Coercing Iran: Why Trump's Hormuz Blockade Has a Short Fuse

This analysis from the Council on Foreign Relations examines the Trump administration's decision to impose a U.S. blockade in response to Iran's de facto closure of the Strait of Hormuz, arguing that the strategy is a high-stakes gamble with a ticking clock — one that Iran, as an authoritarian state accustomed to economic pain, may be better positioned to outlast than the U.S.

---

1. The Failed Reopening of the Strait of Hormuz

The piece opens with what the author calls a "curious reaction" to a failed attempt to reopen the Strait of Hormuz following a ceasefire announcement. Despite the pause in fighting, only a handful of ships managed to transit the strait, which remained under de facto Iranian control. Tehran's official excuse was that it didn't know where it had scattered all of its mines — but few believed that explanation. The widespread suspicion was that Iran was deliberately keeping the strait closed to maintain leverage over the United States and its Gulf allies.

This matters enormously because roughly 20 percent of the world's oil flows through the Persian Gulf. While Saudi Arabia and the UAE have been able to route some oil through pipelines that bypass the waterway, much of the region's crude remains trapped. The global energy crisis, already severe, continued to worsen with every day the strait stayed shut.

---

2. The Logic Behind a U.S. Blockade on Top of an Iranian One

So here's the paradox: if the problem is that the Strait of Hormuz is already closed by Iran, why would the U.S. declare its own blockade? The Trump administration's calculation, the author explains, is straightforward — the rest of the world is already suffering economically from the Iran war, and now it's Iran's turn to feel the squeeze.

Despite the devastating U.S. and Israeli bombing campaign, Iran had managed to keep its oil exports close to prewar levels. Thanks to surging oil prices, Iran actually reaped a financial windfall from the war — made even larger because Trump had relaxed sanctions on Iran's oil exports to prevent prices from spiraling further out of control. The U.S. blockade essentially sends a blunt message: if other nations can't export through the strait, Iran can't either.

The economic impact could be severe. Miad Maleki, a former U.S. Treasury sanctions expert and fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracy, estimated that a fully enforced blockade would cost Iran $13 billion per month. As he noted:

"Oil/gas accounts for 80% of [Iran] government export earnings and 23.7% of GDP."

And since 90 percent of Iran's oil exports go to China, Beijing would feel significant pain from the blockade as well.

---

3. Trump's Desired Deal — and What Could Go Wrong

Trump's ultimate goal is to ratchet up pressure on both China and Iran to the point where Tehran accepts the deal reportedly offered during talks in Islamabad. That deal is sweeping in scope:

• Iran would give up all nuclear enrichment for twenty years
• Iran would surrender all fissile material
• Iran would end all support for regional proxies
• In return, Iran would receive a relaxation of sanctions

But the author warns that "there are a host of events that can go wrong." 🚨

One immediate question is whether the U.S. is truly prepared to confront China. Just last month, while enforcing an undeclared blockade on Cuba, the U.S. allowed a Russian oil tanker to reach the island — apparently because Trump didn't want a confrontation with Moscow. Would he really risk a clash with Beijing by stopping tankers carrying oil to China, especially as he prepares for a summit with Xi Jinping?

---

4. Military Risks and Iran's Remaining Capabilities

The U.S. Navy has fifteen warships in the area and the raw capability to enforce a blockade. But the entire region could be thrown into peril if Iran treats the blockade as an act of war — which, under international law, it is — and decides to fight back.

Trump has boasted on social media that Iran's navy is:

"completely obliterated"

But the author points out he's only referring to the regular navy. According to CNN reporting, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) still retains roughly half of its fleet of small fast-attack boats, along with half of its missile launchers and thousands of drones.

To reduce risk, the U.S. Navy is enforcing the blockade not in the narrow strait itself (only twenty-one miles wide) but further east in the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. While this reduces the danger of close-range Iranian attacks on U.S. ships, all the energy infrastructure inside the Gulf remains vulnerable. Saudi Arabia's pipeline route to the Red Sea is also at risk — the Saudis fear that Iran's Houthi allies in Yemen could close the Bab al-Mandab Strait, which controls the entrance to the Red Sea.

The author notes a telling pattern: after threatening Iran with "civilizational destruction" the previous week, Trump backed off his threats to target Iranian power and oil infrastructure — partly because Iran threatened to do the same to Persian Gulf states. Trump appears to be assuming Iran won't carry out retaliatory strikes in response to the blockade. If that calculation proves wrong, the consequences for the global economy would be catastrophic.

---

5. A Battle of Pain Thresholds

Even setting aside the risk of military escalation, the author argues Trump is running a substantial gamble: that Iran has a lower economic pain threshold than the United States does. In other words, the bet is that Iran will suffer enough from the blockade to accept U.S. terms before the global energy crisis forces the administration to pull back.

But consider the asymmetry. Iran is an authoritarian regime with a proven track record of withstanding years of harsh sanctions and brutally repressing popular protests when they arise. The United States, on the other hand, is a democracy where rising gasoline prices are fueling inflation and undermining the Republican Party's prospects in the upcoming midterm elections. The Iran war is already unpopular with American voters. The author poses the key question:

"How long can Trump keep exacerbating the energy crisis before being forced to execute a U-turn?"

Trump has options short of total capitulation. He could soften his demands — for instance, allowing Iran to continue a small amount of enrichment under international monitoring. Or he could simply declare, as he has done before, that the Strait of Hormuz is "someone else's problem."

---

6. Conclusion: A Standoff Where Iran May Have the Edge

With their competing blockades, Iran and the United States are locked in a high-stakes standoff to see which side blinks first. The author's assessment is blunt and provocative:

"I wouldn't bet against Iran."

The logic is clear: a dictatorship that can absorb punishment indefinitely may outlast a democracy where voters punish leaders at the ballot box for economic pain. Trump's blockade strategy has a short fuse — not because of Iran's military response, but because of the political and economic clock ticking at home. ⏳ Whether this gamble pays off or backfires could define the trajectory of the entire conflict — and the global economy along with it.