Yves here. Note that this account is unabashedly anti-Iranian, and needs to be taken with a fistful of salt, in light of tidbits like the claim that Iran’s new SIGINT ship, the Zagros, launched on January 15, was sunk:
Reports claiming that Iran’s advanced spy vessel Zagros was targeted and sunk by the US in the Red Sea are false.
The ship remains safe and operational, currently sailing in international waters. pic.twitter.com/3ZXlnLuOet
— Current Report (@Currentreport1) March 18, 2025
🇮🇷 #Iran‘s @PressTV posts this ‘introduction to the Zagros’ video just days after rumors began circulating online re: the Zagros reconnaissance ship having been targeted and sunk by the US navy (which even the US now seems to be denying). #oott pic.twitter.com/5SzwoywS3q
— Nader Itayim | نادر ایتیّم (@ncitayim) March 19, 2025
Nevertheless, this article is a useful sighting of Trump escalatory moves toward Iran and related scapegoating. But one has to note it starts with unlikely premise, per its headline, that the US would win in a hot war with Iran.
By Dr. Cyril Widdershoven, a long-time observer of the global energy market. Presently he works as Director of Energy Security and Supply Chains, at Strategy International Cyprus. Originally published at OilPrice
- Escalating tensions between Israel, Iran, and regional militias—including Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis—are pushing the Middle East toward a potential large-scale conflict.
- The U.S. has intensified military actions against Iranian-backed forces.
- Oil markets remain complacent despite growing risks.
The energy markets could be on the verge of a Black Swan Bull Market, signaling potential volatility and major geopolitical shifts.
After a brief lull in military confrontations in the Middle East, tensions are once again escalating between Israel and its adversaries—Hezbollah, Hamas, Iran, and the Houthis. Recent attention has focused on developments in Syria, where a newly emerging Islamist extremist regime, led by self-proclaimed President Al Jolani, is struggling to maintain control. His forces are engaged in a sectarian war against opposition groups such as the Kurds, former Assad loyalists, and Hezbollah fighters.
The situation remains fluid, especially following sectarian massacres in Alawite and Christian regions by Al Jolani-backed militias. At the same time, Iran and Hezbollah are actively working to destabilize parts of the country. In a significant escalation, Syrian army units have reportedly crossed into Lebanon, potentially igniting a conflict with the Lebanese Armed Forces. Israel has made it clear that it will not support or allow the stabilization of the Al Jolani-led, Turkish-backed government, while simultaneously seeking to expand its influence in Druze-controlled areas near its borders.
Meanwhile, Israel has resumed military operations against Hamas in Gaza and intensified its activities in the West Bank. The IDF is also actively striking Hezbollah positions in Lebanon, increasing the risk of a renewed confrontation. Iran’s deep involvement in all these flashpoints—both militarily and through strategic coordination—suggests a broader regional power play, aimed at challenging Israel and reasserting Tehran’s influence.
Escalation Beyond Israel and Iran
The region’s volatility is further amplified by third-party military actions, particularly U.S. airstrikes against Houthi forces in Yemen and broader U.S. foreign policy moves. The Trump administration’s stance on Ukraine and Russia is fueling geopolitical instability, indirectly influencing the Middle East’s fragile balance.
As Washington escalates its approach toward Iran, recent reports indicate that the U.S. military has targeted and disabled Iran’s most advanced SIGINT vessel, the Zagros. This marks a major blow to Tehran’s naval intelligence capabilities. The attack comes amid Houthi claims of launching a third assault on U.S. warships in the Red Sea, allegedly targeting the USS Harry S. Truman with missiles and drones.
In response, the Trump administration has declared that as long as threats to commercial vessels in the Red Sea-Gulf of Aden corridor persist, decisive action will be taken against the Houthis. Notably, the U.S. has now expanded its targets to include Iranian assets in Yemen, making it clear that Tehran itself is now in Washington’s crosshairs.
A Shift in U.S. and Israeli strategy
For Israel, the message is equally clear. Trump’s recent approval of renewed military action against Hamas suggests that Washington may have given Israel the green light for a potential final showdown with Iran. With global media focused on Trump’s “One-Day” plan for ending the Ukraine war, the situation could provide cover for joint U.S.-Israeli military action against Iran. Trump has already accused Tehran of orchestrating the Houthi attacks, warning:
Let nobody be fooled! The hundreds of attacks being made by the Houthi—these sinister mobsters and thugs based in Yemen—are all orchestrated by IRAN.
