Tag: strait of hormuz
Will Surrendering To Iran Relieve Trump's Gas Pains? Alas, Probably Not!

Will Surrendering To Iran Relieve Trump's Gas Pains? Alas, Probably Not!

Donald Trump’s rhetoric on Iran oscillates wildly from day to day, sometimes from hour to hour. But Trump has run out of military options that don’t involve huge war crimes, so we seem to be heading for a reopening of the Strait of Hormuz on Iran’s terms. And that includes the imposition of de facto tolls, whatever they are called.

There is no mystery about Trump’s surrender: He’s desperate to end the war because he is paying a steep political price for high gasoline prices, and the midterms are only four and a half months away.

But can Trump rehabilitate his standing with American voters by throwing in the towel? Probably not, for both economic and political reasons. I would argue that there are four points of slippage between Trump’s political goals and what is likely to happen.

The state of the Strait: Even if the war is truly over, it will take time to return world oil supplies to normal levels. First, there has been substantial damage to the Persian Gulf’s infrastructure, which will take months, if not years, to repair. Second, many oil tankers are now in the wrong place and it will take weeks or months to move them. Third, some shipping channels are at risk from stray mines. Lastly, the world met the Hormuz crisis in part by running down oil inventories, which will now need to be rebuilt.

It’s true that a surge in Iranian oil exports has begun thanks to the lifting of the U.S. blockade. This will add to global oil supplies but will also strengthen the regime. But despite this surge of Iranian shipments, prices of oil futures — promises to buy or sell oil on specified dates — indicate that the oil markets expect oil prices to decline at only a slow rate for the rest of this year:

west texas intermediate oil price

Rockets and feathers: There is a well-documented pattern to how the price of gasoline responds to changes in the price of crude oil. When there is a global shock that causes the price of crude oil to soar, gasoline prices rise like a rocket. But when the crisis is over and crude prices plunge, the price of gas declines only gradually ­— it drifts down like feathers.

Will that happen this time? Gasoline and, to a lesser extent, diesel, have fallen considerably in price from their peak:

oil price

They are, however, still well above their prewar levels, and by more than you would expect given the commonly used rule of thumb:

$10 on price of crude = $0.25 on price of gasoline

Crude oil prices are $10-$15 a barrel higher than they were prewar, which would point to gasoline prices $0.25-$0.37 higher per gallon. Yet gasoline is currently almost $1 a gallon higher than it was before the war.

So if the “rockets and feathers” pattern continues to apply, gasoline prices will be elevated for months to come, thwarting Trumpist hopes of quick political relief from capitulating to Iran.

Prices beyond gasoline: As you can see in the chart above, the war on Iran sent the price of diesel fuel soaring by significantly more than the price of gasoline. Unlike gasoline, which is mainly purchased by consumers, diesel is mainly used by businesses, for trucking and industrial uses. So the surge in diesel prices led to a surge in business costs rather than a direct burden on consumers.

True, businesses do eventually pass higher costs on to consumers. The key word, however, is “eventually.” This means that there is probably substantial Iran war-induced inflation still in the pipeline.

Nor were soaring prices of diesel the only cost the war imposed on businesses. The Persian Gulf is normally a key supplier of many chemicals, whose prices soared when the Strait of Hormuz was closed. For example, the price of urea, a key fertilizer with industrial uses as well, temporarily rose by 75 percent when the Strait was closed. Again, some of the effect of these cost shocks still hasn’t hit consumer prices.

Moreover, the economy is delivering inflationary shocks independent of the war. Notably, the AI/datacenter boom has driven a rapid rise in electricity prices and huge increases in the prices of memory chips, which are used in almost all consumer electronics, from smartphones to laptops to game consoles. The AI boom has also pushed up interest rates on mortgages and consumer loans. Oh, and Trump’s cuts to Obamacare subsidies are causing many Americans’ health insurance costs to soar.

