(WASHINGTON, DC, UNITED STATES) – The United States faces increasing diplomatic and economic pressure over its approach to Iran, with analysts warning that the administration of Donald Trump may be isolated after failing to prepare for key consequences of the conflict.<\/p>\n
Professor Scott Lucas of University College Dublin said there are growing concerns about both global and domestic economic impacts, particularly following disruption in the Strait of Hormuz. He said the administration did not plan for a potential closure of the waterway and underestimated the range of methods Iran could use to restrict shipping.<\/p>\n
\u201cThey are absolutely worried because there are global economic consequences and domestic economic consequences,\u201d Lucas said. \u201cThey did not plan for Iran to close the Strait of Hormuz. They are caught in a cul de sac.\u201d<\/p>\n
Lucas said the situation reflects a broader lack of strategic planning, with uncertainty over how the United States will respond if disruption continues.<\/p>\n
The interview followed a meeting between Trump and Japan\u2019s prime minister in the Oval Office, which was described as cordial but included an exchange that drew attention. When asked why allies had not been informed in advance of strikes on Iran, Trump referred to the element of surprise and made a remark referencing Pearl Harbor, prompting a muted response in the room.<\/p>\n
Lucas described the comment as indicative of a pattern in which Trump reacts impulsively. He said the Japanese prime minister did not respond publicly, reflecting the importance of maintaining diplomatic relations at a time when Japan relies heavily on energy supplies passing through the Strait of Hormuz.<\/p>\n
He added that media coverage often focuses on such moments rather than underlying policy issues, including economic and military implications.<\/p>\n
Shipping through the Strait has already been affected. Reports indicate that one tanker operator paid approximately 2 million US dollars for safe passage. Lucas said Iran appears to be selectively allowing vessels from certain countries to pass, including Turkey, India and Pakistan, potentially in exchange for political or economic considerations.<\/p>\n
He noted that Greek owned shipping has historically continued operating in such conditions, even when overall traffic falls significantly. In recent weeks, shipping levels reportedly dropped by around 90 percent at the start of the conflict.<\/p>\n
Lucas said statements from US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent have raised further questions about policy consistency. Bessent indicated that Iranian oil shipments could be allowed to proceed in order to stabilise global markets, despite the ongoing conflict.<\/p>\n
He said this reflects concern within the administration about rising oil prices and broader economic consequences. \u201cThey messed up by not planning for a global oil price spike,\u201d Lucas said, adding that measures intended to reduce prices could also provide revenue to Iran.<\/p>\n
The administration is also facing internal divisions. While some officials continue to emphasise military pressure, others are focused on economic stability. Lucas said this split reflects uncertainty over objectives and strategy.<\/p>\n
He warned that the United States may be forced to tolerate some level of Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz, even while conducting military operations.<\/p>\n
Estimates suggest that around 140 million barrels of Iranian oil are currently at sea, representing roughly 10 to 14 days of supply. Allowing these shipments to proceed could ease market pressures but also strengthen Iran financially.<\/p>\n
Lucas said Iran has likely prepared for such scenarios over several years, including contingency planning and the use of asymmetric tactics. These include partnerships with regional groups and the potential use of drones, missiles and maritime disruption.<\/p>\n
He contrasted this with what he described as reduced institutional capacity within the US government, including the loss of experienced analysts and diplomats. This, he said, may have contributed to gaps in planning and assessment.<\/p>\n
Military considerations also present challenges. US officials have acknowledged limitations in interceptor missile supplies, particularly in the face of large numbers of lower cost drones. This imbalance increases the cost of sustained operations.<\/p>\n
The administration is seeking up to 200 billion US dollars in additional funding for the conflict. The proposal requires approval from Congress and has already faced opposition from some lawmakers.<\/p>\n
Lucas said the increase from earlier estimates has raised questions about the scope and duration of the conflict. He noted that public support for deploying ground troops remains low, with recent polling indicating limited backing.<\/p>\n
Although Trump has publicly ruled out deploying troops, discussions continue about possible actions, including blockades or limited operations targeting key infrastructure such as Kharg Island.<\/p>\n
Lucas said these options suggest uncertainty rather than a clear plan. \u201cThey are keeping options open because they are not sure which way they go,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
He added that neither the United States nor Israel appears to have a fully defined long term strategy. While Israel may seek regime change, the US position appears focused on compelling concessions from Iran while allowing the current government to remain.<\/p>\n
This approach, he said, leaves limited room for negotiation if Iran refuses to abandon key elements of its policy, including its nuclear and missile programmes and regional alliances.<\/p>\n
International support for US actions has been limited. Several European and allied countries have condemned Iranian strikes but have not committed military forces to operations in the Strait of Hormuz.<\/p>\n
Lucas said this reflects both strategic caution and broader concerns about the risks of escalation. He noted that European governments are likely to support efforts to de escalate the conflict before considering any direct involvement.<\/p>\n
He added that relations between the United States and its allies have been strained by previous disputes, including trade measures and security disagreements, which may also affect current cooperation.<\/p>\n
At the same time, there are concerns about the legal and intelligence basis for the conflict. US intelligence officials have indicated there was no clear evidence of an imminent threat from Iran at the time of the strikes.<\/p>\n
Lucas said this undermines both legal justification and strategic coherence. He described the conflict as lacking a clear objective and warned that its consequences are already spreading across the Middle East.<\/p>\n
He concluded that the situation remains uncertain, with no clear resolution in sight. \u201cThere is no one in the driver\u2019s seat,\u201d he said, describing a reactive approach rather than a coordinated strategy.<\/p>\n