Straitjacket of Hormuz
Iran bulletin
Last year, we highlighted tensions between the Islamic Republic of Iran, the State of Israel, and the United States of America as they escalated through a series of attacks, intelligence accusations, and assassination plots. Iran launched Operation True Promise in April after Israel bombed its Damascus embassy, while U.S. intelligence increasingly framed Iran as a national security threat following the death of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi last May. Over the following months, Iran was accused of election interference, cyberattacks, and influencing protests, culminating in the FBI arresting an alleged IRGC-linked assassin targeting Donald Trump. In October, Iran launched Operation True Promise 2 in retaliation for Israel’s assassination of a Hamas leader in Tehran. After Trump’s November election victory, Iran postponed further military actions, though tensions persisted. As Trump’s 2025 inauguration neared, uncertainty remained over whether his administration would pursue diplomacy or further escalate toward conflict.
Viewers of our New Year spectacle know that we’ve been betting on further escalations, and (at least in this arena) Trump hasn’t disappointed us. Just two days after his second inauguration, he re-designated Yemen’s Ansar Allah—popularly known as the Houthis—as a terrorist organization, reversing President Biden’s 2021 decision to lift the designation due to humanitarian concerns. The move aligns with the interests of Israel, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman pledging $600 million in U.S. investments simultaneous to the terrorist designation. The decision followed continued Houthi attacks on commercial ships and military targets, despite previous U.S. and UK airstrikes. Trump’s order cited the Houthis’ ties to Iran’s Quds Force and their disruption of global trade through their attacks on ships in the Red Sea in response to Israel’s genocide in Gaza. (The Houthis, who had paused attacks following a Gaza ceasefire in January—which Trump helped broker with assistance from Egypt and Qatar—recently announced they would resume targeting Israeli-linked vessels following Israel’s repeated violations of that ceasefire deal.) Trump directed Secretary of State Marco Rubio to finalize the designation within 45 days and ordered a review to halt any U.S. aid that could benefit the Houthis.
On 15 March, seven days after Rubio’s deadline for finalizing the designation, the U.S. launched its first strikes against Yemen, killing at least 21 people, including civilians, according to Houthi officials. The airstrikes targeted sites in Sanaa and Saada as part of Trump’s intensified military campaign against the group, with Trump vowing to use “overwhelming lethal force” against the Houthis and warning Iran to halt its support for them—despite these strikes having no congressional approval, and therefore violating Article 1 the U.S. Constitution and of the War Powers Resolution of 1973. Those strikes became the first of a campaign that continued for at least a week and a half, shifting from targeting missile launch sites to attacking Houthi leadership and urban areas that killed 36 more—and though concerns over civilian casualties are growing, the U.S. has not publicly acknowledged any. Trump has given the U.S. military greater autonomy to conduct strikes without White House approval, leading to a higher frequency of attacks. Analysts suggest airstrikes alone will not eliminate their capabilities without ground forces.
Trump’s warning to Iran followed his proposal to reopen nuclear talks with the Islamic Republic, despite having withdrawn the U.S. from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2018—having then criticized the deal for its sunset clauses, which he believed would eventually allow Iran to resume nuclear activity, and for not addressing Iran’s missile development and regional influence—in favor of a “maximum pressure” campaign that imposed strict sanctions on Iran in an effort to secure a new agreement. That proposal set a two-month deadline for negotiating a new nuclear deal, after which the risk of U.S. or Israeli military action against Iran’s nuclear facilities would increase—with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu having thanked Trump at the start of the month for sending munitions that had been held up by the previous administration, stating they would help Israel “finish the job against Iran’s terror axis.”
However, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Masoud Pezeshkian both rejected Trump’s offer, accusing the U.S. of trying to impose further demands beyond nuclear restrictions, including limiting Iran’s missile capabilities and regional influence. Additionally, China and Russia expressed strong support for Iran—their fellow BRICS+ member since 2024—issuing a joint statement after talks in Beijing emphasizing that dialogue should only resume based on “mutual respect” and insisting that all sanctions be lifted. They also reaffirmed Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear energy use.
