.S. in a war it has no obvious way to win. Trump may therefore try to declare victory and walk away, pointing to Iran's supposedly destroyed nuclear capabilities and arguing that the Strait of Hormuz is no longer strategically important. But Iran has leverage. Tehran can make an American withdrawal politically painful while maintaining enough pressure to prevent Washington from simply resetting the conflict and returning later. And this is where Diesen's warning matters. A great power pushed between humiliation and escalation may choose escalation. Iran therefore has to be careful not to push Trump so far that he concludes there is nothing left to lose. Meanwhile, the war is becoming harder to contain. Fighting is spreading through Yemen, with the Houthis striking Saudi-backed targets and reportedly hitting Saudi-linked shipping and infrastructure. Diesen argues that treating these groups simply as Iranian proxies misses the bigger problem: many have their own interests and conflicts that could continue even if Tehran wanted the war to end. The same applies to the emerging Middle Eastern security order. As confidence in permanent American protection declines, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Pakistan and potentially Egypt are moving toward a new regional security architecture. Diesen sees two possible futures: competing blocs, where states seek security against one another, or an inclusive system that eventually brings Iran, and perhaps even Israel, into the same framework. The first creates another cycle of escalation. The second attempts to make security indivisible, so one country's security does not require another country's permanent insecurity. And then there is Ukraine. Diesen argues that the battlefield is increasingly becoming a war of attrition that Russia is slowly winning. Ukraine faces worsening manpower and ammunition problems, while a shortage of interceptor missiles is allowing Russia to use more air power and increasingly devastating glide bombs. Russia is also expanding attacks against Ukrainian logistics, ports, bridges, warehouses and energy infrastructure, while Ukraine continues striking deeper inside Russia to create pressure for negotiations. But if Moscow sees NATO expansion and Ukraine's role as a Western frontline as an existential threat, hurting Russia may not convince it to compromise. It may convince Russia that it has even more reason to continue fighting. Diesen's conclusion is bleak: both sides want the war to end, but they fundamentally disagree over what ending it means. For Russia, that means Ukrainian neutrality, territorial concessions and a political settlement. For Ukraine and its European backers, an unconditional ceasefire risks freezing the battlefield and giving Kyiv time to rebuild. So the wars in Iran and Ukraine are beginning to reveal the same dangerous pattern. The longer a conflict continues, the harder it becomes to separate victory from survival, and the harder it becomes for either side to back down without believing it is surrendering something existential. When the off-ramp disappears, escalation starts looking less like a choice and more like the only road left. Diesen's final warning was almost an afterthought: let's hope the conflict doesn't spread to Japan. He may have been joking. But these are not particularly reassuring times. Glenn Diesen

Mario Nawfal

244,431 Aufrufe • vor 6 Tagen

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Bombing Iran failed, so did the sanctions, and the maritime blockade. Now Trump's answer is to try blocking the entire country by land!! His original strategy was simple: Bomb Iran hard, destroy its military infrastructure, break the regime, and force Tehran to accept American terms. That didn't happen, so Washington is moving to the next idea: A land blockade. According to reports, the U.S and Israel are considering pressuring Iran's seven neighbours to restrict trade and tighten the economic noose around the country. Iraq, Turkey, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. Geopolitical analyst Brandon Weichert thinks the proposal is pure fantasy. These countries have different interests, deep economic ties to Iran and, in many cases, major relationships with China. Even if some publicly agreed, enforcing a complete blockade against a country as large and geographically connected as Iran would be another matter entirely. But Brandon says the plan reveals something much more important. America is no longer pursuing a coherent strategy; it's cycling through different versions of the same failed idea. At the same time, Iran appears to be changing its own strategy. Instead of simply waiting to retaliate after every American strike, Tehran is increasingly demonstrating that any new blockade, sabotage campaign or act of coercion could trigger a much wider regional war. Brandon believes Iran now sees a weakened and overstretched opponent. U.S interceptors are being depleted, military assets are being pulled from other theatres, disagreements inside the White House are becoming harder to hide, and Trump is reportedly furious that the war has produced neither a clear victory nor an obvious exit. That's what makes this moment so dangerous. Brandon Weichert
59:36

