The Chokehold of a Deal

North Korea built a nuclear weapon and became isolated. Iran may be discovering that the Strait of Hormuz offers something far more powerful: the ability to force the world’s largest economies to negotiate around Iranian interests. After years of sanctions and isolation, Tehran has tied oil prices, inflation, shipping flows, and financial markets directly to Iranian decision-making. The bomb may deter adversaries. The Strait forces global relevance.

If the weekend’s headline ping-pong has everyone’s head spinning, join the club.

Is there a deal? What does it look like? Does it include Iran giving up enrichment? Did Iran release control of the Strait of Hormuz?

The Trump administration says an agreement is close and that it includes reopening the Strait and giving up enriched uranium. Iran says it has red lines and surrendering leverage over the Strait appears to be one of them.

It raises a larger question: does Iran now have more power through its chokehold on the Strait than through uranium enrichment itself?

Trump went into this confrontation with a uranium problem and he’s now dealing with a Strait problem.

Every day Iran demonstrates its ability to disrupt the Strait of Hormuz is another day it gains geopolitical leverage and strategic relevance. Tehran understands that Trump cannot easily walk away from this. The longer energy markets remain under pressure, the greater the political cost becomes at home: higher inflation, the risk of $5-per-gallon gasoline, market volatility, and growing Republican discomfort with another open-ended Middle East conflict.

If the administration ultimately accepts a deal that prioritizes reopening the Strait over permanently ending enrichment, Iran will be able to claim it forced the United States to negotiate on Tehran’s terms. That would fundamentally alter the perception of who gained leverage from this crisis.

At the same time, Israel has been noticeably quiet and largely sidelined from the negotiations. That silence won’t last if Trump accepts an agreement that leaves Iran’s enrichment capability intact while merely restoring shipping flows. Israel could become the spoiler in the entire process. Israel has consistently argued that any deal allowing Iran to retain enrichment capability simply delays the next crisis rather than preventing it.

The political backlash is already emerging inside Trump’s own party.

Ted Cruz warned:

“If the result of all that is to be an Iranian regime — still run by Islamists who chant ‘death to America’ — now receiving billions of dollars, being able to enrich uranium & develop nuclear weapons, and having effective control over the Strait of Hormuz, then that outcome would be a disastrous mistake.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham framed the danger even more directly:

“If a deal is struck to end the Iranian conflict because it is believed that the Strait of Hormuz cannot be protected from Iranian terrorism and Iran still possesses the capability to destroy major Gulf oil infrastructure, then Iran will be perceived as being a dominant force requiring a diplomatic solution.”

Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo also warned against settling for a deal centered only on maritime stability rather than dismantling Iran’s nuclear capability:

“A deal that leaves Iran with enrichment capability is not a solution. It is a pause before the next crisis.”

Sen. Roger Wicker, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, questioned the wisdom of a proposed 60-day ceasefire:

“Everything accomplished by Operation Epic Fury would be for naught.”

And that’s the key tension underneath these negotiations: what exactly is the objective now?

The irony now is that the center of gravity is energy flows not uranium.

North Korea developed nuclear weapons and became a pariah state largely isolated from the global economy. The world sanctions them, avoids them, and rarely discusses them outside of missile tests.

Iran is learning a different lesson. By threatening the Strait of Hormuz, Tehran discovered it could exert pressure not just on regional rivals, but on the entire global economy. Oil prices, inflation, shipping flows, gasoline prices, elections, and financial markets all suddenly become tied to Iranian decision-making. In doing so, Iran has transformed itself from a heavily sanctioned regional power into an unavoidable participant in global economic and geopolitical negotiations.

That creates a form of leverage uranium alone never provided.

And from Tehran’s perspective, the conclusion may be obvious: if control over the Strait gives Iran geopolitical power, why give up the nuclear program at all?

Why not pursue both?

‍