After five weeks of sustained aerial bombardment that failed to secure Iran’s capitulation to the Donald Trump administration, Washington has shifted its strategy towards economic coercion, imposing an economic embargo on Tehran’s exports and imports by imposing a double naval blockade at the Strait of Hormuz.
The blockade illustrates a wider effort to diminish Iran’s economic strength and reduce its ability to maintain long-term resistance.
This strategy aligns with the defiant stance historically associated with its late supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, who often emphasised endurance under pressure as a key element of Iran’s approach to countering Washington.
Experts warn that although the United States might have the upper hand militarily and economically in the short term, Iran’s long history under Western sanctions indicates it could withstand immediate shocks and prepare for a prolonged strategic contest.
This ongoing confrontation could challenge American patience as the toll of war and disruptions start impacting daily life.
“In the immediate military and economic sense, the US appears to have the upper hand, because it has greater capacity to impose pressure and shape the strategic environment,” Ali Mammadov, a PhD researcher in political science at George Mason University’s Schar School of Policy and Government, tells TRT World.
But Mammadov adds that “the longer-term balance is still unclear and will depend less on the blockade itself than on the terms of any eventual agreement”, referring to the exchange of messages between the US and Iran and the possibility of a second round of talks in Islamabad, aimed at moving towards a comprehensive peace deal between the two archenemies.
Mammadov notes that if the US blockade forces Iran to come to the table and agrees to “a strict limitation” on its nuclear programme, it could be considered a major success for the Trump administration.
While the US calls for a 20-year ban on uranium enrichment, Iran has indicated it is open to a five-year suspension, suggesting that a compromise might be achievable on this major sticking point between the two countries.
Other unresolved issues include Iran’s missile program and its connections with Shia allies throughout the Middle East, from Lebanon to Iraq and Yemen.
If US-Iran negotiations result in a temporary delay or sanctions relief without major nuclear concessions from Tehran, “the outcome would look much more mixed,” says Mammadov, noting that “the current pressure gives the US short-term leverage, but the real measure of who has the upper hand will be decided politically, not just militarily”.
Iranian calculation
Throughout the conflict, analysts say, Iran’s strategy is to avoid defeat, while the US must achieve a clear victory to claim success.
Currently, the conflict indicates that “the Iranians have the upper hand,” even though the US, with “the most advanced military in the world,” has engaged Tehran in intense hostilities, says retired American General Mark Kimmitt.
While the Trump administration says its blockade of Iranian ports in the Persian Gulf is effective, maritime data show that some vessels continue to enter the Strait of Hormuz.
It remains unclear whether vessels moving between the Gulf and the Indian Ocean have any direct connections with Iran.
Oral Toga, a researcher at the Centre for Iranian Studies, sees that “despite the claimed blockade”, movements of vessels in the region “expose the enforcement gap between declaration and interdiction”.
“Iran operates from a different theory of victory. Its doctrine is not symmetry but cost imposition across domains — Hormuz disruption, proxy activation, missile and drone saturation, and fragmentation of the Western coalition,” Toga tells TRT World.
“In the first weeks the blockade favors the US; beyond that horizon escalation costs compound on both sides, and upper-hand dynamics become situational rather than structural,” the analyst adds. As a result, he believes that an analysis based on “the notion of a clear upper hand misreads the structure of this conflict.”