Donald Trump wants to be the emperor of the world, the strongest and most feared global leader, admired by all and paid by all to receive his favor and avoid his coercion. The Trumpian vision of the world is imperialist and obsessed with natural resources: territory, oil, and minerals. Those who possess natural resources and have a history of hostility toward the United States now become targets for American power. Venezuela was the first case. Iran is the second. Venezuela has gone well so far, but the war with Iran has all the ingredients to go badly. In fact, the attack on Iran has opened a Pandora’s box that will be difficult to contain and will lead to an escalation of the conflict in the region.
In the massive bombings of Iran, Trump was surprised by the regime’s resilience and by the power that control of the Strait of Hormuz gives the Iranians. Iran’s Navy and Air Force have been destroyed, yet it is still able to exert pressure on the world and negotiate, country by country, the passage of ships through the strait, granting it enormous geopolitical leverage. A power Trump did not initially understand, but now seeks to claim for himself. If the United States controls the Strait of Hormuz, it will effectively control global oil and gas markets. And since these are resources of which the U.S. is a net exporter, the Trump administration could attempt to cap prices domestically while shifting the heavy cost onto the rest of the world, even coercing other countries into bearing the financial burden of the attack on Iran and the security of the strait. This appears to be the administration’s strategy for dominance and the reason behind the heavy concentration of American military forces, around 20,000 Marines and special forces, in the Persian Gulf, boots on the ground.
If this is indeed the U.S. strategy, then the primary objective will be the capture of the seven Iranian islands that form the defensive and control architecture of the Strait of Hormuz, rather than Kharg Island, Iran’s main oil hub, which may become a later target. Qeshm Island is the largest and best defended, alongside three smaller islands in the strait, Hengam, Larak, and Hormuz. There are also three small islands near the UAE coast, Abu Musa, Greater Tunb, and Lesser Tunb, which the Emirates claim as their own. There is therefore a serious risk of the conflict expanding to additional countries.
The Gulf states have shown remarkable restraint, despite being targeted by hundreds of Iranian missile attacks without retaliating. However, the region’s aura of security and prosperity has been shattered, and its economic model is now under severe threat, both in terms of resource exports and the attraction of tourism and investment. A peace agreement that leaves the Iranian regime in power and in control of the Strait of Hormuz would be detrimental to the future of these countries, as it would maintain a persistent sense of insecurity in the region. Under current conditions, the best strategy for the UAE and Saudi Arabia may be to join the United States in attacking Iran, despite the risks of retaliation. Smaller Gulf countries, more exposed and with limited military capabilities, have greater incentive to remain neutral at this stage of the conflict.
Thus, Pandora’s box has been opened. The main forces in the region have been placed in a situation where continuing the war becomes the most rational strategy. Iran will never willingly relinquish control of the Strait of Hormuz. The United States needs a rapid victory in Hormuz to justify the war. The Gulf states are being drawn into a conflict they sought to avoid, but which now may only end with the fall of the Iranian regime. And Israel aims to continue dismantling surrounding paramilitary forces while expanding its territory in Gaza, the West Bank, and southern Lebanon. Talks of negotiations serve merely as smokescreens to conceal preparations for further attacks.
As a result, it is highly likely that the United States and Israel will intensify their bombardment of Iran in the week of April 6, targeting the islands near Hormuz and the Persian Gulf coastline, as a prelude to an amphibious offensive in the early hours of Saturday, April 11, when markets are closed, or the following week if forces are not yet ready. The U.S. will likely attempt to seize the four islands closest to the strait and subsequently turn them into an American protectorate in the name of securing the Strait of Hormuz, thereby increasing its influence over the global economy and Gulf countries. In this operation, the U.S. will not be alone. The UAE, the Gulf country with the most capable military forces, will likely attempt to take control of the three smaller islands it claims. This would be a high-risk operation with significant potential loss of life. If successful, however, it would weaken the Iranian regime and allow the U.S. to claim a major victory, even if it leaves it entangled in Middle Eastern conflicts for years.
What could go wrong? Few doubt the U.S. military’s ability to capture these islands. But if casualties rise from dozens to hundreds, American public opinion may turn against the war. Even with control of the islands, the security of the Strait of Hormuz would remain threatened by attacks from Iran’s coastline, potentially forcing further escalation. There is also the risk that this operation could trigger wider regional conflicts, including sectarian tensions between Shia and Sunni populations across Gulf countries, as well as continued Israeli advances into Lebanon. A serious risk also lies in internal instability in Iran leading to civil war, with unpredictable consequences for the region. All of this would significantly benefit Russia, which would gain economically from the disruption in the Persian Gulf and could use the situation to escalate the war in Ukraine.
The unknown variable is China’s response, the only global power whose actions or influence could potentially prevent U.S. escalation, yet it has remained notably calm since the conflict began. This week’s cover of The Economist suggests China is following Napoleon’s principle of never interrupting an enemy while it is making a mistake. But how will China assess its strategic position in this emerging world order, where Pacific powers are rapidly rearming and the Trump administration seeks to control global oil markets while proposing a 40% increase in its defense budget by 2027, reminiscent of Cold War peaks in military spending? Will China continue with a patient strategy, or seize this moment, with the U.S. engaged elsewhere, to accelerate its timeline and impose a blockade on Taiwan to force integration into greater China?
Trump’s imperial strategy is dismantling the global order. The strategic adjustments that other powers will make in response are difficult to predict. What is certain is that the world has become far more dangerous and fragmented, and it is likely to become even more so. Europe must recognize that everything has changed, muster the courage and resources, and develop the capacity to continue supporting Ukraine, which is fighting for its freedom. Europe must also rapidly strengthen its strategic autonomy, militarily, digitally, and financially, as a major global bloc.
Filipe Santos, Dean of CATÓLICA-LISBON