So far, Iran has dismissed these threats, with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei asserting that Trump’s “bullying” will have no impact. Meanwhile, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has issued a stark warning:
Iran does not seek war, but if anyone threatens us, we will respond with appropriate, decisive, and conclusive action. — IRGC General Hossein Salami
A Full-Scale War: Not if, but When?
A full-scale confrontation between Israel (and potentially the U.S.) and Iran no longer seems a question of if—but when. Some analysts argue that this clash should have already occurred, but the Netanyahu-Trump alliance has faced internal pressure. Washington’s backdoor negotiations with Hamas have limited Netanyahu’s room to maneuver.
Meanwhile, a growing Moscow-Tehran-Beijing alliance has also complicated matters. Recent joint naval exercises in the Gulf of Oman—involving Russia, China, and Iran—suggest that an attack on Iranian assets could risk triggering Chinese and Russian intervention. Despite these risks, Middle East tensions could soon explode into a full-blown conflict. With global media fixated on Ukraine, NATO, and Trump’s tariff wars, the Middle East is being largely ignored—creating the perfect storm for an unexpected escalation.
Energy Markets Are Blind to the Risk
Oil and gas markets appear bearish, driven by commodity trader algorithms and price pressures. But this complacency could be a critical mistake. A peace deal in Ukraine is nowhere in sight, and Trump’s fragile relationship with Putin could collapse if Moscow continues to push its maximalist demands. A resumption of hostilities in Ukraine would increase energy demand, especially as the EU’s military rearmament efforts gain momentum.
However, the true game-changer remains a potential U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran. Tehran’s response would be complex and far-reaching—targeting not only Israel and the U.S. but also Gulf Arab states, with Iraqi militias joining the fight. Syria and Yemen would likely become further battlegrounds, escalating regional instability.
For decades, analysts have debated the possibility of a war with Iran, but today, all indicators point to an imminent conflict. Any military action against Iran will go beyond its nuclear facilities, likely targeting the IRGC and Tehran’s energy infrastructure. In retaliation, Iran could strike at U.S. allies in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, or Jordan.
The economic consequences would be severe. Iran’s oil and gas exports would be wiped off the market, triggering a supply shock. With OPEC+ struggling to compensate Iranian barrels in the short term, energy prices could soar overnight.
The world may be on the brink of a historic geopolitical shift. As attention remains fixed on Ukraine, NATO, and U.S.-China tensions, a potential Middle East conflict is rapidly unfolding behind the scenes. With all signs pointing toward a direct confrontation between Israel, the U.S., and Iran, the Endgame may already be in motion.
The next few weeks could prove decisive.
42 comments
Comments are closed.
Let’s look at this diagnosis, from the article: “After a brief lull in military confrontations in the Middle East, tensions are once again escalating between Israel and its adversaries—Hezbollah, Hamas, Iran, and the Houthis. Recent attention has focused on developments in Syria, where a newly emerging Islamist extremist regime, led by self-proclaimed President Al Jolani, is struggling to maintain control. His forces are engaged in a sectarian war against opposition groups such as the Kurds, former Assad loyalists, and Hezbollah fighters.”
Who in their right minds sends U.S. troops into this snarl? Oh, the Israeli government wants it.
As we have seen from the war / genocide-by-proxy in Ukraine, and the war / genocide-by-proxy in Palestine, the so-called West (USA, U.K., NATO, and Israel) have no strategy. In Ukraine, the fantasy of dismantling the Russian Federation seems to be an emanation of the University of Laputa and various think tanks. In the Middle East, the fantasy of “God Is My Real-Estate Agent” and “Let’s All Intone the Theme from Exodus” is not a strategy.
Just look at a map of Iran. How do Israel and the U.S. of A, the government of which doesn’t want to put any U.S. soldiers or sailors in harm’s way (because it might disrupt the profits of Taco Bell and other contractors), win? Invade Iran through the Persian Gulf? Hint: Straits of Hormuz. Land invasion? Hint: Zagros Mountains.
