Trump war of choice against Iran

The original plan for this month was simple: eight blog posts in total, completely moving away from writing about politics, with everything written well ahead of time. However, because events have become so fascinating, I find myself drawn right back in. You might even see another bonus post after this one I’m honestly not sure yet.

I last wrote about this topic back in February when things were just starting to get going. I won’t repeat myself here, but I want to fill in the gaps and provide some much-needed insight. A couple of months ago, I wrote Terror in Tehran and Horror in Havana, which covered both Cuba and Iran alongside the raw geopolitics driving the choices made. My focus back then was primarily on what those choices were doing to our allies, it was really just me musing about how things were shifting.

So, this next section is going to be about exactly how we got here, diving into some crucial background information I missed out on the first time. After that, we’ll talk about the now and why we are facing our current problems.

How We Got Here

The Middle East is a patchwork of alliances, rivals, and divides. The best way to understand it is simple: “If you hit me, I have a bigger stick.”

For Iran, the roots of today’s conflict date all the way back to 1953. They actually used to be a Western ally, a major oil supplier, and a functioning democracy with plans to nationalise their oil industry, taking it away from private British and American companies. A coup, supported by both the Americans and the British, happened. Why? Well, beyond the oil, there were massive worries over Russian influence in the Middle East as well. The result was a deep-seated mistrust planted in the Iranian psyche, and nicknames were given out: the “Big Devil” and the “Little Devil.”

The Western-backed monarchy eventually collapsed in 1979, replaced by the current regime, which was far less friendly and openly hostile. Then came the embassy hostage crisis, which effectively destroyed Jimmy Carter’s presidency. American voters did not like the high energy prices and the runaway inflation that came with it.

A young businessman named Donald J. Trump was heavily influenced by what happened during those years. As a borrower, high interest rates personally hurt Trump’s bottom line. During the 1980s, Trump took out full-page ads and gave interviews slamming what had happened. He did not understand the concept of diplomatic restraint, calling instead for direct action taking the oil and finally dealing with Iran the only way the US knew how: with mighty power. Loads of people, including the mainstream media, were critical of Carter at the time, but nobody held the same transactional, fringe view that Trump did. The vital takeaway here is that this has been on Trump’s mind, shaping his opinions, for decades. That history matters.

After 1979, due to the Americans flexing their muscles in the Middle East, both Iran and Israel along with many others began to flex their own. For Iran, it started with building resilience within the regime: multiple layers of leadership, alongside proxy groups to do its bidding. Iran helped fund various groups to keep the fight far from its borders, while Israel staged sabotage, assassinations, and other operations to contain them. A shadow war between them began wielding sticks big enough to avoid an all-out war, but acting as mutual deterrents. Other actors played their roles, and it took a couple of decades until things escalated into a full-scale confrontation.

Another name that needs talking about is Benjamin Netanyahu, who like Trump was hostile towards Iran during the 1980s, viewing them as a threat due to their export of terrorism. Later in the 1990s, 2000s, and 2010s, he warned that Iran was two weeks or months away from a nuclear bomb. This was part of the reason why Obama made a deal with Iran, to try and resolve this outstanding issue. Politics within Israel did not like such a deal due to the ongoing shadow war. Which carried on.

Under Obama, Iran finally came to the table. Decades of sanctions had crippled the country, and they decided it was worth “dealing with the devil.” Then Trump came along and ripped that deal up. Following the death of an American, he decided to assassinate a high-ranking Iranian general. When it came down to it, he showed no restraint and went straight to “11” on his options menu. In response, Iran plotted to assassinate him, hacked his campaign emails, and did a bunch of other things. There is absolutely no love lost between the two sides here.

Then came October 7th, when one of Iran’s biggest proxy groups attacked Israel. Iran was actually taken by surprise and didn’t really want a direct war. Under Biden, the US stayed at arm’s length, and the rest of the proxy network tried to keep its distance too. Over many months, both America and Israel spent their time dismantling that proxy network, picking it apart piece by piece. The Israelis repeatedly showed they were able to get deep inside both the network and Iran itself.

Even though Iran was facing a massive domestic economic crisis alongside a severe water crisis and wanted no part of an open war, it had to keep showing it still held a big stick to avoid looking weak.

