By Mohammad Molaei
US President Donald Trump’s threat to impose a complete “naval blockade” on Iranian ports and control of the Strait of Hormuz is not a strategic military move, but the final attempt of a dying Empire to reformulate the equations of a war it has already lost.
The threat, issued after the collapse of ceasefire talks in Pakistan, is in line with the US military might at face value, but in reality has no long-term operational support, rational economic foundation, or international backing.
By doing this, the United States will not only be unable to deter Iran but will also severely harm its own strategic ties with other countries, as it will further deteriorate the global energy crisis, push inflation and even cripple its own supply chains.
In military terms, Trump’s threat of a naval blockade is completely detached from modern asymmetric warfare. Despite the Fifth Fleet of the US in Bahrain having the most modern Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and Aegis systems, it is completely susceptible to the hybrid war of Iran and regional resistance allies.
The implementation of such a blockade, according to military experts like James Stavridis, the former NATO commander, would necessitate at least two groups of carrier strike, over a dozen destroyers and frigates not within the Persian Gulf, and at least six more warships, as well as the support of the naval forces of the UAE and Saudi Arabia within the Persian Gulf.
Even this number of forces would not allow a standing blockade in case of a new round of war due to saturation missiles, drone attacks and unmanned boat attacks.
Moreover, the American fleet has not dared to come closer to the Iranian coasts since the start of the Ramadan War until now, not to come within the range of the Iranian ballistic anti-ship and supersonic cruise missiles, which comprise the major and most advanced weapons in the Iranian arsenal in terms of anti-ship weapons.
As the experience of the so-called 2023-2024 “Operation Prosperity Guardian” in Yemen demonstrated, despite the large presence of the American and coalition fleet, the Yemeni military managed to decrease Red Sea traffic by up to 70 percent.
Iran, also, with its vast web of anti-ship cruise missiles, long-range suicide drones and massive mining capacity, can make any American warship or naval force a target without necessarily engaging them.
Even the Pentagon itself has verified in its secret evaluations that the expense of such a blockade, considering the fuel use and crew burnout, and the logistical fragility, would soon become unsustainable.
Thus, the threat of Trump becomes more of a psychological and propaganda weapon than an operational one. It is a weapon of diplomatic pressure that will backfire on the battlefield. Just as it did not achieve its goals in the Ramadan War, the naval blockade will also prove futile.
The financial aspects of this embargo are much more devastating than was first thought. IEA and EIA projections suggest that the Bab al-Mandab Strait alone would be transporting about 4.2 million barrels of crude oil and petroleum products per day in the first half of 2026, or about 5 to 6 percent of the global seaborne oil trade.
However, its effects are much stronger than energy: in a typical state of affairs, this strait has to carry up to 14 percent of the world’s seaborne traffic, 30 percent of container transportation, and a considerable part of LNG traffic.
Any further build-up of tension or mutual blockade will instantly send oil prices skyrocketing to amounts never before witnessed and exacerbate world inflation. The experience with the Yemeni attacks of the past indicates that even a reduction of 50 to 60 percent in traffic resulted in a rise in the rates of container shipping on the Asia-Europe routes by 200 to 300 percent, an increase in war-risk insurance rates, and a rise in fuel costs and the voyage duration by another 10 to 14 days.
In this scenario, it will not be able to weaken Iran, which has become resilient with diversification of its export channels and reliance on alternative currencies, but will take the economies of Europe, Asia and even the United States itself, which is a significant importer of energy, as its hostages.
Reportedly, Egypt, the Suez Canal revenues of which have already dropped by 40 to 60 percent in recent years due to similar disruptions, will be one of the largest losers of this policy, according to the reports issued by the World Bank and the Suez Canal Authority.
But why has the United States already thrown away this war? The solution is strategic calculations in the long term. Having exhausted all the effective methods of enforcing its will with years of maximum-pressure policy, unilateral sanctions, and proxy wars, Washington is now left with no effective instrument to enforce its will, and the economy of Iran, now accustomed to the economic siege that has been maintained until today, will not be substantially impacted by a naval blockade.