So while consumers are getting some relief at the gas pump, they’re facing persistent sticker shock on many other goods. It’s safe to predict that consumers won’t be in a celebratory mood on D-I [defeat by Iran] Day. Instead, they are likely to feel that any claims of victory are Pyrrhic at best.

The cost of broken promises: We have just endured the second big gasoline price shock of the past five years. The previous shock, during the Biden years, briefly sent average prices of gasoline above $5 a gallon. Like the recent price spike, the 2022 run-up in gas prices was largely caused by a war — the war between Russia and Ukraine. That wasn’t a war that the U.S. president launched on a whim. Regardless, the price of gasoline fell rapidly after June 2022:

Inflation also fell rapidly, especially if you exclude the price of shelter, which as measured tends, for technical reasons, to lag far behind market prices:

So what did cheaper gas and rapid disinflation without a recession do for perceptions about President Biden’s handling of the economy? Almost nothing. The Roper Center published an analysis of trends in Biden’s economic approval rating, and found hardly any improvement when gas prices and overall inflation plunged:

You may argue that this was unfair because Biden was punished for a global inflation shock that wasn’t his fault. Furthermore, his overall economic management was in fact very good. In fact, that’s what I have argued, and a majority of Americans now say that the economy was better under Biden than under Trump. However, that argument is beside the point for analyzing the effect of the Trump surrender. The point, instead, is that once a leader has lost the public’s economic trust, that trust doesn’t come back just because gasoline prices have receded.

I would add that it may be especially hard for the Trumpists to make the case that things have turned around when they were never willing to admit that anything was wrong in the first place, insisting even as prices soared that we were living in a “golden age.”

So will Trump’s surrender to Iran rescue him and his party from a blue wave in November? It’s very unlikely. I suggest they find themselves some lifejackets.

Paul Krugman is a Nobel Prize-winning economist and former professor at MIT and Princeton who now teaches at the City University of New York's Graduate Center. From 2000 to 2024, he wrote a column for The New York Times. Please consider subscribing to his Substack.

Reprinted with permission from Paul Krugman.


As Trump's Iran Defeat Emerges, Military And Political Analysts Condemn 'Disaster'

As Trump's Iran Defeat Emerges, Military And Political Analysts Condemn 'Disaster'

Donald Trump claimed an Iran deal was coming—for literally the 40th time—on the weekend of his 80th birthday as he turned the White House lawn into a circus of rage and vulgarity all backed with ads for crypto companies and Trump coins.

He hoped the UFC fights would overshadow how bad the so-called deal was, as he was heading to Europe to claim a victory over Iran while not having an actual copy of anything with details of it. He would just tell the G7 leaders at the summit how great it is—as if they’re going to believe him after all he’s put them through from tariffs to Greenland—while the written details conveniently wouldn’t be ready until the end of the week.

But those details of the “memorandum of understanding” (hardly a deal) have been coming out, and it’s pretty simple: Trump settled for getting the Strait of Hormuz possibly opened in return for Iran getting 300 billion dollars. On my SiriusXM program, retired U.S. Army General Randy Manner told me this was an “unconditional surrender” and will go down in history as a terrible military defeat.Trump tried to kick the details down the road, hoping against all hope that people will forget. There’s nothing concrete being stated about the nuclear material being secured and Trump is already preparing for that, actually pondering at the G7 summit, “Why even bother” to get it? His reasoning is that his bombing of the nuclear facility last year has so buried the material that it’s not usable.

Then why did we need to go to war and cost lives?

Trump says the strait will be “permanently toll-free,” but Iran says it will have “fees.”

There is a technical, legal difference, which Trump is trying to hide behind, but there’s no tangible difference between the two. Iran’s foreign ministry said that Iran was “not seeking to levy transit tolls; however, fees will be charged in exchange for the services that are provided.”

In other words, Trump is getting snookered.Trump and Vice President JD Vance have also been adamant that the $300 billion to rebuild Iran is not coming from U.S. dollars but from a fund set up by the Gulf states—the very nations Iran attacked throughout the war.

