The closure of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran was not merely a regional disruption; it was a direct challenge to the U.S.–Israeli military campaign against Iran and a shock to the global order. With nearly 20% of the world’s oil flowing through this narrow passage, its strategic importance cannot be overstated. 

Yet the current crisis reveals something deeper than a military standoff: it exposes the complexity of power, perception, and strategy in modern warfare. It also highlights how economic vulnerability can be weaponized as effectively as military force in shaping outcomes.

Aware of this, U.S. President Donald Trump called on NATO allies, as well as China, South Korea, and Japan, to help reopen the Strait and ensure the safe passage of tankers. Many observers, however, were quick to interpret this as a sign of weakness. That conclusion is premature. it misunderstands the nature of global power in a geopolitical context, particularly in a world where the imbalance of power continues to grow. 

The Strait of Hormuz is not an American asset, nor does it serve the United States alone. It is a global lifeline. Securing it is not a unilateral task, but a shared necessity. In such a context, cooperation becomes a tool of strength rather than a concession. So calling allies to secure the Strait of Hormuz was not a sign of weakness or defeat. It was a recognition of Iran’s strategy—and of how power works today. Trump made it clear, saying: “I wonder what would happen if we ‘finished off’ what’s left of the Iranian Terror State, and let the countries that use it—we don’t—be responsible for the so-called ‘Strait?’” He added, “That would get some of our non-responsive ‘allies’ in gear, and fast!!!”

 Iran understands this reality well. After failing to gain decisive leverage through attacks on its neighbors, including Gulf countries, Tehran has turned its focus to the Strait as its most potent strategic weapon to achieve its objectives in a broader way. By threatening or closing the Strait, Iran raised the stakes for everyone—not just the United States. Control over this chokepoint allowed Tehran to shift the battlefield from conventional military confrontation to economic disruption with global consequences. Thus, Iran does not need to lead on the battlefield to control or probably win the war if it can force the world to feel the economic cost of the conflict. This is asymmetric warfare at its best and, In doing so, Iran has strategically transformed geography into power, extending its influence beyond the Middle East in an attempt to halt and possibly win the war. 

In this sense, the control of the Hormuz Strait is central to its war strategy. As reported by Reuter and Kuwait Times, citing senior Iranian sources: “The Guards strongly believe that if they lose control over the Strait of Hormuz, Iran will lose the war.” So Iranian officials view control over Hormuz as essential to avoiding defeat. Their logic is simple: if Iran loses control of the Strait, it loses its most effective lever in the conflict. That’s why Tehran continued to stand firm in the face of both verbal and military threats that aimed at forcing Iranian authorities to reopen the Strait.

Iran’s leadership has reinforced this position. The new Supreme Leader has reportedly ordered the Strait to remain closed as a tool of pressure. Iranian Foreign minister Abbas Araghchi also told UN Secretary-General that “Disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz cannot be addressed independently of the U.S.–Israeli war against Iran,” and “called upon states and institutions concerned with global peace and security to condemn U.S.–Israeli attacks on his country.” This is not just a military stance, it is a strategic message to the international community. It signals that any attempt to isolate Iran will carry consequences beyond the region.

That’s why........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)