‘Force and geography’ Trump’s liberal plan meets Iran’s remaining firepower

TOI Washington correspondent: The United States and Iran are about to resume a shooting contest in the Gulf after Tehran attacked the United Arab Emirates with drones and missiles in response to U.S. efforts to militarily escort ships stranded in the Strait of Hormuz under the so-called “Project Freedom.”“In a high-stakes gamble that combines humanitarian rhetoric with hard-power signals, U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday launched a Washington-led operation to escort commercial ships out of the troubled waterway under U.S. protection. But as Tehran attacked the UAE’s Fujairah province, the military operation was attacked by Iran’s remaining firepower, forcing it to take defensive measures against incoming missiles and drones. The United States claimed that two commercial ships passed through the strait, but Iran denied this claim and said it had full control of the strait. The tit-for-tat statements come amid a two-month conflict in the Gulf that has clogged one of the world’s most important oil arteries and roiled global energy markets and the United States. Domestic politics were in chaos.The battle for control of the Strait of Hormuz has now crystallized into a stark reality: The United States clearly has superior military power, but Iran appears to be dictating the terms of engagement, with clear warnings from Tehran that geography and asymmetric tactics are weakening Washington and forcing it to operate within the red lines set by its adversaries. What the United States describes as freedom is viewed by Iran as a provocation, as both sides on Monday embarked on a dangerous path toward renewed fighting. Earlier, Trump, who characterized the operation as a humanitarian intervention, said neutral countries had called on Washington to help free ships “trapped” in the strait, many of which were short of food and necessities. He said the United States would “guide its ships safely out of these restricted waterways” and warned that any disruption “must be dealt with forcefully”. The operation, which began Monday morning Middle East time, was billed as a gesture of goodwill – including toward Iran – although it had clear overtones of coercion.But in reality, Project Freedom got off to a hesitant start. Ship traffic through the strait remains low, with most vessels choosing to use the Iranian-controlled traffic separation scheme rather than the U.S.-proposed corridor closer to Oman. Shipping industry executives said the plan lacked operational clarity and it was unclear whether it was sustainable, echoing industry concerns that any large-scale shipments without Iranian coordination could reignite hostilities. Tehran’s attack on the UAE within hours of the U.S. action showed that the concerns were not unfounded. From a strictly military perspective, the United States maintains overwhelming superiority. The U.S. Navy can project power across the Gulf through carrier strike groups, surveillance systems and allied bases. But geography and politics complicate this advantage. Iran’s proximity to the strait, combined with its possession of coastal missiles, drones and fast attack craft, allows it to effectively control escalation. Even limited harassment can hamper commercial shipping, as insurance companies raise premiums and companies refuse to risk multi-million-dollar vessels.Shipping companies, for their part, voted with their keels: most stood on the sidelines. Executives said Trump’s assurances fell short of the security assurances needed to resume border crossings. Insurers are unlikely to cover voyages through the strait without a broader deal, preferably involving Iran. The result was a bottleneck with global implications, affecting markets from Asia to Europe.Stateside, the crisis is colliding with the table economy. National gas prices have soared from a pre-conflict price of $2.98 per gallon to an average of $4.46, an increase of about 50%. Analysts warned that if the strait remains restricted, oil prices could top $5.Soaring energy prices have put intense pressure on Trump, who has made energy affordability a core political message. The president has responded with a combination of external appeals and strategic pressure, repeatedly calling on China and NATO allies to help reopen the waterway, whether by pressuring Iran or providing naval assets.Critics say the government’s approach is reactive and lacks a coherent outcome. Some lawmakers question whether liberal projects have the potential to plunge the United States into broader conflict without congressional authorization, while others believe the president has no choice but to act to stabilize global energy flows.Trump, however, struck a defiant tone, insisting the action was both necessary and limited. He pointed to “very positive discussions” with Iran as evidence that diplomacy is still at work, even as he stressed a willingness to use force if necessary.