But, as retired general Jack Keane said on Fox, “The $300 billion is real. Who cares where it comes from? The Iranians are still in charge. They’re going to take that money and recover everything.”

Keane compared it to allowing Nazi Germany access to billions for reconstruction while the Nazis were still in charge, no matter who’s giving them the money.And with the Gulf states themselves looking for bailouts from the US for the damage they incurred—and the Trump administration indicated back in April that it was open to it—it’s not clear to me that US dollars are not going to Iran.

It’s also been reported, however, that the money won’t come from governments of the Gulf states but from “investors,” and not just from the Gulf.

Reuters reports:

“The new fund is a private investment vehicle, not a reconstruction or reparations program and will not include any ⁠government money or grants, the source said, adding that companies based in the U.S., the Gulf Arab states, Asia, South America and Africa have agreed to commit financing.” Investments pledged span energy, logistics, manufacturing and transport, the source said.

Iran is declaring full victory. And though it has suffered terrible losses of its military infrastructure and leadership, it has won in terms of the geopolitics of this war, simply by surviving and now having a huge weapon. It controls the strait and can get ransom for it. Iran is blaring on state media that it is victorious. Acknowledging Iran’s loses, the Financial Times puts it in context:

Within the highest ranks of the Islamic republic, nobody would deny Iran is nursing devastating losses. US and Israeli strikes destroyed crucial infrastructure, took the lives of about 3,500 civilians, and killed supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and several senior military commanders.
But regime insiders, Iranian analysts and western diplomats in Tehran agree on one thing: the war failed to bring the radical transformation sought by Iran’s enemies. In fact, the regime, which at the start of the year appeared to be at its most vulnerable, seems more confident than before the war began in February.
“The US made a big mistake. It awakened the sleeping dragon,” said a regime insider. “We paid a huge price, but we activated capacities that we had previously hesitated to use.”

The extremist religious leaders in Tehran are feeling omnipotent, and they will repress the Iranian people even further. Prominent Republicans are already speaking out, and more will follow once the details are public.

Marc Thiessen, the odious former George W. Bush aide who reportedly advised Trump, warned on Fox News that this deal was “no better” than Obama’s.

After Vance confirmed the $300 billion payout, Thiessen called the deal a “disaster.”

The far-right Wall Street Journal editorial page states, “There’s no denying that Mr. Trump is retreating from his main goals as political pressure has built at home, and finishing the job requires greater military risk.”

“The deal also includes no Iranian commitments on its missiles and terror proxies,” the Journal stated. “These will be put off to ‘regional discussions’ from which no one expects much.”

In other words, Trump caused thousands of deaths, including those of American service members; cost U.S. taxpayers billions; depleted munitions; and sent gas prices soaring, which in turn had inflation on all other goods surging. And in the end he completely caved to the Iranian regime.

Reprinted with permission from The Signorile Report

Did We Lose Yet? Trump's Ego-Driven Iran 'Excursion' Crashes Into Reality

Did We Lose Yet? Trump's Ego-Driven Iran 'Excursion' Crashes Into Reality

“Many questions, few details in latest Iran peace proposal,” read the headline on a New York Times report Sunday. As the subhead explained, “It is too early to tell what exactly Trump and Iran have agreed to, or if they have agreed to much at all.” The article, by the way, was written by David Sanger, who Trump called “treasonous” over his clearly accurate reporting on how badly the war was going.

But, in fact, Trump’s Iran war may be over, or virtually over. America lost.

Iran may or may not agree to exercise restraint in its control over the Strait of Hormuz and its nuclear program. But as Donald Trump of all people should know, agreements can be broken. At a fundamental level Trump, who began by demanding UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER and trying to impose a subservient new regime, is now slinking away, leaving Iran’s hard-liners empowered — and America’s reputation shattered.