Three times the size of France? Population 80 million? All the U.S. Army has to do is magically intone “Women, Freedom” and Iranians will line the streets with bowls of bastani to greet the conquering Westerners…
That leaves nuclear. End game indeed. Once the bloodthirsty foreign-policy geniuses nuke Shiraz, there goes Tel Aviv. And given the care with which Iran has prepared, I wouldn’t rule out direct attacks on the U S of A. If Shiraz is vaporized, I wouldn’t be so confident about the continuing existence of, ohhhh, Miami.
Yes. But why Shiraz?
Finn Andreen. And please note the comment from Bugs below.
Living as I do in Italy, a very old country, I am fully aware that the Iranians (Persians) take great pride in their ancient civilization. Heck, they gave ole Trajan trouble back in about A.D. 100. The continuity of Italian, Persian, and Chinese cultures is very important in understanding them.
Shiraz mainly has cultural value. But then so did Nagasaki, once the main open port during the time when the daimyo had closed Japan to the outside world. Hiroshima is of minor strategic value, being located on the Inland Sea. Dresden, famously firebombed, is known for Bach more than any other characteristic.
It’s all about terrorizing the population. It’s like sending exploding pages — but even “cooler,” eh.
> Dresden, famously firebombed, is known for Bach more than any other characteristic
Re that latter point about Bach, I suspect you are confusing Dresden with Leipzig (also in Saxony):
https://www.bachfestleipzig.de/en/bachfest
>Living as I do in Italy, a very old country
Italy is a very young country. Younger than the USA. There’s no comparison to China or Persia. One could argue that ‘Italian’ culture is older. One could also argue that such culture was a slightly less young invention, necessary to unify Italy but with little bearing on the vastly different cultures of people inhabiting the peninsula and surrounding islands.
This is vulgar. There are more suitable targets, thanks.
It’s been widely reported that the US intends to target sites important to Iranian culture if it decides to commit to direct military aggression against the Iranian nation.
The vulgarity is coming from inside the house.
https://www.npr.org/2020/01/06/794006073/trump-says-hell-target-iran-s-cultural-sites-that-s-illegal
Anonted: “Suitable targets”?
War is vulgar. War is a racket.
Further on Bugs’s comment and link. Here is the UNESCO list of historic sites and cultural artifacts in Iran.
https://whc.unesco.org/en/statesparties/IR
Note Esfahan.
I don’t want to be party to the newest iteration of a firebombing of Dresden.
I mean really, blowing up cultural sites, why would we want to give the entire nation, or region of the world, something to be furious about, memorialize and their children taught during history class for the next couple thousand years? It’s beyond the dictionary definition of insanity.
By the way, if the roles were reversed, what cultural sites from our brief history as a nation would be targeted for destruction? Curious to the thoughts of the readers. The local museum?
Memorials in DC? What would piss us off as a US Citizen ?Not an assignment.
I’d speculate that the best known site of common national signifcance to the greatest number of Americans, an atack on which would cause most offence, is Gettysburg – a place of glorious self-inflicted slaughter as opposed to art and culture.
Plowing up Arlington National Cemetery with a bunker-busting type bombs would stir up any related to veterans.
An EMP only attack on Wall Street would stir up the PMC.
This destruction might make people furious, or not, depending on the resident at the time.
I had no idea flying a plane into a skyscraper in New York could get people in small-town Nebraska all riled up, but turns out it did. As long as the target is in a high-population area on one of the coasts, I think you’ve got your war.
I had forgotten about that, and quite a reminder to how quickly that event was used by our own government to trash more of our constitutional rights.
Axios report that Trump has given the Iranians two months to reply to his letter. I would imagine that he made a whole menu of things that they had to do so he would not attack them. Reduce their enriched stockpile to zero, abandon all their allies in the region, do a major downgrade of their missile program, etc. In short, a whole bunch of demands that if done would make it much, much easier to attack Iran. Gaddafi fell into that trap though it was his own fault – he believed the west.
But Israel and the US already attacked Iran back in October and it was basically a mission failure. Why does he think any attack would go any better this time? By now the Russians would have helped make all sorts of improvements on Iran’s aerial defenses and maybe they even shipped in more gear. I would not put it beyond Trump to have told Putin that if he gives Russia the Ukraine, then Russia can give Trump Iran. His idea of a great deal.