But when Trump returned to office, things went badly wrong, very quickly. First, Trump decided to strike Iran’s nuclear programme. Then, a year later, following protests inside Iran, he decided to strike an already weakened nation. That was the official start of this open war.

The Israeli and American leadership genuinely thought they could force a total regime change from the air alone. The simple explanation here is deeply worrying: there are no experienced experts left in the room to say “no” to Trump’s worst impulses. What followed was months of war before both sides came to the table.

Okay, so what happened to the ceasefire deal?

Well, it was a memorandum of understanding (MoU). It was a statement to get a deal done at a later stage, with both sides doing certain things to build trust. It was signed due to the benefits Iran would get straight away, giving it a lifeline it badly needed. Israel did what it could to undermine it, while Iran showed a high amount of restraint but still showed a big stick if need be.

After a while, things broke down. Why? Well, the document itself and the language used is the heart of the problem. Remember what was said earlier about no experienced people in the room? Well, guess what. No expertise and no diplomats helped draft it. Okay, maybe somebody else did, but for America, they did not. This has led to the Americans threatening to commit the absolute worst war crimes they can, alongside putting a blockade against Iran once again.

So What’s the Problem?

The answer comes down to the actual Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) that was signed. Specifically, it is this exact clause:

Point 5: Upon the signing of this MOU, the Islamic Republic of Iran will make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels with no charge for 60 days, only from the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Oman and vice versa. The traffic of commercial vessels will immediately start, and considering the need for removing the tactical and military obstacles and de-mining by the Islamic Republic of Iran, will be instated within 30 days. The Islamic Republic of Iran will conduct dialogue with the Sultanate of Oman to define the future administration and maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz, in discussion with other Persian Gulf littoral states in line with the applicable international law and the sovereign rights of coastal states of the Strait of Hormuz.

What Iran thinks this says is that the Strait of Hormuz is essentially theirs to administer. The Americans, on the other hand, think this is about restoring the status quo that was broken.

The fundamental problem here is that the first half of that paragraph and the second half simply do not match.

And there is a highly ironic side note here: the Americans, who generally hate international law at the moment, are suddenly referencing it. Talking about Iran and Oman both being the administrators in charge of this while claiming it aligns with international law shows a complete misunderstanding of the actual law and agreements that have existed since the 1600s!

This is clear proof that whoever wrote this document had zero expertise. You could see a massive problem coming from a mile away.

So, that is where we are right now. Global energy markets are effectively being held hostage with no respite in sight. Around 20% of the world’s oil flows through this strategic waterway, with another 10% transported by other means. In total, almost a third of the global energy supply is at risk of being blocked.

The risk to actual oil production is incredibly high; some production has stalled, while other operations have stopped altogether. The knock-on effect on the by-products of that oil production, as well as natural gas, is another massive problem. It will take weeks, if not months, before it flows again and that is assuming no permanent damage is done. Restarting oil wells after they’ve been stopped runs a serious risk of reservoir damage.

Which is why oil prices sitting at around $81 a barrel for Brent crude is so strange. The global glut of oil is running low, demand remains the same, but the supply simply does not exist. Nobody can replace that oil on the market. Nobody has enough reserves; we have most likely used most of that up already.

Until both sides come back to the negotiating table, it looks highly likely that the waterway will remain closed because it is simply too unsafe. With the level of risk out there, absolutely nobody is willing to insure shipping. Some ships have taken the risk. But the amount of daily traffic has plummeted from 100 or 120 a day, to 40, to around 20, to 8, to basically zero.

Returning things back to normal is going to be incredibly hard. A very real, possible outcome is that the Strait remains closed forever—or at least until the hardliners in Iran decide it’s worth it to reopen, or they get a very good deal, or they just decide to say “screw it.” And that’s before we even get to the hardliners in America.

I do think the market is completely underpricing the risk that shipping here remains off-limits. When I originally gave some options for what could happen, I got it completely wrong. I was thinking a swift regime change would happen. I did not consider a scenario where the regime remains in power, and we are left dealing with a toxic mix of American incompetence and Israel ruining it.

The only way forward now seems to be escalation and a ground invasion. An air campaign alone won’t do it even if Trump commits the worst war crimes on the table.