How did that happen? America is a superpower, Iran a middle-sized regional power at best. Spending isn’t the only determinant of armed might, but even so a comparison of the two government’s military budgets is ludicrously one-sided:

US and Iran military spending 2025 Data from Stockholm International Peace Research Institute

Yet the Iranian regime is not only still standing, it is stronger than before. Meanwhile, Trump is running away.

Trump’s disastrous leadership isn’t the sole factor behind this debacle, although it’s a large part of the story. In my view there are four main reasons Trump’s Iran “excursion” is ending in humiliation.

First, this was a fundamentally unwinnable war.

Once the initial decapitation strike against Iran’s leadership left the regime’s hold on power intact, Operation Epic Fury became an attempt to end Iran’s threat to world oil supplies by suppressing its missiles and drones with air power. Unfortunately, as the Substack History Does You has documented, such campaigns have never worked. Allied air forces tried to stop Nazi Germany from launching V1s and V2s in World War II; they failed. During the first Gulf War, Coalition air forces devoted huge resources to an attempt to stop Iraq from launching Scud missiles; they also failed. Chasing down mobile launchers, especially in an era of cheap, abundant drones and in a huge, mountainous country like Iran, is an impossible game of whack-a-mole.

Of course, leaders who aren’t terminally arrogant and ignorant don’t start unwinnable wars in the first place.

Second, painful as this is to recognize, the U.S. military, after decades of unchallenged dominance, appears to have lost much of its edge. As Phillips O’Brien recently wrote,

The lack of thought-through US response to the technological changes we are seeing [especially in the Russia-Ukraine war] before it embarked on the Iran bombing shows how smug militaries can be—and the bigger and more powerful they think they are the more smug they tend to be.

There is far too much self-congratulation in the US about its military, a belief that US armed forces are highly professional, show initiative, are thoughtful, etc. This is a romantic vision that Americans are using now to throw all blame for the Iran failure on the Trump Administration.

That said, the Trump administration has made the degradation of the military much worse.

Pete Hegseth, the self-proclaimed Secretary of War, has carried out an unprecedented purge of military officers with impeccable reputations, with the majority of those fired Black or female. He has replaced them with political loyalists like Admiral Brad Cooper, the head of Central Command, who has in effect been running Trump’s war.

The officers who survived the purge got the message. Under Hegseth, official accounts of the war’s progress have been a stream of bombastic claims of victory and ludicrously rosy depictions of the situation on the battlefield. Less than two weeks ago Cooper was still peddling fantasies of easy victory to Congress, asserting among other things that the U.S. could easily open the Strait of Hormuz by force.

Do you believe that these delusions are only for public consumption, that Hegseth has been getting and acting on accurate information? I don’t. It’s far more likely that Hegseth and Trump have also been receiving false, optimistic reports, because nobody in the military dares to tell them the uncomfortable truth.

The sycophancy and flattery Cooper exhibited in that testimony surely reflected groupthink that has led to many bad decisions. For example, reporting by CNN, the Washington Post and the Times finds that U.S. bases and facilities have suffered a remarkable amount of damage from Iranian drone and missile strikes, with casualties and much expensive equipment and aircraft destroyed. Why wasn’t the U.S. military prepared for this possibility?

The lack of preparation clearly reflected a predetermined view that Iran would be so devastated by U.S. attacks that it would be unable to strike back. And it’s reasonable to infer that any officers who tried to warn of the dangers were treated as defeatists and silenced.

Finally, success in modern war depends crucially on out-thinking one’s enemies. But MAGA is all about deprecating hard thinking and valorizing belligerent ignorance.

On Saturday Hegseth addressed the graduating class at West Point. In war, he declared, “you can’t throw your pronouns at the enemy.” He congratulated the cadets on being “fit, not fat.” Despite humiliating failure, Hegseth still has his job — and is still asserting that eliminating DEI wins wars and that bulging biceps can beat drones.

Can America still snatch victory from the jaws of defeat, or should it accept a deal that leaves us clearly worse off than we were before the war? The answer is that running away — if that is what Trump is doing — is now the right move. It’s better to accept a bad deal, one that leaves America much weaker than it was a few months ago, than to double down on a failed war. Time is not on our side: looming shortages of critical weapons, the imminent exhaustion of world oil inventories, and the lost support of our allies and the American public mean that this war needs to end soon.