In any case, Iran would have zero trust with any Trump deal. Not only is the US not to be trusted but it was Trump that reneged on the nuke deal back about 2016. Any deal that Trump offered would be about sanctions relief but as there would be snap-back provisions, that would be worthless. Even if that did not happen, they would remember how Obama gave them sanctions relief after signing up to the nuke deal – and then put on a raft of whole different sanctions and stopped the Europeans coming in to do deals-
https://www.axios.com/2025/03/19/trump-letter-iran-nuclear-deal
I’m a cynic. So I’d expect the attack to occur before the end of the two-month deadline.
I have the impression that the two months period is the time the USA and Israel believe they will need to pound Ansarallah to the point that Yemen no longer constitutes a threat in their rear.
Once this is done, they will proceed with Iran.
Imo pretty tough nut. Iran is about the size of turkey, Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and tiny Israel combined. Can’t be attacked from north, east is Afghanistan/pakistan. south is Indian Ocean and west means a repeat of the aborted attack of last year, l hears because the not so stealthy planes noticed radar had locked on them.
This leaves ICBM’s… would we do that? And if so, how much damage could Iran inflict on Israel in the aftermath? Iranians are Shia, they’re pretty fatalistic.
Plus… maybe Russia has boosted Iran defenses since that aborted attack? Or even provided better offense… surely not a couple batteries of kinzhals, useful vs the biggest carriers…
The article talks about no oil from Iran afterwards… wonder if they’d take out saudi fields? Their truce with Saudi is pretty recent, us has been using bases in Persian gulf countries to attack Houthis. And maybe Qatari gas exports might stop, too. Wonder if west might welcome Russian fossil exports.
“Trump’s fragile relationship with Putin could collapse if Moscow continues to push its maximalist demands.”
Revealing of author’s bias – as Yves noted, fistfuls of salt required. That said, one way to severely damage both China and Europe would be to shut down the Persian Gulf to oil transport, which a war with Iran would immediately do. IMHO this is why the Saudis and the Iranians are talking now – the Saudis are quite concerned that the radical breakers of the Trump admin will break their source of revenue – in the event of a war with Iran, Saudi Arabia, and all the various little kingdoms will be in a world of hurt. Oil prices will skyrocket – which will trigger a worldwide recession (a not much noted cause of the 2008 recession was a (manufactured?) spike in oil prices. It would be a massive Samson option.
The author appears to assume only Iran’s exports would be affected. This is absolute nonsense.
Twenty years ago it was reasonable to debate whether Iran could stop oil exports from the Persian Gulf by closing the strait of Hormuz and how long it might take for the American Navy to re-open it. Today it should be clear the Iranians could close the Persian Gulf whenever they like for as long as they like. Since the Houthis decided to stop ships sailing to Israel through the Red Sea more than a year ago, the US and assorted hangers on, have continually tried and failed to re-open the Red Sea. If the Houthis can do that the Iranians could certainly shut the Persian Gulf indefinitely.
The Iranians may also be able to close down Saudi export terminals on the Red Sea using drones and missiles. The Iranians could also stop most of the oil and gas from Central Asia that crosses the Caspian Sea.
The economic impact around the world would be massive.
Assuming Trump administration are not total idiots (maybe not a safe assumption) they would not attack Iran because it would cause oil price to increase to $100+ per barrel in turn causing dramatically higher inflation, energy costs, and a dramatically lowering standards or living in America. It would tank Trump’s entire economic and “domestic” agenda and possibly even trigger a 70s style hyperinflation.
So I would guess attacking Iran is not worth the trouble, from Don’s perspective, at least if he has any sense.
There has been talk, (can’t locate a link) that these broligarchs goal is to crash the economy in order to impoverish the plebs and then buy back the assets at fire sale prices. Much as occurred in Russia after the Soviet Union collapse. Seem anything is possible these days.
I am hearing that Trump is trying to get the interest rate down before 7 trillion in US debt rolls over.
Lot’s of people are on the sidelines waiting to see what happens. And the owners of gold are having it shipped to their vaults. Feels like something is up.
