Dem
47
GOP
53
Politico has a good article summarizing the box Donald Trump is in. Iran feels it has all the cards and sees no reason to negotiate. What it wants is formal recognition that it controls the Strait of Hormuz and can charge any tolls it wants to. For Trump this is completely unacceptable because it will lead everyone—including Republicans—to ask how this is better than the deal that Barack Obama made with Iran, which had some restrictions on Iran's ability to enrich uranium and no restrictions or tolls in the Strait. If Trump is unwilling to accept Iranian control of the Strait, all he can do is keep bombing and hope against hope that Iran eventually gives in, which seems very unlikely at this point. Meanwhile, as the no-war-no-peace situation continues, the U.S. is running out of bombs and interceptors and Iran keeps attacking U.S. allies in the region. Trump has no good options. He is a cornered animal.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio is against letting Iran control the Strait because there are other straits in the world where the country or countries bordering them would also start demanding tolls. A key American foreign policy principle going back at least 200 years is freedom of the seas. That would go up in smoke in such a deal and Republicans would have to defend it in 2026 and 2028. Also, as a practical matter rather than an abstract principle, prices of oil and other products would go up if there were tolls all around the world.
Middle East expert Danny Citrinowicz said: "Any diplomatic agreement will likely require accepting some form of Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz, an outcome many in Washington would find difficult to accept. On the other hand, further military escalation would almost certainly keep oil prices elevated while offering no guarantee that Iran would back down or fundamentally change its strategic calculus."
Alex Gray, chief of staff of the National Security Council in Trump v1.0, is just as pessimistic. He said: "If we start accepting that a party of any kind can just unilaterally impose tolls and fees and close major passages in international waters, that is deeply destructive to commercial traffic, to the U.S. Navy's ability to operate, to the norms of freedom of navigation that have been really in practice for 80 years, that would be a very difficult thing for us to concede."
If Trump is thinking of his possible legacy as the president who gave up freedom of the seas, what he could do is forget the midterms and refuse to budge until after Nov. 4. The Iranians are no doubt thinking that they have him over a (oil) barrel on account of the midterms. On Nov. 4, that weapon goes "poof!" Then Trump would be free to escalate, such as invading and capturing Kharg Island, where the terminal used to export Iran's oil is located. That would block almost all Iranian oil exports. Undoubtedly American soldiers would be killed in the invasion, but after the midterms, Trump might not care about that. Then he could offer Iran this deal: "You get your island back in return for a formal treaty guaranteeing freedom of navigation in the Strait with no tolls and enforced by an international naval military presence in the Strait." Would that work and is it worth trying? Trump would be wise to check with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Dan Caine before giving any orders. And to listen carefully to what the general says this time. (V)