Why the Iran-US Conflict Risks Becoming a Prolonged War

TL;DR

Despite Trump's claims of an imminent deal, structural disputes over ceasefire terms and maximalist negotiating positions from both sides make a lasting resolution unlikely, keeping the Iran-US conflict on a trajectory toward prolonged confrontation.

Key Takeaways

1The ceasefire agreement contains fundamental ambiguities—particularly over Lebanon's inclusion and the Strait of Hormuz's opening—that have led to recurring violations and escalation.
2Both the US and Iran believe they won the war, making each side reluctant to concede on core demands, reducing incentives for a genuine diplomatic breakthrough.
3Iran controls two critical global maritime chokepoints (Strait of Hormuz and Bab el-Mandab) and can impose severe costs on the global economy by restricting oil flows.
4The US can continue bombing Iranian targets, but mutual leverage means both sides have tools to inflict pain without forcing capitulation, risking indefinite conflict.
5Optimistic headlines about 'deals' typically refer only to temporary ceasefire extensions, not substantive agreements on issues like Iran's nuclear program.

Notable Quotes

“the final throws of a very good deal which could be signed off within 2 or 3 days and would involve the total reopening of the Strait of Hormuz”
— Trump

“the ceasefire was to apply quote everywhere”
— Pakistan's PM Shabbaz Sharif (referenced)

“Iran had only agreed to quote safe passage via coordination with the Iranian armed forces”
— Iranian readout

“Both sides still have leverage. This would be a good thing if either side had sufficient leverage to force the other to back down. But it's probably a bad thing because neither side seems in the mood for concessions.”

Chapters

1. Trump's Failed Deal Claims and the Rapid Escalation

Trump claimed a deal was imminent just days before Iranian forces downed a US helicopter. What followed was rapid tit-for-tat missile strikes between the US and Iran, contradicting the administration's public optimism.

2. The Fundamental Ambiguities in the Ceasefire

The ceasefire agreement was disputed from the start. The US claimed it required complete opening of the Strait of Hormuz; Iran only agreed to 'safe passage via coordination.' Israel continued military operations in Lebanon despite the ceasefire's stated scope, provoking Iranian retaliation.

3. Why Both Sides Believe They Won

The Trump administration claims to have destroyed Iranian capabilities, while Iran argues it proved it can withstand US military power and impose economic costs. These incompatible narratives eliminate incentives for substantive concessions.

4. The Real Terms of the Strait of Hormuz Dispute

Iran treats the strait as a heavily militarized toll booth via Keshm and Larak islands, requiring multi-million dollar payments. The US imposed a blockade to prevent Iranian ships, creating ongoing friction and occasional attacks on vessels.

5. Mutual Leverage and the Risk of Indefinite Conflict

The US can bomb Iranian infrastructure, but Iran controls global chokepoints and can severely disrupt oil supplies. Neither side has sufficient leverage to force the other to back down, creating conditions for prolonged confrontation.

6. Iran's Economic Leverage: The Strait of Hormuz and Bab el-Mandab

Iran could easily close the Strait of Hormuz to shipping and can use Houthi proxies to close Bab el-Mandab, disrupting 8% of global oil supply. A combined closure would create a 20 million barrel-per-day shortfall.

Key People & Entities

Trump: US President claiming imminent deal and victory over Iran; announced ceasefire terms involving Strait of Hormuz opening
Shabbaz Sharif: Pakistan's Prime Minister who helped describe the original ceasefire terms
Houthis: Iranian proxies controlling western Yemen, capable of disrupting maritime traffic in Bab el-Mandab
Israel: Continued military operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon despite ceasefire agreement, source of ongoing tension
Hezbollah: Lebanese militant group engaged in conflict with Israel; central to dispute over ceasefire scope

Glossary

Strait of Hormuz: A maritime chokepoint between Iran and Oman through which approximately 20% of global oil supply passes; critical to energy markets.
Bab el-Mandab: A maritime strait between Djibouti and Yemen connecting the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden; handles roughly 8% of global oil supply, increasingly important as an alternative to Hormuz.
Keshm and Larak Islands: Heavily militarized Iranian islands in the Strait of Hormuz through which Iran claims transiting ships must pass and pay tolls under its 'safe passage via coordination' arrangement.
Houthis: A militant group controlling much of western Yemen; widely considered to be Iranian proxies capable of disrupting maritime traffic in the Red Sea.
Ceasefire: An agreement to stop hostilities announced early in the conflict, but with disputed terms regarding scope (particularly Lebanon's inclusion) and the Strait of Hormuz's status.

Explore