di Marco Antonangeli,
Six months after the conflict began, the United States and Iran appear no closer to reaching a settlement. Military operations may have slowed, but economic pressure is intensifying. Diplomacy is attempting to reopen a door while fresh attacks on vessels in the Strait of Hormuz underline just how fragile the situation remains.
The war is entering a phase that may appear less dramatic than its opening weeks, but could prove even more dangerous.
At the centre of the crisis is no longer just Iran’s nuclear programme. The confrontation now involves control over strategic energy routes, Tehran’s economic isolation and Washington’s ability to sustain a war that has lasted far longer than initially predicted.
On 27 August, Qatar renewed its mediation efforts. Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani travelled to Tehran in search of a potential way out of the conflict.
Yet while diplomacy is moving again, another reported attack involving an oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz has offered a stark reminder of how quickly the situation could deteriorate.
According to Associated Press, regional powers are intensifying their efforts to stop the war, while the Iranian government continues to reject Washington’s latest sanctions campaign.
US-Iran War: From a Short Operation to a Conflict Without an End Date
When President Donald Trump launched the campaign against Iran in late February, the stated expectation was that the operation would last only a matter of weeks. Six months later, that forecast appears increasingly distant.
Washington’s objectives also seem to have expanded over time. What began as an effort to neutralise Iran’s nuclear and military capabilities has evolved into a broader struggle over the Strait of Hormuz and the financial isolation of the Islamic Republic.
An analysis published by Associated Press notes that security and freedom of movement through the Strait have now become central priorities for the US administration.
This shift reveals a familiar truth about modern warfare: identifying the day a conflict begins is relatively easy. Deciding how it should end is much harder.
Washington maintains that it has significantly weakened Iran’s military capabilities and damaged its nuclear programme. Tehran, however, has not accepted American conditions and retains the ability to threaten US interests and regional allies.
The result is a conflict suspended between military operations, naval restrictions, indirect attacks and economic pressure. In such an unstable environment, even a seemingly limited incident could trigger another major escalation.
The Strait of Hormuz Has Become the Real Battlefield
The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow stretch of water connecting the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman. Its strategic importance, however, is enormous: a significant share of the world’s seaborne oil and liquefied natural gas passes through this route.
Every attack on a vessel and every disruption to maritime traffic can therefore produce consequences far beyond the Middle East.
Reports of another tanker being hit in the region have renewed concerns over the safety of navigation. Markets respond not only to the amount of oil currently available, but also to the possibility that future supplies could be interrupted.
On 27 August, Brent crude rose by more than one dollar and approached $89 a barrel after the White House confirmed that no direct talks with Iran were taking place. The market reaction and Washington’s statement were reported by Reuters.
For a European motorist, a crisis in the Strait of Hormuz can mean more expensive fuel. For a business, it can lead to higher transportation and production costs. For governments, it raises the prospect of renewed energy inflation, making decisions on interest rates, taxation and public spending even more difficult.
This is the true strategic power of Hormuz: its ability to transform a regional war into a global economic problem.
Washington Moves from Military Warfare to Economic Warfare
On 24 August, the Trump administration announced “Operation Economic Outcast”, a campaign designed to sever the remaining financial and commercial connections between Iran and the rest of the world.
According to the White House, the objective is to remove the Iranian government’s remaining sources of economic support and intensify pressure until Tehran accepts American demands.
The message is not directed exclusively at Iran. The United States also intends to target companies, intermediaries and countries that continue to maintain financial relationships with the Islamic Republic.
This strategy could have far-reaching consequences.
Iran’s economy has already been weakened by years of sanctions, high inflation and falling oil revenues. The United Arab Emirates’ decision to suspend trade relations has added further pressure on the regional networks that Tehran relies upon, according to Associated Press.
Sanctions, however, rarely affect political leaders alone.
When a country is isolated from international financial systems, it can become more difficult to purchase medicines, maintain infrastructure, import technology and finance productive activity. The most vulnerable sections of the population are often the first to bear the cost.
Washington believes complete economic isolation could force Iran back to the negotiating table. Tehran argues that external pressure will strengthen domestic resistance. History suggests that both outcomes are possible.
Qatar’s Mediation and a Diplomatic Door Left Partly Open
Against this background, Qatar’s mission represents one of the few signs of diplomatic movement.
Doha maintains working relationships with both Washington and Tehran and has previously acted as a mediator in several regional crises. Its immediate goal is to bring the parties back into negotiations and establish the conditions required for the Strait of Hormuz to reopen fully and safely.
The central problem is that the United States and Iran appear to be speaking different political languages.
Washington wants guarantees concerning Iran’s nuclear programme, military capabilities and the security of commercial shipping. Tehran considers US sanctions and military operations acts of aggression and is demanding an end to economic pressure.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has not ruled out a negotiated settlement, although he has said that the country will continue to resist economic coercion. At the same time, the White House has confirmed that direct talks are not currently taking place.
Diplomacy therefore remains alive—but it is operating through intermediaries, with no agreement on the basic conditions required to begin formal negotiations.
Trump Is Also Running Out of Time
The length of the war is becoming a domestic political issue in the United States.
Trump originally presented the conflict as a limited operation. Its continuation could now influence the midterm election campaign, particularly if its economic and military costs continue to rise.
The issue goes beyond public support. A prolonged war consumes ammunition, defence systems and financial resources. The increased demand for advanced missile interceptors has also reportedly raised concerns about whether sufficient systems would remain available to protect NATO members against other potential threats.
The danger is that a conflict intended to strengthen American security could eventually create new vulnerabilities elsewhere, including in Europe.
The White House must therefore demonstrate that its strategy is producing results. An agreement seen as too accommodating could be portrayed by political opponents as a concession. A renewed military escalation, however, could make the end of the war even more distant.
China and Europe Watch with Growing Concern
Washington’s economic campaign also directly affects China, one of Iran’s most important commercial and energy partners.
Beijing has said it will defend its interests against the threat of US secondary sanctions. As reported by Le Monde, China’s position could make America’s attempt to isolate Tehran completely far more difficult.
Europe faces an equally delicate situation.
A prolonged rise in energy prices could fuel inflation and weaken economic growth. European governments must also continue supporting Ukraine, increase defence expenditure and protect households and businesses from higher costs.
The US-Iran war is therefore not a distant conflict. Its effects can reach European energy bills, industrial production costs, European Central Bank decisions and national budgets.
The Greatest Danger Is a Miscalculation
The current phase may appear less violent because the number of direct strikes has declined. In reality, periods of unstable balance are often those in which the risk of miscalculation is greatest.
A tanker attack, a missile interpreted as the beginning of a wider offensive or a disproportionate military response could restart the cycle of escalation.
Neither side wants to appear weak, but both have an interest in preventing the conflict from becoming uncontrollable.
Qatar’s mission could represent the beginning of de-escalation. It could also become another failed diplomatic attempt, especially if Washington continues to increase sanctions while Tehran maintains pressure on maritime routes.
After six months, the US-Iran war has entered a decisive phase. It is no longer being fought only with missiles and drones, but also with oil, banking restrictions, shipping insurance, sanctions and diplomacy.
The future of the conflict may depend on a stretch of water only a few dozen kilometres wide.
That is precisely why the consequences could affect the entire world.