The asymmetric deterrence of Iran and the Axis of Resistance, based on low-cost but highly effective technologies such as suicide drones, ballistic anti-ship missiles, and integrated intelligence networks, has made every direct action an outrageously costly undertaking.
Think tanks like CSIS and the Atlantic Council have made analytical reports that, despite an ideal scenario in the United States, there is a massive consumption of resources in implementing a blockade, which cannot be offered by the current American fleet considering their global commitments in the Pacific as well as other locations.
Additionally, any actual blockade is accompanied by a threat of a chain reaction: an increase in energy prices, the breakage of food and medicine supply chains, and home protests in Western nations that are already struggling with inflation and recession.
It is the structural weakness in American foreign policy that Trump has only revealed: failure to come to terms with the new reality of West Asia, in which it is no longer the backyard of Washington, but a sphere in which Iran gains dominance with the help of asymmetric weapons.
Next, what will occur if Yemen, in response to the blockade or any other irresponsible act by the Americans, shuts the Bab al-Mandab Strait?
This is not a situation that would hardly be avoided; indeed, it is quite well congruent with the deterrence concept of the Axis of Resistance. The Bab al-Mandab Strait, just 18 miles wide, is the southern entrance of the Red Sea and the Suez Canal and during good times, thousands of ships sailed through it each day.
According to statistics of Lloyds List and IMF PortWatch, during normal times, monthly passage via this strait was as high as 1,200 vessels, and the volume of cargo was 1.6 billion tons per year.
With its demonstrated capabilities to strike, such as ballistic, cruise anti-ship missiles, suicide drones, explosive unmanned boats and smart mining capabilities, Yemeni military has precisely the same equipment that in the last two years allowed it to cut down Red Sea traffic by up to 70 percent, make ship insurance rates 0.7 to 1 percent of cargo value and add to the cost of shipping a container between Shanghai and Rotterdam by Complete closure, or even a solemn threat of complete closure, of the strait, would be accomplished in a few days; but mine- clearance and security operations, in months.
In the case of the simultaneous Strait of Hormuz blockade (or an attempt to blockade) by the Americans and the Bab al-Mandab blockade by Yemen, nearly 10 to 14 percent of all seaborne trade, 5 to 6 percent of all seaborne oil trade, and almost a third of all container traffic, more than under normal conditions, will be immobilized.
Oil prices will be higher than they have ever been, the European and Asian supply chains will be impacted, revenues at the Suez Canal, which is critical to the country, and costs billions of dollars a year will hit zero, and world food and energy inflation will be out of control.
The American fleet will not be able to stay on two fronts apart and protect them at the same time. Experience has revealed that even combined American and coalition attacks in the Red Sea failed to prevent the attacks of the Yemeni military.
Now that there is not even a coalition, and that America’s allies and Western bloc nations like Spain and Italy are leaning in the direction of China, this will be much more with their outright backing of the Axis of Resistance.
This is just the asymmetric economic war the Axis of Resistance has long been imposing on hostile powers, asymmetrically organizing unbearable costs to the opposing side without inciting outright war of attrition.
Hence, Trump will not alter the dynamics of the war by introducing the challenge of the naval blockade but will bring it to a new level to benefit Iran and the Axis of Resistance.
The geographic impossibility of attacking the Persian Gulf and the Red Sea, the indisputable superiority of asymmetric warfare and the resolute will of the forces put in countermeasure will turn any American deception to failure.
In case the US is, in fact, interested in ending tensions, it needs to abandon the language of threats and come to terms with the new reality: the vital straits of the world have ceased to be instruments of Western domination.
Any attempt to challenge this fact will only add to the global crisis and eventually lead to the widespread acknowledgment that America has suffered a decisive strategic defeat.
[…]
The Most Revolutionary Act 