'We're going to hit them hard': Trump threatens Iran as Tehran escalates shipping attacks

Trump threatened further military action against Iran during a campaign rally in Wasilla, Alaska. He said the United States would “hit them hard” and suggested that more action could come soon. His comments followed shifting statements about whether Washington would strike before the November midterm elections.

The immediate pressure came from Iran’s actions against maritime traffic. Two Iranian officials told Reuters that Iran had begun using new offensive tactics against vessels it considered to be violating its restrictions in the Strait of Hormuz. The officials said attacks on those ships had increased about 10 days earlier.

Iran’s wider goal was to pressure Washington. Its attacks and restrictions sharply reduced traffic through the strait and pushed oil prices higher. The officials said Tehran wanted to frustrate US and allied efforts to lower global oil prices and influence the US midterm elections. Trump also claimed Iran’s nuclear facilities remained deeply buried and that its nuclear program had once been close to producing a weapon.

The Strait of Hormuz is a strategic waterway connecting major energy-producing areas with global shipping routes. Ships use it to transport oil and liquefied natural gas to international markets. Because the passage is narrow and highly concentrated, disruption there can affect energy trade far beyond the surrounding region.

The article reports that about one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas trade passed through the strait before the war. Iran has restricted passage and attacked some vessels since US and Israeli strikes began on February 28. These actions severely curtailed traffic, although some oil continued to move through the waterway.

The strait matters because fewer safe passages mean fewer energy shipments reaching buyers. That can drive oil prices higher and increase pressure on governments, companies, and households. The article links Iran’s restrictions to an effort to gain leverage over Washington and keep global oil prices elevated before the US midterm elections.

Before the war, about one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas trade passed through the Strait of Hormuz. The figure shows why a narrow waterway can matter to countries and markets far away. A disruption does not need to stop every shipment to create wider concern about supply and prices.

The article says Iran restricted passage through the strait after US and Israeli strikes began on February 28. Its threats and attacks severely curtailed traffic. Some oil still passed through, but the reduction in shipping was enough to drive oil prices higher.

This share gives the waterway global importance. Buyers depend on steady deliveries, while producers depend on ships reaching overseas markets. If traffic remains limited, governments and companies may face higher costs and greater uncertainty. The article also says Iran used the pressure to challenge Washington, frustrate efforts to reduce global oil prices, and potentially influence the US midterm elections.

Iran is using the Strait of Hormuz as a pressure point. It has restricted passage through the waterway and attacked vessels it considers to be violating those restrictions. Two senior Iranian officials told Reuters that Tehran began using different offensive tactics against such ships about 10 days earlier, leading to more attacks.

The strategy involved changing both the type and pace of attacks. The officials said the decision came from Iran’s highest leadership and was coordinated across the country’s ruling system. These actions severely reduced shipping through the strait, though some oil continued to transit.

Iran hopes the pressure will produce political and economic leverage. One official said the aim was to frustrate US and allied efforts to bring down global oil prices. The officials also said the campaign sought to influence the US midterm elections. Higher oil prices and disrupted shipping can therefore serve both Tehran’s foreign-policy goals and its domestic political calculations.

When traffic through a major energy route is disrupted, fewer shipments may reach buyers on time. Markets respond to that risk, often by pushing oil prices higher. The article directly reports that Iran’s threats and attacks severely curtailed traffic through the Strait of Hormuz and drove up oil prices.

The mechanism is simple. Ships face restrictions, attacks, or delays, so companies may avoid the route or send fewer vessels. Even if some oil continues to move, buyers may worry that supplies could become less reliable. That concern can raise prices before an actual shortage occurs. Liquefied natural gas shipments can also be affected when the same route carries both fuels.

Higher energy prices can spread through economies. Transport, electricity, heating, and goods may become more expensive, although the article does not specify exact consumer price changes. Continued disruption could increase pressure on governments to secure alternative supplies and routes. It could also strengthen Iran’s leverage over Washington and global energy markets.

If ships cannot safely pass through the Strait of Hormuz, countries can reduce dependence on that route in several ways. They may use pipelines connected to other ports, reroute cargo through longer sea journeys, or draw on emergency fuel reserves. These options can keep supplies moving, but they may be slower, more expensive, or limited in capacity.

Countries can also diversify the energy itself. They might buy oil or liquefied natural gas from suppliers reached through different routes. Over time, they could expand renewables, nuclear power, or other domestic energy sources. These alternatives reduce exposure to one chokepoint, but they cannot necessarily replace disrupted shipments immediately.

The article does not name any alternative routes or energy sources. It only states that some oil continued through the strait and that traffic was severely reduced. Therefore, the practical response would depend on available infrastructure, reserves, suppliers, and time. Prolonged disruption would likely increase the value of diversification and emergency planning.

Control of a narrow waterway matters because many essential shipments may depend on that single passage. If a country can restrict or threaten traffic, it can affect supply, prices, and the decisions of governments far away. The Strait of Hormuz carried about one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas trade before the war.

Iran’s actions show the mechanism. It restricted passage and attacked vessels it considered to be violating its rules. Traffic through the strait fell sharply, and oil prices rose. That created pressure for Washington and its allies, which were trying to bring global oil prices down. Energy markets responded to the risk even though some oil continued to pass.

The Iranian officials said the strategy also aimed to influence the US midterm elections. This demonstrates how economic pressure can become political pressure. If disruption continues, Iran may retain leverage over energy markets and US policymakers, while affected governments seek safer routes and other supplies.