Trump said he was close to deciding whether to authorise an assault that would be larger than previous operations against Iran. He described the potential action as a “massive attack” and said military preparations were already in place, although he stopped short of confirming targets, timing or the forces that could be involved.
The comments raised the prospect of another sharp escalation in a conflict that has already spread across important energy and shipping corridors. United States forces have carried out successive waves of strikes against Iranian military infrastructure, including missile facilities, drone sites, air-defence systems, surveillance installations and coastal positions.
Iran has responded through direct attacks and actions by aligned armed groups operating across the region. Tehran has also warned that any assault on its strategic infrastructure would trigger retaliation against United States interests and regional partners.
Trump argued that sustained military pressure could force Iran’s leadership back to negotiations. He said Tehran was not ready to reach an agreement because it had not experienced sufficient “pain”, suggesting the White House believes battlefield losses and economic disruption may alter Iran’s negotiating position.
That approach carries significant risks. Iranian officials have repeatedly rejected negotiations conducted under military coercion and have demanded an end to attacks before substantive diplomacy can resume. Tehran has also signalled that strikes on energy, transport or government infrastructure could be met with proportional attacks on comparable targets.
The threatened expansion comes amid efforts by regional intermediaries to revive ceasefire discussions. Gulf governments are seeking to prevent the conflict from widening, fearing missile attacks on cities, energy facilities and ports as well as prolonged disruption to commercial shipping.
Military activity has intensified around the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, two waterways central to global trade. The Strait of Hormuz handles roughly one-fifth of the world’s petroleum consumption, while Bab el-Mandeb connects the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden and serves as a route for tankers travelling between Asia, Europe and the Middle East.
Attacks on Saudi-linked tankers and threats against vessels have increased shipping costs and prompted some operators to reconsider routes. Insurers have raised war-risk premiums, while longer journeys around the Cape of Good Hope are adding fuel expenses, delaying deliveries and tightening the availability of vessels.
Brent crude moved above $100 a barrel as traders priced in the possibility of deeper supply disruption. West Texas Intermediate also climbed, adding pressure on petrol, aviation fuel and transport costs. The price increases have unsettled equity and bond markets, reviving concerns that higher energy bills could keep inflation elevated and complicate interest-rate decisions.
Oil-importing economies face particular exposure. Higher crude prices increase import costs, weaken trade balances and place pressure on currencies. Governments that subsidise fuel may have to absorb larger fiscal burdens, while consumers could face higher prices for transport, food, electricity and manufactured goods.
Energy producers may benefit from stronger prices, but the gains could be offset by threats to export routes. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Iraq and Qatar depend on secure Gulf shipping lanes, even as some producers have developed pipelines designed to bypass the Strait of Hormuz.
A wider United States operation could involve long-range bombers, naval-launched missiles, fighter aircraft and drones. The Pentagon has maintained substantial forces across the region, supported by aerial refuelling aircraft, missile-defence systems, naval groups and bases in allied countries.
Operation Epic Fury, launched earlier this year, targeted Iran’s missile forces, naval capabilities, drone infrastructure and command centres. United States officials have said the campaign weakened Iran’s offensive capacity, but Tehran has continued to demonstrate an ability to launch missiles and drones and to support allied groups.
Iran’s nuclear programme remains another source of confrontation. International inspectors have faced restrictions since verification activity was halted during the conflict. The absence of regular inspections has increased uncertainty over nuclear material, enrichment capacity and damage at declared facilities.
Trump has said Iran must never obtain a nuclear weapon. Tehran maintains that its programme is intended for peaceful purposes, while demanding recognition of its right to enrich uranium under international agreements.
Follow Arabian Post
Select Arabian Post as your preferred source on Google and MSN News for trusted business news and Arab politics and updates.
