The American-Israeli escalation and Iran’s assertive response, particularly its effective management of the Strait of Hormuz, have already reshaped global equations, especially in the economic sphere. Yet in parallel, paper-based coalition initiatives have emerged around the idea of “reopening the Strait of Hormuz.” The Wall Street Journal reported that the US administration is seeking international partners to establish a new maritime coalition aimed at securing the Strait. The initiative, framed as a “Freedom of Navigation Construct,” would be led by the United States and focus on intelligence sharing, diplomatic coordination, and sanctions enforcement. Diplomats have reportedly been instructed to encourage foreign governments to join as either diplomatic or military partners.
This coalition discourse comes at a time when Donald Trump continues to claim the destruction of Iran’s military capabilities, including its navy. Yet since earlier conflicts, the United States has repeatedly sought coalition support against Iran, often in a pleading manner, while even NATO allies have refused to join such efforts. This process not only highlights the erosion of US global standing, but also reflects a broader international recognition of Iran’s military deterrence and the consequences of any confrontation with it.
Narrative Gap vs. Operational Reality: From Maximal Claims to Tactical Retreat
US coalition-building claims, along with reports about the restoration and enhancement of its regional military capabilities, come at a time when its own appeals for a coalition to “reopen the Strait of Hormuz” expose the fragility of those narratives. These contradictions directly undermine Trump’s assertions, including his repeated claim that Iran is “desperately eager for a deal.” He has further argued that Iran is in a very weak position, with “almost nothing left,” even claiming its leadership and military structures have been destroyed, and that nearly the entire armed forces have been eliminated. He has also asserted that Iran’s entire navy, “159 ships”, has been sunk and destroyed.
On the other hand, the coalition effort itself demonstrates that the United States has failed to achieve its objectives neither militarily, nor diplomatically, nor through economic pressure and blockade, and is now turning to other countries for support. This crisis becomes even more apparent with reports indicating that the aircraft carrier USS Gerald Ford will soon return to the United States. This withdrawal directly contradicts Trump’s claims of Iranian military collapse; because under basic military logic, if such claims were true, the result would not be retreat but advancement toward the Strait of Hormuz and deeper entry into the Persian Gulf.
The US economic situation further underscores the disconnect between rhetoric and reality. Net dissatisfaction with Trump’s handling of inflation has reached minus 49 percent, meaning opposition exceeds support by nearly half the population. In California, gasoline prices have surpassed six dollars per gallon—an all-time record—while the national average has climbed to 4.2 dollars, marking an increase of more than 30 percent.
The scale of economic strain is such that even the Pentagon avoids publicly disclosing the real cost of ongoing conflicts, citing 25 billion dollars, while some members of Congress and media estimates place the figure closer to 50 billion dollars. Evidence also suggests that Benjamin Netanyahu’s strategic gamble has already cost the United States 100 billion dollars—four times the official estimate. This translates into roughly 500 dollars per month per American household, with costs rising rapidly. “Israel first” has increasingly meant “America last.”
Washington’s Growing Isolation: Erosion of Consensus and Allied Reluctance
The United States continues to speak of new coalition-building efforts, despite failing over the past year to maintain even a stable alliance with its traditional partners. Its so-called Gaza Peace Council, instead of bringing together 60 countries, was formed with only 20 participants and without European involvement. NATO and European allies have repeatedly and explicitly stated that they will not participate in any war against Iran, emphasizing that such a war is not theirs.
This stance has become so pronounced that Trump has publicly criticized NATO for its lack of cooperation, even raising the possibility of US withdrawal from the alliance or reducing troop deployments in countries such as Germany.
Once a central architect of global consensus, the United States today lacks even intra-alliance cohesion. Its long-standing Western partners, and even Arab states, no longer trust Washington’s security guarantees, especially after the recent conflict, which made it clear that “Israel first” takes precedence over all other considerations in US policy.
Deterrence Mechanism in Hormuz: Reciprocal Costs and Strategic Horizons
While the United States continues to speak of expanding military capabilities in the region and forming coalitions to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, it is essential, alongside national vigilance against psychological warfare, particularly in economic and media dimensions, that Iran maintains a firm and decisive response to any move by the United States or other actors.
In this context, and amid claims of short, rapid US strikes designed to achieve quick gains and exit escalation cycles, the commander of Iran’s Aerospace Force has issued an explicit operational warning: “With painful, prolonged, and far-reaching strikes, we will respond, if enemy operations are swift and short-lived, we will answer them by divine grace. We have already seen the fate of your hollow bases in the region; we will also see your ships.”
The world has come to understand that Iran converts every threat into operational action. Accordingly, any country entering a war against Iran effectively turns itself and its interests into a legitimate target for Iranian armed forces. At the same time, Washington’s insistence on repetitive military threats and coercive behavior will do nothing but deepen the crisis and further tighten the knot around the Strait of Hormuz, a chokepoint whose economic and political consequences for the world would be incalculable.
NOURNEWS