Who Will Win the Great Iran-U.S. Test?
WANA (Aug 24) – The U.S. economic war against Iran goes beyond a bilateral confrontation, placing the world before a historic choice: between a Washington-led unilateral order and a multilateral system that strengthens countries’ economic independence, regional security, and Iran’s strategic role in the Strait of Hormuz.
At a time when Trump and Vance had previously spoken of entering a new phase of the confrontation with Iran, namely an “economic war,” U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent also announced the launch of what he called the “largest financial assault in history” against Iran, while threatening countries that side with Tehran with isolation and punishment.
The approach indicates that after setbacks in the military and diplomatic arenas, Washington is now relying on economic pressure to erode Iran’s social resilience and revive domestic discontent.
Trump Announces Start of “Economic War” Against Iran
WANA (Aug 20) – U.S. President Donald Trump announced early Thursday that his administration had launched what he described as the “most crushing economic operation” ever imposed against the Islamic Republic of Iran, signaling a new phase of sweeping economic pressure on Tehran and countries and entities doing business with Iran. In a post […]
The Region Faces a Historic Choice
The United States has entered this arena at a time when Iran, a country with vast territory, substantial domestic capabilities, and decades of experience with war and sanctions, cannot easily be placed under an economic siege. From this perspective, Washington’s move may be less a sign of an imminent victory than a costly attempt to achieve an objective whose outcome remains uncertain.
The reality is that no effective economic blockade can be imposed without the cooperation of a target country’s neighbors, as the deepest and most extensive trade, security, and economic ties are generally formed among neighboring states. At the same time, although the economic war against Iran is economic in appearance, its implementation tools—particularly at the regional level—have security and military dimensions, ranging from pressure on trade and maritime routes to pressure on neighboring countries.
This puts regional countries before a decisive choice: whether to participate in a strategy that could also put their own security and economies at risk, or move toward a multilateral order in which shared interests replace reliance on a power from outside the region.
A display shows currency exchange information, in the Grand Bazaar in Tehran, Iran, August 17, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency)
Hormuz: Where Economics Meets Security
Under such circumstances, Iran’s response cannot be purely economic either. The recent warning by Major General Mohsen Rezaei that any country participating in or supporting the U.S. economic war against the Iranian people would be considered to have taken a hostile military action sends a clear message to the region: security and economics cannot be separated.
He has also warned that if the economic war continues, not a single drop of oil will be exported either through the Strait of Hormuz or from any other point in the Persian Gulf. This position should be assessed in the context of the Strait of Hormuz’s strategic role and the global economy’s dependence on the security of the waterway.
The announcement of restrictions on vessels that violate Iran’s established arrangements for transit through Hormuz also indicates that Tehran is drawing its red lines against any regional participation in economic pressure. From this perspective, regional countries’ alignment with Washington without taking into account the potential costs could prove a risky decision that runs counter to the region’s geopolitical realities.
If Economic War Continues, Not A Drop Of Oil Will Be Exported From The Persian Gulf
WANA (Aug 23) – Iran’s Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council warned that if the economic war against Iran continues, not a single drop of oil will be exported through the Strait of Hormuz or from anywhere else in the Persian Gulf. Mohsen Rezaei said in a post on X: “If the economic […]
A Major Test for the Global Order
The confrontation, however, is not limited to the region. Bessent has explicitly warned that any country acting as a “financial lifeline” for Iran will face isolation, and has argued that a path to sustainable prosperity will be closed to countries that tie their future to Tehran.
This rhetoric effectively turns the economic war against Iran into a test for the entire world—a choice between two paths: a unilateral order based on Washington’s will, or a multilateral system in which countries can pursue their national interests independently of pressure from a dominant power.
On one side of the equation is Iran, which, relying on economic resilience, domestic capabilities, and the geopolitical position of the Strait of Hormuz, is seeking to strengthen multilateral arrangements independent of unilateral pressure. On the other is the United States, which is seeking to turn Iran into an example of failure in order to discourage other countries from moving closer to Tehran and joining independent economic mechanisms.
A Choice Beyond Iran
The strategy is not aimed only at China, Russia, or Iran’s close partners. Members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, BRICS and the Eurasian bloc—and ultimately all countries seeking to preserve their economic independence—face a historic choice.
Under such circumstances, expanding relations with Iran and recognizing its role in the strategic equation surrounding the Strait of Hormuz could contribute to the emergence of a more multilateral and independent order. Otherwise, alignment with Washington could expose these countries to two costs at the same time: the security consequences of potential Iranian countermeasures and deeper entanglement in the U.S.-led unilateral system.
Ultimately, the scope of this confrontation extends beyond the economic war against Iran and could also affect the future course of global economic and security relations. Iran’s resistance to U.S. pressure could become a decisive test of efforts to reduce unilateral dominance in the region and move toward an order in which the independence of states takes precedence over the will of dominant powers.
