Against this backdrop, news reports have claimed that the United States is seeking support from members at a G20 finance ministers’ meeting to step up economic pressure on Iran and restrict the country’s financial channels.
The claim, however, comes amid serious doubts about whether such a consensus can be forged in the first place. The G20, because of deep divisions among its members, is no longer the unified structure that Washington could readily leverage to advance its policies. Moreover, the United States has lost a significant share of its ability to wield power and build consensus, as demonstrated by the fact that many countries were unwilling to stand alongside Washington in its confrontation with Iran on the military front. The world now clearly understands that increasing pressure on Tehran could intensify the crisis in the Strait of Hormuz and impose heavy costs on the global economy.
Trump’s Return to Structures He Once Rejected
Since returning to the White House, Donald Trump has pursued a foreign policy centered on withdrawing from many international institutions and even applying pressure and threats against them. Last year, he also declined to attend the G20 summit in South Africa, a move that drew criticism and disappointment from several members.
A Victory Increasingly Resembling a Propaganda Narrative
In recent months, Trump has repeatedly claimed that the United States has achieved victory over Iran and that Tehran no longer has the ability to resist. He has even said that Washington does not need other countries to join its pressure campaign against Iran and that there is no need to negotiate with Tehran.
But if that picture truly corresponds to reality, a fundamental question arises: If Iran’s military capabilities have been destroyed, its economy has collapsed and Tehran has lost its ability to exert influence, why is Washington once again seeking to rally countries to pressure Iran? And why is it simultaneously requesting tens of billions of dollars to rebuild and modernize its own military capabilities?
US actions on the ground differ significantly from its public narrative. The effort to revive economic pressure and seek new partners is not necessarily a sign of strength; it could instead amount to an early admission that policies Washington claims have succeeded are proving ineffective.
G20: A Composition That Makes Anti-Iran Consensus Difficult
The composition of the G20 itself underscores the difficulty of Washington’s consensus-building effort. Australia, Canada, Saudi Arabia, the United States, India, South Africa, Türkiye, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, France, Germany, Italy, Britain, China, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea and the European Union form a diverse group with differing interests and priorities.
Some members, including China, Brazil, South Africa and Türkiye, have little inclination to implement unilateral US sanctions. European countries are also grappling with economic and energy pressures and lack the capacity to absorb the costs of additional sanctions. Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, understands well that openly backing any hostile initiative against Iran could carry serious security consequences.
Even Washington’s traditional allies, under pressure from Trump’s tariffs and unilateral policies, are increasingly seeking greater independence from the United States. The idea of a G20 consensus against Iran therefore looks more like an attempt to bring opposing poles together than a genuine alliance.
Strait of Hormuz: Where Pressure Creates No Passage
Ultimately, no international meeting can ignore the geopolitical realities of the Strait of Hormuz. The world today understands that any increase in pressure on Iran could directly affect energy security and the global economy. The United States has also deployed all available capabilities to reshape regional dynamics, but this approach has not produced the outcome Washington wanted.
The way to reduce the crisis now is not greater pressure, but negotiation and engagement. Tehran has also demonstrated that it will not submit to coercion and threats, and that any hostile action could broaden the scope of the crisis.
From this perspective, the G20 cannot become another instrument for realizing Trump’s vision of “maximum pressure.” If countries genuinely want to ease the economic crisis and secure energy routes, the path lies in acknowledging regional realities, respecting Iran’s sovereignty, and distancing themselves from the destabilizing policies of the United States and the Israeli regime. Otherwise, any hostile action will carry costs that will fall first and foremost on the very countries Washington is now seeking to bring into its camp.
NOURNEWS