(SeaPRwire) –
By: Julian Holbrooke
Washington is playing a dangerous game of psychological warfare with Tehran, and the chessboard happens to be the world’s most critical oil chokepoint. The Trump administration’s latest moves are not about democracy promotion. They are about pricing.
President Trump’s Truth Social post asking Iranians to “rise up and fight” was a calculated message, not a humanitarian plea. It came the same day US forces struck Iranian air-defense systems and radar installations, while Tehran retaliated with missile and drone attacks on American assets across the region. The White House maintains it has not announced a policy of regime change. That careful distinction is the entire point.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent described Iran’s economy as entering a “death spiral” on Fox Business, arguing that the regime is “panicked” and resorting to kinetic action because economic pressure is closing in. He outlined three possible outcomes for Tehran: the IRGC turning on itself, the Iranian people rising up, or the regime coming to the negotiating table. The subtext was clear. Washington does not need to invade. It needs Iran to fold under economic gravity.
The Hormuz Strait detail in Trump’s post was the loudest part of that message. “I like our position now much better, with almost total control of the Hormuz Strait,” he wrote. That phrase carries enormous weight. Roughly a fifth of global oil trade passes through that narrow waterway. Controlling it, or threatening to, is a lever that moves energy markets more than any diplomatic declaration ever could.
Miad Maleki, the senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, confirmed what many suspected. “It’s very clear U.S. government is not in the business of regime change anymore,” he said. He argued Washington should contain the regime, cut off its economic lifelines, and prepare for internal unrest. The strategy is not conquest. It is strangulation.
Reports of localized protests inside Iran add texture to this strategy. The National Council of Resistance of Iran said workers, retirees, drivers, and unemployed youth demonstrated in multiple cities on August 31st. The group alleged security forces fired on job seekers in Gachsaran and Ahvaz. Claims of unpaid wages, inflation, fuel shortages, and brutal working conditions came from the same source. Digital could not verify those specific allegations independently.
Benny Sabti, an Iran analyst, told Digital that deteriorating living conditions could become the catalyst for broader unrest. “People are hungry,” he said. “Hunger is humiliating.” The prediction was straightforward. Economic desperation would eventually outweigh fear of the security apparatus.
Trump’s Tuesday post reframed the entire question. It was no longer about whether economic pressure would bring Tehran back to negotiations. The administration is now asking what happens inside Iran if those negotiations never come. The answer determines whether the pressure strategy produces a deal, an internal collapse, or something far messier.
The geopolitical pendulum is shifting toward a moment where Washington’s options narrow regardless of how the crisis unfolds. Every escalation on the ground deepens Iran’s vulnerability. Every provocation from Tehran risks drawing the US into a conflict it claims not to want. The Hormuz leverage is powerful. It is also a double-edged sword that can cut American allies and global markets just as easily as it cuts Iran.
Author bio: Julian Holbrooke is an overseas international relations analyst who frequently contributes to major European daily newspapers.