But in the wake of that proposal’s rejection, the U.S. began escalating its military presence in the Middle East by deploying a second aircraft carrier, the USS Carl Vinson, to the Red Sea to join the USS Harry S. Truman carrier strike group, while Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth extended the Truman’s deployment by at least a month. The buildup aims both to counter persistent Houthi attacks on commercial and military vessels, and to deter Iranian support. Additionally, Trump lowered the authorization threshold for offensive strikes, granting U.S. Central Command the ability to act offensively without White House approval—and, as previously mentioned, without congressional authorization.
Naturally, that double deployment signifies a significant shift in U.S. military focus toward the Middle East. Reinforcing its military presence in the region also involved the deployment of seven B-2 Spirit stealth bombers—more than a third of its B-2 fleet—to Diego Garcia, a remote U.S.-UK military base in the Indian Ocean dating to the 1960s, when the British forcibly displaced native islanders to lease the land to the U.S. for military use. Since then, the island has served as a strategic outpost for U.S. military operations in the Middle East and Indo-Pacific—including bombing campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan—especially when access to bases in the Gulf states has been restricted.
Of course, Iran didn’t sit idly by. On 22 March, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) announced the deployment of advanced 15th Khordad air defense missile systems on three strategic islands in the Persian Gulf—Greater Tunb, Lesser Tunb, and Abu Musa—positioned near the vital Strait of Hormuz, a crucial shipping route for Middle Eastern oil, as part of the Islamic Republic’s broader efforts to expand its military presence in the Gulf. The missiles, capable of striking targets within 600 km (370 miles), are intended to target “enemy bases, vessels, and assets” in the region. The move strengthens Iran’s anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) capabilities, challenging U.S. and allied military operations in the Gulf. The 15th Khordad system can detect and engage a range of aerial threats, including stealth aircraft and cruise missiles, in a deployment that enhances Iran’s ability to counter U.S. surveillance and carrier strike groups, potentially restricting freedom of operation in the region. Meanwhile, the international community fears that escalating militarization in the Strait of Hormuz could disrupt global oil supplies and lead to armed conflict, reshaping the security landscape of the Persian Gulf.
Notably, Iran seems to have played its offensive capabilities closer to the vest, not mentioning whether the USS Carl Vinson, the USS Harry S. Truman, or other U.S. military assets might face its Fattah-1 or Fattah-2 hypersonic missiles, to which the aforementioned aircraft carriers are extremely vulnerable—though the IRGC has announced plans to soon debut a new model of hypersonic cruise missile.
Soon after the announced deployment of its air defense systems, the IRGC upped the ante with its revelation of another underground missile city, adding to one for naval warfare unveiled in February and to an underground naval base disclosed in January. These announcements came concurrent with naval exercises that took place this month, in which Russia and China joined their BRICS+ fellow in the Gulf of Oman (near Iran’s port of Chabahar) for their Marine Security Belt 2025—the fifth China-Iran-Russia naval exercise since 2019—aimed at enhancing counter-piracy, anti-terrorism, and maritime security operations. Russia deployed two corvettes, the Rezky and Aldar Tsydenzhapov, along with a tanker from its Pacific Fleet. China sent its Type 052D destroyer Baotou and the Type 903A replenishment ship Gaoyouhu from its 47th escort task group, while Iran contributed warships from both its Navy and the Revolutionary Guards. The exercises included hijacked vessel rescues, search and rescue missions, and live-fire drills. Additionally, Azerbaijan, South Africa, Oman, Kazakhstan, Pakistan, Qatar, Iraq, the UAE, and Sri Lanka participated as observers.
