Introduction
Hello everyone, today we’re going to talk about the U.S.-Iran conflict. Our discussion today will cover the following points: First, we’ll discuss the U.S.’s recent actions to block the Strait of Hormuz; Second, we’ll analyze the current situations of the U.S. and Iran; Third, we’ll talk about what is often referred to as Trump’s “perfect plan”—namely, the possibility that Trump might make a comeback in 2027; Fourth, at this stage, I do not believe a war in the Middle East will escalate into World War III. If World War III were to break out one day in the future, what would be the prerequisites or preconditions for its outbreak? Fifth, if you were Trump, how would you strategize in the Middle East to secure U.S. hegemony?
I. Trump’s True Intentions Behind Blocking the Strait of Hormuz
Let’s start with the first point. We’ll briefly discuss the news from the past few days—namely, Trump’s desire to block the Strait of Hormuz. Why is Trump engaging in such a bizarre maneuver right now? He’s clearly worried about oil prices, yet he’s still playing this game of mutual destruction.
Please note that I have put the phrase “mutually assured destruction” in quotation marks. Why did I do that? Because according to Trump’s original statement, if negotiations failed, he would bomb Iran—that is what “mutually assured destruction” truly means. However, what has replaced that scenario is not a full-scale U.S. bombing campaign against Iran, but rather the U.S. blocking the Strait of Hormuz as well.
While everyone’s attention is focused on the Strait, people may have forgotten that just a week ago, the U.S. was threatening to destroy Iranian civilization—some media outlets even reported that the U.S. was considering dropping a nuclear weapon. The end result, however, is that the U.S. chose to blockade the Strait of Hormuz. On the surface, Trump appears erratic, but in reality, he has given himself a way out.
For Iran, the location of the conflict is gradually shifting from Iranian territory to its coastal waters, and the likelihood of escalation is gradually decreasing. Originally, Trump said he would land on Iranian soil, then later said he would land on Khalk Island, and then changed it to blockading the Strait of Hormuz—the location of the conflict is becoming increasingly distant.
The Awkward Position of the U.S., Israel, and the U.K.
The reason Trump appears erratic is largely due to the awkward position in which both Israel and the U.S. find themselves. Although the Strait of Hormuz was blocked some time ago, Iranian ships were able to pass through normally. Compared to before, Iran’s oil revenues have even increased. If Iran can continue to export oil while collecting tolls, the Revolutionary Guards will receive a steady stream of income. With this income, the capabilities of the entire “Arc of Resistance” will be enhanced. For Israel, this is the last scenario it wants to see.
As for the United States, Trump’s goal is to control the “switch” of the Strait of Hormuz—or, in other words, the switch that controls inflation and interest rate cuts. But right now, that switch is in Iran’s hands. To draw an analogy, Trump’s current situation is very similar to that of his first term. During his first term, Trump had no ability to influence monetary policy; at that time, the switch for interest rate cuts was in the hands of the Federal Reserve, whereas this time, the switch is in Iran’s hands.
If the Strait of Hormuz remains blocked, inflation rises, borrowing costs increase, and fiscal spending grows, the U.S. coffers will run dry. The emptier the coffers, the less power Trump will have. Ultimately, whatever Trump wants to do will depend on the Fed’s approval—almost exactly as it was during his first term.
There is one other country worth mentioning: the United Kingdom. While continental Europe has chosen not to participate in this conflict, the UK stands out as an exception. The UK has taken a relatively proactive stance in this conflict, seeking to support the United States and Israel. Why is the UK acting this way? Because from the UK’s perspective, if Iran can control the Strait of Hormuz, might Spain then seek to control the Strait of Gibraltar? Why has Spain recently been so vocal in its opposition to Israel and the United States? Spain, too, has its own geopolitical interests.
If the Strait of Hormuz becomes impassable, and if the Strait of Gibraltar is no longer open to free navigation, then U.S. military bases across Europe and the Middle East would have to rely solely on air transport to remain operational. If these two straits were completely blockaded, the U.S.’s influence on the European continent would rapidly diminish, and Britain’s influence would decline just as swiftly. This is because Britain has long served as a bridgehead for U.S. control over the entire European continent.
Therefore, from the perspective of the U.S., the UK, and Israel, the current situation is extremely awkward for all three. That is why Trump can only threaten Iran’s economy by blocking the straits, attempting to regain control of the “switch” at the Strait of Hormuz. However, despite all his maneuvering, Trump has never managed to break free from the original logical framework.
This logical framework is quite simple: it comes down to who is more desperate. Is Iran more desperate to sell its oil, or is Trump more desperate to withdraw quickly for the sake of the midterm elections? Personally, I believe the U.S. side is more desperate. After all, Iran has been under sanctions for quite some time, and it has long since established a self-sustaining domestic economic system. So, in my view, the fact that Trump came up with this underhanded tactic of blockading the Strait actually proves that he really has no other options left.
Some might argue that the U.S. still has one option left: the so-called use of nuclear weapons. We’ll explore that issue later.
II. Analysis of the Current Situation Between the U.S. and Iran
Let’s move on to the second topic of this video: analyzing the current situation facing the U.S. and Iran. Between April 3 and April 5, the U.S. military attempted to seize enriched uranium under the pretext of rescuing a pilot, but the operation was thwarted by Iran at the time. Since then, the scale of conflict between the U.S. and Iran has shown signs of slowing down.
Overall, judging by the current situation, even if the U.S. and Iran are unable to reach an agreement by the end of April, the scale of the conflict will not escalate further before 2027. The only uncertainty lies in the duration of this conflict. I believe the future pace of negotiations between the U.S. and Iran will resemble that of a tariff war—a cycle of skirmishes and talks, with multiple rounds of negotiations. Reports have already emerged suggesting that the U.S. and Iran may be preparing for a second round of talks.
However, it is crucial to remember that a single agreement cannot bring lasting peace to the Middle East. In 2027, there is a risk that the U.S. will make a comeback.