Paul Krugman is a Nobel Prize-winning economist and former professor at MIT and Princeton who now teaches at the City University of New York's Graduate Center. From 2000 to 2024, he wrote a column for The New York Times. Please consider subscribing to his Substack.

Reprinted with permission from Paul Krugman.

Discerning The Grim Reality Behind Trump's Fog Of Wartime Lies

Discerning The Grim Reality Behind Trump's Fog Of Wartime Lies

For anyone who believed Donald Trump's promise to be a "peace" president, his regime becomes more confusing every day.

Having started a war with Iran for no intelligible reason, Trump now alternates between threatening to bomb them back to the Stone Age and overseeing a ceasefire in which the firing hasn't actually ceased. Yesterday, US forces launched what the Pentagon called “self-defense strikes” after Iran fired missiles and drones against the destroyers USS Truxton, USS Rafael Peralta, and USS Mason, as well as attacking with small boats.

Trump insists the ceasefire is still in place and that negotiations toward a peaceful resolution continue. Meanwhile to avoid the Constitutional requirement for Congressional authorization, he has called the war an "excursion," a "military operation," a "conflict," and most recently a "skirmish."

But having issued repeated orders to strike boats allegedly carrying narcotics in the Caribbean and the Pacific, which most of the world regards as a violation of international law, Trump and his Pentagon stooge Pete Hegseth claim that we're "at war" with the supposed narco traffickers on those vessels. According to their twisted logic, those accused smugglers are combatants, and thus not entitled to arrest and trial instead of summary execution.

In the real world -- which bears little resemblance to the Trump fantasy universe -- we have been at war with Iran for months and while the outcome remains to be seen, this misadventure isn't going well by any sane measure despite Trump's constant grandiose prevarications.

He constantly insists that Iran was on the brink of acquiring nuclear weapons before the US started this war, a claim he reiterated this week when he slandered Pope Leo. The mullahs were "two weeks away" from possessing atomic bombs, he wrote on Truth Social, to be deployed immediately against Israel, every other country in the Mideast, Europe and the United States. They were about to blow up the world! Only the most braindead MAGA imbeciles believe such fables. The International Atomic Energy Agency and every other credible authority -- including the US intelligence community's own assessment last year -- have determined that Iran is nowhere near to building even a single bomb, nor has its leadership undertaken any decision to do so.

Both he and Hegseth boast that their current military campaign has "completely destroyed" Iran's military, including its navy, air force, missile and drone production facilities. Yet somehow Iran continues to control the Strait of Hormuz and to hit targets at will, including US navy vessels and the territory of US allies in the Gulf.

Trump has said many times in recent weeks that negotiations to conclude the "skirmish" are on the verge of success, although what success would mean is far from clear. He blusters on and on, assuring Americans that the Iranians are desperate to make a deal while he "holds all the cards."

Yesterday the Washington Post revealed that the CIA does not agree with that optimistic assessment. In a secret report to the White House, the agency found that Iran can endure the US blockade of the Strait of Hormuz for several months before encountering any serious economic trouble. As one US official told the Post, the Iranian leadership -- the same leadership that Trump says no longer exists -- has become "increasingly confident" that they can outlast the Trump administration in a contest of wills.

There is a reason that almost every word out of Trump's mouth is a lie. Neither he nor we can tolerate the reality of the world deformed by his incompetence and narcissism.

Joe Conason is founder and editor-in-chief of The National Memo. He is also editor-at-large of Type Investigations, a nonprofit investigative reporting organization formerly known as The Investigative Fund. His latest book is The Longest Con: How Grifters, Swindlers and Frauds Hijacked American Conservatism (St. Martin's Press, 2024). The paperback version, with a new Afterword, is now available wherever books are sold.




Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Trending

World