Broligarchs crushing the economy and scooping up the assets at fire sale prices is exactly what’s up.
Trump profited by snapping up real estate and permits in the NYC and Atlantic City bankruptcies and later laundered assets looted from the USSR collapse into U.S. reap property. Buy low. Sell high.
The Shock Doctrine in action.
“Assuming Trump administration are not total idiots (maybe not a safe assumption).” Indeed.
The possibility of a confrontation with Iran blowing up into WW III is very real. And why? So Netanyahou can realize his wet dream of Middle East hegemony. I, for one (a simple American taxpayer), am sick of having this maniac and his lunatic supporters controlling our foreign policy. What about trying to find a way for the international powers to cooperate, on real problems, like climate change, instead of war without end? This planet may be on life support before long, and exploding more bunker busters is not the answer. Isn’t it time that these world “leaders” outgrew their adolescent fantasies?
Ken Klippenstein writes about Pentagon planning for war with Iran. According to him, they think they got this. https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/the-nuclear-war-plan-for-iran
“Military intelligence”–always reliable /sarc
I thought that Klipperstein article was more clickbait than anything else. Or perhaps it’s some govt supplied psyop to try to scare the Iranians into negotiations. This seems to be a typical Trump tactic.
To be sure Trump did just attack Yemen for no reason but he doubtless thinks he has little to fear from them. Perhaps the increasingly shaky Tulsi can set him straight on Iran.
Doubtless, having apparently forgotten Yemen’s involvement with an insignificant little outfit called Al Quada and a minor demonstration of their impotence on 9/11/2001.
Energy markets are blind to the risk? Are the steely-eyed oil traders brain dead or maybe Dr. Cyril is hyperventilating? Bibi has wanted the US to go to war with Iran on Israel’s behalf forever. Is The Don the none to do it? Never can tell just what The Don might do and since Congress is a lap dog what is stopping him. The risk of war in the region is an “any day” proposition as long as the Greater Israel project is in high gear, but one must never lose sight of the fact that without the US at its shoulder, there is no Greater Israel project. I fail to see that encouraging Israeli ambitions is now or ever has been in the interest of the US. It is one thing to stand behind its existence and quite another to loose it on the “others” within its borders and encourage the conquest of portions of neighboring states. If the US and the rest of the West insist that borders are inviolate in Ukraine why are they no so in West Asia? And yet war is likely to come. The Don seems unable to do other than fulfill Israel’s wishes.
“Energy markets are blind to the risk?”
By not addressig the risk, it fits in with the “traumatize the populations” psyop.
Make things seem like they happem suddenly and beyond control.
Can’t have the trauma if people prepare for the risks.
What, aside from the evergreen political gains to be had in America by making ritual threats to the mullahs, does the US stand to gain by a war with Iran?
It simply doesn’t add up.
(I think there may be an open “bold” tag somewhere above?)
This is all simply horrifying.
Everyone appears to be underestimating how profoundly Trump has lost his mind. There is no strategy here. Only his odd-ball Queens-bred racism and his unflagging allegiance to the worst players in the settler-colonial apartheid Jewish state.
His niece Mary (a PhD psychologist) writes that he suffers from a complete absence of empathy due to repeated maternal abandonment as a toddler and again as a pre-teen. He is a bully who thrives on the power-moves that cover for his repeated failures in actual business, bailed-out by the family fortune. After his presidency he endured 4 years of deeply personal persecution that ultimately failed to deliver him a much needed slap-in-the-face of incarceration and confiscation of assets.
To this psychopathy add the psychosis of a man who never sleeps — probably aided by the Provigil and Xanax that the White House pharmacy was handing out like Pez and Skittles during 2017-21.
If Israel and its American proxy (the relationship today is emphatically not vice-versa) launch a massive air attack on Iran, even if they forbear nuclear weapons, can the American economy survive the sanctions that the international community will be compelled to impose? Will we be reduced to being Cuba with guns?
One question, why would the world be compelled to impose sanctions? I ask because it hasn’t been compelled to do so over the Gaza genocide. Also, the US will continue to hold a lot of cards, such as the US dollar as reserve currency as well as housing the most global foreign investment, to the tune of $41 trillion:
https://www.imf.org/en/Blogs/Articles/2025/02/20/foreign-direct-investment-increased-to-a-record-41-trillion
And not to mention $6.68 trillion invested from the US abroad:
https://www.bea.gov/data/intl-trade-investment/direct-investment-country-and-industry
It would be very painful and doesn’t seem any easier for the rest of world to sanction the US after attacking Iran than it is now.
