Trump, Iran, and the Strait of Hormuz: An Escalation That Has the World on Edge

There are moments when history seems to be spinning out of control, and you wake up each morning feeling like you're turning the page of a book you never wanted to read. Since last night, that’s pretty much the mood. The echoes coming out of Tehran and Washington sound like an unmistakable warning: we are on the brink of open confrontation. And this morning, the single topic dominating every conversation—from the quays of Paris to Geneva’s think tanks—is Iran’s ultimatum regarding the Strait of Hormuz. The Iranian government has just announced that it would “completely shut down” the passage if the country’s nuclear power plants or energy infrastructure were targeted. In the current climate, this is no hollow threat.

To understand why this stretch of sea between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman has become such a flashpoint, you have to look at the last 48 hours. The Trump administration has let plans leak—if confirmed, they would target strategic installations inside Iran. The idea of striking power plants goes straight for the jugular in a region where electricity and oil are the lifeblood of power. In response, Tehran is raising the stakes with a formidable asymmetric weapon: holding maritime traffic hostage. Nearly 20% of the world’s oil passes through this choke point. Closing Hormuz would send a shockwave far more severe than the oil crises of the 1970s—or even the one triggered by the war in Ukraine. Behind the scenes, experts agree that an open conflict combined with a blockade could unleash an energy crisis of unprecedented scale. We’re talking about a scenario where the price of a barrel becomes a purely abstract number.

In moments like this, I always find myself digging through the library. Not looking for ready-made answers, but for recurring patterns. When you see a U.S. president engaging in such a risky confrontation at the end of his term, my mind immediately goes to a book on my nightstand: “When You Come at the King: Inside DOJ's Pursuit of the President, From Nixon to Trump”. It’s not just a legal history. It’s a perfect illustration of how an executive branch, cornered at home, sometimes tends to look for an escape through escalation abroad. The parallel with “One Damn Thing After Another: Memoirs of an Attorney General” is striking. These memoirs describe a political machine where international decisions are often made in a hypercharged inner circle, far from the nuanced discussions of a proper situation room.

What strikes me too is the almost total absence of a certain political “playbook” in this confrontation. It feels like the fundamentals of political science—the kind taught in books like “Power and Choice: An Introduction to Political Science” or “Introduction to Comparative Politics”—have been temporarily suspended. Normally, in an international standoff, there are guardrails, channels of communication, backchannels. Here, we’re witnessing a deafening dialogue amplified by strong personalities. And we shouldn’t overlook the behind-the-scenes players in this affair. I’m thinking of Naghmeh Abedini Panahi, a figure in Iranian civil society whose name often comes up in sharp analyses of the situation. Her story, like so many others, is a reminder that beyond the missiles and tankers, there’s an Iranian society watching this dangerous game with a level of anxiety we here can hardly imagine.

So, what should we expect in the hours ahead? Here are what I see as the three critical things to watch:

• Response to the response: If Iran follows through on Hormuz, don’t expect just a verbal condemnation. The Trump administration has shown in the past that it responds with force. The question is whether that response will be measured or whether it will open a Pandora’s box.
• The domino effect on energy prices: Markets are already on edge. A closure, even partial, of the strait would send prices skyrocketing instantly. For Europe, still reliant on certain sources, this would be an economic body blow right in the middle of its transition process.
• National unity in Iran: Nothing unites a people like an external attack. A U.S. strike on civilian infrastructure, like power plants, would have the opposite of its intended effect. It would temporarily erase internal fractures and forge a unified front against the “Great Satan.”

I say this without hyperbole: this is no ordinary episode of tensions, the kind we see every six months in this region. The threat of a “complete shutdown” of Hormuz, coupled with offensive plans targeting energy sites, has put us in a zone of turbulence that foreign policy veterans are comparing to the worst days of the Cold War. The history books—the ones full of miscalculations and tragic escalations—are filled with chapters that begin exactly like this one. Whether today’s players will have the wisdom to turn the page before it’s too late remains to be seen. In the meantime, I’m keeping one eye on maritime traffic and the other on the statements coming out in the next few hours. Because right now, whether in Tehran or Washington, this isn’t political fiction. This is real time.