Chinese experts emphasize that the drill is not directed at any third party but is intended to maintain regional stability and global peace, but of course this year’s exercise holds greater geopolitical significance as Trump’s foreign policy shifts, disrupting Western alliances while strengthening pressure on Iran. Like the Strait of Hormuz, the Gulf of Oman remains a key oil trade route, with the U.S. Fifth Fleet stationed nearby in Bahrain—some 4,397 km (2,732 miles) from the U.S. base on Diego Garcia.
China’s efforts to downplay any foreign concerns about the naval exercise wisely anticipated the likely reaction of an increasingly belligerent U.S. president. Despite claims of being an “anti-war” president, analysts observe that Trump's actions suggest otherwise as he escalates conflict in the Middle East. At the start of the U.S. airstrike campaign in Yemen, the White House released photos of Trump watching U.S. strikes against the Houthis while dressed in golf attire, wearing a red MAGA hat and a headset. The post framed the strikes as an effort to protect U.S. shipping and deter terrorism. The images quickly went viral, sparking mixed reactions: critics questioned his “anti-war” stance, accusing him of prioritizing Israel’s interests, while supporters praised him for taking action. Others mocked him for ordering airstrikes while golfing. Meanwhile, Israel moved troops into Syria, and U.S. airstrikes targeted Syrian anti-aircraft artillery, creating a path for possible strikes on Iran.
Though Trump has expressed a preference for negotiations but warned of severe consequences if talks fail—and the deployment of B-2 bombers, capable of carrying massive bunker-buster bombs needed to strike Iran’s underground nuclear sites, signals U.S. preparedness for potential military action. But Iran’s nuclear ambitions are shaped by historical lessons from its neighbors, observing that Iraq and Libya were dismantled while North Korea, with nuclear weapons, deterred intervention, as Kevork Almassian persuasively argues. The U.S. initially engaged with Iran through the 2015 JCPOA, limiting its nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief, but Trump, influenced by Netanyahu, withdrew from the deal in 2018, escalating tensions.
Almassian contends that U.S. policy toward Iran is less about nonproliferation and more about control, aiming to force Iran into submission rather than ensuring regional stability. This strategy, which he describes as imperial bullying, aligns with broader U.S. and Israeli goals of dominance in the Middle East. Netanyahu’s long-standing vision allegedly involves using military intervention to pacify the region and maintain U.S.-Israeli hegemony. While Iran faces heavy sanctions and threats over its nuclear potential, Israel, which has nuclear weapons and never signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), faces no such consequences, indicating the hypocrisy of the “rules-based international order.” Almassian therefore questions why global denuclearization efforts do not extend to all nations, highlighting a double standard that favors powerful allies while punishing adversaries.
As tensions escalate in the Middle East, the trajectory of U.S. policy under Trump’s second administration becomes increasingly clear: military action and coercion take precedence over diplomacy. The re-designation of the Houthis as a terrorist organization, the intensifying airstrike campaign in Yemen, and the growing military buildup in the region all point toward a widening conflict. Meanwhile, Iran continues to strengthen its defenses, bolstered by support from China and Russia, as the U.S. and its allies increase pressure.
Despite Trump’s insistence that he seeks negotiations, his administration’s actions—deploying stealth bombers, enabling unilateral strikes, and aligning with Netanyahu’s military ambitions—suggest otherwise. The historical pattern remains unchanged: Washington demands submission, and when defied, resorts to force. The hypocrisy of the so-called “rules-based order” is evident in the double standards applied to Iran versus Israel, reinforcing the notion that global power structures remain dictated by military might rather than true diplomacy.
As the Persian Gulf becomes a flashpoint for potential kinetic conflict, the question remains: will the world witness yet another devastating war, likely to cripple the global economy through its effect on global oil supplies, or will strategic interests force an uneasy balance of power? Given Trump’s two-month deadline for reaching a new nuclear deal, the coming months will determine whether Trump’s brinksmanship leads to a negotiated settlement—or yet another catastrophic confrontation.