Will Iran’s Power Grid Collapse Under a Trump Attack?
WANA (Mar 23) – The short answer, according to energy experts, is no—at least not in the context of a limited, conventional strike. Iran’s power grid is structured in a way that makes a “total collapse” a complex, costly, and time-consuming scenario rather than a quick, decisive move.
Mohammad Enayati, an energy expert, explains that Iran’s electricity network, with a capacity exceeding 100,000 megawatts and a wide geographic spread, is not a single, centralized target. Disabling it would require striking hundreds of critical points simultaneously—an operation that is both logistically difficult and highly expensive.
He also points to current conditions: during holiday periods, electricity demand is lower and some power plants are offline. Under such circumstances, even attacks on several power plants would not necessarily result in immediate or noticeable disruptions for the general population.
Enayati adds a strategic comparison: in a calculated conflict scenario, targeting five major power plants in Iran would affect roughly 10% of its total electricity generation capacity. By contrast, striking five power plants in Israel could impact up to half of its total capacity. This highlights that vulnerability in this sector is relative and depends on the structure of each country’s grid.
Against this backdrop, recent threats by Donald Trump take on added significance. He has claimed that if Iran does not fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz within 48 hours, the United States would target and destroy its electricity production facilities, focusing on “major energy infrastructure.”
These remarks were met with a strong response from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). In an official statement, the IRGC said: “The lying, terrorist, child-killing President of the United States has claimed that the IRGC intends to target desalination plants in the region… It is this same U.S. president who has threatened to attack Iran’s power plants. Naturally, targeting electricity infrastructure would disrupt essential human services such as hospitals, emergency centers, water networks, and desalination facilities, and is an inhumane act… We are determined to respond to any threat at a level that maintains deterrence, and we will do so.”
The statement further added: “You struck our hospitals—we did not do the same. You struck our relief centers—we did not do the same. You struck our schools—we did not do the same. But if you strike electricity, we will strike electricity.”
Taken together, the technical assessments and the exchange of threats suggest that electricity infrastructure is not merely a point of vulnerability, but part of a broader deterrence equation—where any potential strike is unlikely to end the confrontation, but rather trigger a cycle of reciprocal responses.
A U.S. Analyst’s Sarcastic Take on Trump’s Contradictory Stance on the Strait of Hormuz
WANA (Mar 23) – Lars Christensen, an economic analyst, responded with pointed sarcasm to what he described as Donald Trump’s contradictory remarks regarding recent developments. Referring to Trump’s conflicting statements, he wrote: “We have effectively won,” “We will be going home soon,” and “The Strait of Hormuz does not matter to us.” Yet minutes […]
