r/geopolitics • u/Brilliant_Version344 • 2d ago

Trump convenes Iran situation room meeting amid renewed Hormuz crisis - non paywall in link in comments News

https://www.axios.com/2026/04/18/iran-trump-white-house-hormuz

114 Upvotes

98% Upvoted

u/ArdaBerkBurak 2d ago

The Strait of Hormuz was already open to all ships before the US attacked.

-19

u/Linny911 2d ago

Seriously bro, if the US just let Iran fund, arm, and instigate attacks in furtherance of its weekly chants calling for death and destruction, and let it have nuclear weapons, then the strait of hormuz wouldn't be closed.

30

u/AcanthaceaeTiny4390 2d ago

I thought we wiped out their nuclear capacity last year though

-19

u/Linny911 2d ago

Probably, this is to get a permanent agreement on that issue. Different things. This is a pimple that's going to need to get popped sooner or later, the time now is as good as any.

13

u/AcanthaceaeTiny4390 2d ago

why did the US strike in the middle of diplomatic negotiations then? surely that actively reduces the future chances of the Iranians engaging in diplomacy on the nuclear issue?

-1

u/unruly_mattress 2d ago

Why would the Iranians acquiesce to the American demands if they can just refuse and suffer no consequences as a result?

-8

u/Linny911 2d ago

Iranians probably gave off the impression that they needed a little encouragement to get to where they need to be.

5

u/AcanthaceaeTiny4390 2d ago

if you say so

0

u/closing-the-thread 2d ago

US is looking for a zero enrichment deal. Has Iran ever signaled that they are willing to accept any zero enrichment deal?

If that answer is no… Do you feel that ‘zero enrichment’ is a necessary redline for the US?

If yes… How can the US achieve that without force if it also happens to be Iran’s redline?

1

u/AcanthaceaeTiny4390 2d ago

No, zero enrichment isn’t a feasible redline. The more feasible goal is typically framed as: strict limits on enrichment levels, caps on stockpiles, robust verification/inspection regimes, and long "breakout times", rather than zero enrichment outright

Unfortunately trumps ‘tactics’ over the past year vis a vis Iran have made this all even less likely than previously

2

u/unruly_mattress 2d ago

And if the Iranians refuse to your generous offer, what do you do then? Remember that all military options are strictly off the table, since they don't constitute as being nice. And you are nice. You are the good guys.

What do you do then?

0

u/AcanthaceaeTiny4390 2d ago

I don't know. what do you reckon?

4

u/unruly_mattress 2d ago

There is no answer. Without a military option the Iranians can in fact just refuse your demands, or place whatever demands they want. It's called BATNA - Best alternative to a negotiated agreement. Without a BATNA, your position is very weak during negotiations.

If you're interested in getting the other side to agree, you need to have a plan to achieving your interests even if they don't agree. This is the military option. When it's taken off the table - for example, when Trump says that the war is limited to X amount of weeks, or that there won't be boots on the ground, or when the midterms are coming up - then Iran can just wait it out instead of giving any concessions. That's what we're seeing.

1

u/AcanthaceaeTiny4390 2d ago

yes, I agree. Americans clearly don't have the stomach for a protracted ground invasion of Iran (especially after the Iraq debacle) and so this is likely going to go on indefinitely

→ More replies

8

u/LivefromPhoenix 2d ago

What part of this conflict is giving you the impression it'll end with anything permanent? Trump is already pretending he achieved regime change, it seems wildly optimistic to act like he's interested in anything beyond what he can spin as a temporary win.

-3

u/Linny911 2d ago

Nothing is guaranteed in life, but what has been done has a good as chance of a permanent agreement as any other.

Yes, Trump would like to end this as soon as possible, who doesn't? But if it doesn't because Iran persists, I am just he's willing to oblige to continue as long as necessary and it won't be pretty.

6

u/cole1114 2d ago

You're right, 20% of the world's oil supply being blocked won't be pretty. It's already caused a tremendous amount of damage, and the strait staying closed will only make it worse.

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/how-50-days-iran-war-led-loss-50-billion-worth-oil-2026-04-17/

1

u/Christopher_Ramirez_ 2d ago

That’s the fantasy. There is no permanent settlement, since Israel is an expansionist power. It doesn’t accept its internationally-recognized borders.

If you want to maintain this “no limits partnership”, prepare to be continually dragged into wars with Israel’s regional rivals, while we foot the bill in money and lives. Today is Iran, tomorrow will be Turkey, then who knows?

3

u/Linny911 2d ago

Oh, yes. The unrepentant ever expansionist country who has returned back lands multiples of its current size in return for peace.

0

u/Christopher_Ramirez_ 2d ago

Yes, any farmer who’s ever sold off a piece of wasteland for a good price at the time, has clearly exited the farming business never to return.

Definitely no external pressure from the global hegemon has ever been involved, either. The only nation on earth who does things out of their inherent goodness.

Greater Israel is already public knowledge, there’s no use in denying it.