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Bombing Iran failed, so did the sanctions, and the maritime blockade. Now Trump's answer is to try blocking the entire country by land!! His original strategy was simple: Bomb Iran hard, destroy its military infrastructure, break the regime, and force Tehran to accept American terms. That didn't happen, so Washington is moving to the next idea: A land blockade. According to reports, the U.S and Israel are considering pressuring Iran's seven neighbours to restrict trade and tighten the economic noose around the country. Iraq, Turkey, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. Geopolitical analyst Brandon Weichert thinks the proposal is pure fantasy. These countries have different interests, deep economic ties to Iran and, in many cases, major relationships with China. Even if some publicly agreed, enforcing a complete blockade against a country as large and geographically connected as Iran would be another matter entirely. But Brandon says the plan reveals something much more important. America is no longer pursuing a coherent strategy; it's cycling through different versions of the same failed idea. At the same time, Iran appears to be changing its own strategy. Instead of simply waiting to retaliate after every American strike, Tehran is increasingly demonstrating that any new blockade, sabotage campaign or act of coercion could trigger a much wider regional war. Brandon believes Iran now sees a weakened and overstretched opponent. U.S interceptors are being depleted, military assets are being pulled from other theatres, disagreements inside the White House are becoming harder to hide, and Trump is reportedly furious that the war has produced neither a clear victory nor an obvious exit. That's what makes this moment so dangerous. Brandon Weichert

Mario Nawfal

351,533 Aufrufe • vor 21 Tagen

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump has restarted a war he no longer controls, and Iran intends to make escape painfully difficult Middle East analyst Trita Parsi says Trump believed he could inflict enough military pressure to force Iran back to the negotiating table, then declare victory and end the conflict whenever it became politically convenient. Instead, rather than giving him an easy off-ramp, Iran is trying to make the war so costly that he never thinks of doing it again. That's why Trita believes the economic pressure matters just as much as the missiles, because every additional cost increases the political pain of continuing the conflict. At the heart of the war is the Strait of Hormuz, and Trita argues this isn't really about shipping fees; it's about leverage. Iran believes control of the Strait is its single biggest deterrent against a full-scale American attack. Give that up, and Washington can launch another war with far fewer consequences. That's why he says Tehran is extremely unlikely to compromise on the issue, regardless of the military pressure. His warning is that this creates a dangerous cycle, because every failed attempt to force a breakthrough creates pressure for another escalation. Trita says that's how wars stop being short campaigns and start becoming open-ended conflicts. He puts the chances of the fighting escalating over the next month at more than 80%. Not because either side necessarily wants a forever war, but because both sides now believe backing down today makes an even bigger war tomorrow more likely. Trita Parsi
24:15

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump has restarted a war he no longer controls, and Iran intends to make escape painfully difficult Middle East analyst Trita Parsi says Trump believed he could inflict enough military pressure to force Iran back to the negotiating table, then declare victory and end the conflict whenever it became politically convenient. Instead, rather than giving him an easy off-ramp, Iran is trying to make the war so costly that he never thinks of doing it again. That's why Trita believes the economic pressure matters just as much as the missiles, because every additional cost increases the political pain of continuing the conflict. At the heart of the war is the Strait of Hormuz, and Trita argues this isn't really about shipping fees; it's about leverage. Iran believes control of the Strait is its single biggest deterrent against a full-scale American attack. Give that up, and Washington can launch another war with far fewer consequences. That's why he says Tehran is extremely unlikely to compromise on the issue, regardless of the military pressure. His warning is that this creates a dangerous cycle, because every failed attempt to force a breakthrough creates pressure for another escalation. Trita says that's how wars stop being short campaigns and start becoming open-ended conflicts. He puts the chances of the fighting escalating over the next month at more than 80%. Not because either side necessarily wants a forever war, but because both sides now believe backing down today makes an even bigger war tomorrow more likely. Trita Parsi

Mario Nawfal

280,503 Aufrufe • vor 28 Tagen