Iran is a full member of BRICS and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian recently held direct talks with President Xi Jinping of China, who has touted the new “comprehensive strategic partnership” between the two countries. Palestine isn’t even a sovereign state.
And what provocation by Iran would justify an attack? Even if October 7 is overstated in light of the “mass Hannibal” slaughter of Israelis by the IDF, the Palestinians were nevertheless the aggressor. Iran has been measured in its actions.
Those U.S. Commerce Department investment numbers are overwhelmingly skewed towards Europe — $4Tr of the claimed $6.68Tr. The question is how much China, India, and BRICS will care. As the saying goes, f**k around and find out…
Couple of points:
1. Where is Congress? (meant as a rhetorical question but feel free to answer or vent as you like.)
2. Powell Doctrine, anyone? (pretty sure we can answer “no” for most if not all of the checklist)
source = Wikipedia
“But one has to note it starts with unlikely premise…that the US would win a hot war”
Is this really unlikely? Besides norms, what prevents the US from nuking Iran and ‘winning’? Israel would get the crap bombed out of it as a result but that isn’t necessarily equivalent to a US defeat.
I doubt US would *win* a conventional war with Iran, but I would expect it to be capable of inflicting disproportionate pain, as we’ve seen elsewhere in the Middle East.
Iran is widely believed to have a dead hand facility along with tons of conventional missiles bunkered too deep to be vulnerable to even a nuclear attack.
So Iran torches the entire Middle East oil production facilities, starting with the Saudis.
Global winter from all the particulate matter + a vast reduction in oil supplies.
That’s not a win.
On fighting a war with Iran. Less than 60% of combat aircraft are combat ready. Only 35% of the Army combat personnel are fit enough for combat duty. The US has barely enough supplies (bombs, bullets, missiles and etc.) to preform a total engaged war for 1-2 weeks. The navy currently barely has enough logistics supply ships to handle the current supply requirements. Armed forces recruitment is at all time low for the last 45 years (no draft). the only service that has met quotas is Space Force. The Iranians have both the Russian and theirs hyper sonic surface ship killers. The Houthis reportedly have some of the Russian ones. And Iran, also, might have some of the Chinese ones. The US states the will go after anyone that supplies the weapons. So what’s going to happen if the US losses and Aircraft Carrier or two. Are they going to go after Russia and China for supplying the weapons? This could go nuclear real quick. The US is in no position to fight a real war. If they hit Iran, most all middle east oil operations will be targeted as all US military assets. All Israel infrastructure will be attacked. So experts are saying, if things go to hell, the world could see $500-1500 per barrel of oil. If it goes nuclear, nuclear winter will stop global warming.
“Oil markets complacent despite risks.” I sometimes see statements like this and wonder–don’t the markets subsist on hot air? I assume the major holders can play both ends, but isn’t building as much value as possible for stocks almost always the way to make money in the market? Am I being naive? Been a while since I read Henwood’s Wall Street; wonder if a sequel is in the works.
On a more practical note: What really scares me about this is that if conventional thinking almost always assumes enormous losses for any invading army in Iran, that must mean that what’s contemplated approaches real Armaggideon Time, as Willie Williams once sang. . .
Yes, they do. See the dot-com bubble, the current not adequately deflated AI bubble, how long it took markets to recognize the housing-brewing derivatives crisis in 2007-2008, oil at $147 in July 2008….the list goes on.
Read Thucydides. The U.S. is Athens overplaying its hand. Substitute attacking Iran for the Syracuse expedition. The results will be the same: the fall of a would-be hegemon. If we are lucky, we will avoid a nuclear war.
In addition to Thucydides, I also suggest reading about Masada, the Samson story, the Book of Jeremiah…to get more of an Abrahamic flavor. I see deep underlying suicidal ideation. Strongest among the Zionists, but definitely present throughout the various Abrahamic traditions. Suicide is painless, as the old song from MASH proclaimed.