https://tomswitzer.substack.com/p/will-trumps-economic-d-day-work?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=7225458&post_id=212545192&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=false&r=17yiss&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Will Trump’s Economic D-Day work?

Rosemary Kelanic and John Mearsheimer on the risks of economic warfare on Iran and the battle for the Strait of Hormuz

Switzerland with Tom Switzer Aug 24, 2026

The Trump administration has pledged to intensify its economic war on Iran — in President Trump’s words, to impose “the MOST CRUSHING ECONOMIC OPERATION EVER TAKEN AGAINST ANY COUNTRY”. The strategy includes maintaining a naval blockade and seeking to cut Tehran off from its principal trading partners, notably China, Iraq, Turkey, Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates.

Will this “ECONOMIC D-DAY” work?

Not according to my guests, Rosemary Kelanic, director of the Middle East program at Defence Priorities in Washington, and regular guest John Mearsheimer from the University of Chicago.

In today’s edition of “Switzerland,” Rose and John argue that Iran has already shown that it can withstand extraordinary economic and military pressure. As for Iran’s trading partners, China has made clear that it will not simply conform to Washington’s demands. 

Nor, Rose and John argue, will Russia or Pakistan. The UAE has already moved to sever economic relations with Iran, anticipating Washington’s pressure, but Tehran has warned that it could retaliate militarily.

I push back, naturally, by asking whether the new strategy could nevertheless succeed — whether economic strangulation might eventually trigger a popular revolt and unravel the regime. After all, Iranians are already enduring sky-high inflation, widespread unemployment and acute difficulties affording basic goods. The rial has fallen to a record low.

Rose and John’s response is that economic pressure carries its own dangers. Tehran could respond by launching large-scale attacks on America’s Sunni Gulf allies, inflicting enormous damage on the global economy and potentially creating precisely the crisis Washington is trying to avoid.

There is another problem for President Trump: economic strangulation takes time to work, and time may be the one thing his administration does not have.

As John has repeatedly stresses on the program in recent months, the global economy is already in a precarious position. With the US midterm elections looming in early November, that creates a powerful incentive for Trump to bring the Iran war to an end before its economic consequences become politically damaging.

Which raises the central question: Will Trump ultimately be forced to make another accommodation with Tehran, as he did on June 17 when he signed the Memorandum of Understanding?

Meanwhile, what to do about the Strait of Hormuz?

As it happens, Rose — incidentally a former PhD student of John’s at the University of Chicago — has written an op-ed in the New York Times today under a provocative headline:

Rose’s argument is that Washington should accept an uncomfortable reality: it cannot forcibly restore completely free passage through this vital global energy gateway without incurring enormous military and economic costs.

Iran cannot permanently close the strait, but neither can the US reliably keep it open. Geography gives Tehran the ability to make shipping sufficiently dangerous that private companies simply stay away. 

Rose’s “least bad” solution is therefore to allow Iran, potentially in cooperation with Oman, to charge transit fees for safe passage.

As she acknowledges:

“Yes, allowing Iran to control Hormuz would set a bad precedent, encouraging other countries adjacent to chokehold shipping corridors to assert control over them. But what happens in Hormuz will most likely stay in Hormuz; its unique geography and market importance for transporting Persian Gulf oil have no analogue to other waterways.”

The logic is straightforward: tolls would give Iran a financial incentive to keep the strait open rather than close it. Over time, Rose argues, that could encourage regional cooperation and reduce the danger of another war.

It would hardly represent an American victory. But her point is that accepting a degree of Iranian authority over Hormuz may be preferable to an open-ended military effort to overcome a geographical advantage that American firepower has so far been unable to negate.

For more, read Rose’s NYT OpEd today: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/24/opinion/iran-strait-of-hormuz-oil-trump.html 

Tom Switzer is presenter of the Switzerland youTube podcast and a regular contributor to The Australian newspaper and News24 (formerly Sky News Australia.)