Trump’s trap: Solving Hormuz crisis saves Iranian regime, and threats don't work - analysis

US President Donald Trump has threatened Iran with annihilation so many times over the last year that it would be stunning if anyone in Iran still took his rhetoric seriously.

Or, as The Wall Street Journal wrote in an editorial on Wednesday, those threats “would be more credible if the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and we hadn’t heard it several times by now.”

Yet we, and the IRGC, have heard them. And then, in nearly the next breath or at the next photo opportunity, we have heard Trump talk about negotiations and, essentially, peace in our time with Iran.

We heard it again on Tuesday at the UN. On the one hand, Trump threatened to obliterate Iran and “drive them into hell, leaving it no chance of survival and no hope of future greatness for generations.” A few hours later, however, he said the US had held “very good” talks with the Iranians.

Might the tough talk simply be a negotiating ploy? Of course. But Trump is not the only one who knows all the negotiating tricks. So do the Iranians.

According to various reports, those fruitful talks between US and Iranian officials produced a proposal under which Iran would reopen the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for the US lifting its blockade.

The Iranian negotiating ploy is reminiscent of the famous Hasidic tale in which a poor man, complaining to his rabbi that his house is unbearably crowded, is instructed to bring more and more animals inside. When he is finally told to remove them, the same house suddenly feels spacious.

That, in essence, is what Iran is attempting to do.

A war never meant to be about the Strait of Hormuz

This war was never meant to be about the Strait of Hormuz. Or, at least, it did not start that way. The Iranians made the strait an issue by mining it and firing at ships and oil tankers passing through. The US retaliated by imposing a blockade on Iran - a blockade that is currently strangling the Iranian economy.

Now the Iranians are proposing that Washington lift the blockade in exchange for Tehran ending a crisis it created. A senior Iranian official reportedly said that Hormuz could reopen within seven days if Washington reduced military pressure and lifted the blockade.

Sounds tempting, no?

Especially since reopening the strait would allow much more oil onto the world market, lowering gasoline prices at American pumps just weeks before the midterm elections in November.

But such an agreement would solve the crisis Iran manufactured, not the underlying crisis that led to the war.

The central issue is not the Strait of Hormuz. It is Iran’s surviving enriched uranium, its nuclear program and its ballistic-missile capabilities.

If Washington lifts the blockade to reopen the strait, what leverage will remain to compel Iran to surrender its enriched uranium and accept limits on its nuclear and ballistic-missile programs?

Very little, which is precisely the problem.

With the blockade, the US essentially has its foot on the neck of the Iranian economy. If continuously applied, that pressure could lead to the best possible outcome from both an Israeli and American perspective: regime change.

Only will abandon nuclear project with regime change

According to Israeli intelligence assessments, Iran will truly abandon its nuclear project only if its fundamentalist regime changes. As long as that regime remains in power, it will continue striving for nuclear capabilities, which it sees as its ultimate guarantee of survival.

The danger for Israel, therefore, is clear: The US may prioritize reopening the Strait of Hormuz, partly because of domestic electoral considerations, over addressing Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

Iran is offering to stop doing something international law never entitled it to do in the first place, and demanding sanctions and blockade relief in return. The immediate economic incentive to accept will be enormous, but a deal focused narrowly on Hormuz would reward Tehran for manufacturing the crisis.

Trump said in his UN speech that he did not care about the midterm elections and that they were not a factor in his decision-making.

“When it comes to Iran, it doesn’t even enter my mind,” he said.

That should be reassuring. The problem is that so many of Trump’s previous threats against Iran have proved hollow that the skepticism surrounding those threats inevitably carries over to statements such as this one as well.

What the Iranians do not realize, Trump said, is that he is not running in the midterm elections. “I’ll be here for two and a half years.”

And therein lies a core issue.

To get the Iranians to show flexibility, Trump must show that his position will not fluctuate before or after the elections. He must convince Tehran that the pressure will remain regardless of oil prices, polling numbers, or the date on the electoral calendar.

But even that is not enough.

The American political system - not merely the Trump administration - must persuade the Iranians that preventing them from acquiring nuclear weapons is a lasting American policy rather than the preference of one president.

That is a much more difficult task.

The Iranians are betting first that Trump will avoid drastic measures just before the midterm elections because he does not want to disrupt the oil market and send gasoline prices soaring.

Their second and more consequential wager is that, even if Trump holds firm now, they need only endure another two years. After that, a new administration could enter office with different priorities and a far more conciliatory approach toward Tehran.

This belief that American pressure can always be waited out is central to Iran’s strategy. It is also why lifting the blockade now would be particularly damaging.

It will be difficult for the regime to outlast Trump if the blockade remains in place and the economy continues to crumble. It will be considerably easier if the blockade is lifted, sanctions are eased, and Iran is given the economic oxygen needed to stabilize the regime and rebuild its military capabilities.

Following the June 2025 12-Day War, Israel changed its objective regarding Iran. The goal shifted from “merely” damaging and setting back Iran’s nuclear and missile programs to establishing the conditions for the eventual fall of the regime - something that Israeli intelligence assessments said would take between one and three years if military and economic pressure was sustained.

That assessment has not necessarily changed. It might, however, if the blockade is lifted, Iran receives sanctions relief, and the regime is allowed to rescue its economy.

Trump’s credibility will not be restored by threatening Iran with annihilation yet again. It will be restored by demonstrating that the US will not exchange long-term strategic leverage for temporary calm and cheaper gasoline.