US and Iran Shift to Maritime and Economic Warfare Amid Rising Tensions
US-Iran tensions are shifting to economic and maritime pressure as Washington targets Iranian tankers. The strategy faces major constraints, including Iran's escalation incentives and complex geopolitical dependencies involving China.
Recent US strikes against three Iranian tankers mark a new phase in the ongoing conflict between the United States and Iran. After more than half a year of war characterized by waves of strikes, lulls, and escalations, the confrontation is gradually shifting from direct military combat to a campaign of sustained economic and maritime pressure. In a sense, the war is evolving into a new version of the "tanker war": a missile for a tanker, a strike for a strike, and blows against Iranian oil revenues in response to threats against freedom of navigation in the Gulf.
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s plan is based on the premise that sustained economic pressure can break Iran without requiring a broader military campaign: gradually raising the price paid by the regime until it is forced back to the negotiating table—or until the heavy economic pressure leads to its collapse. However, this premise carries a significant risk: pressure that weakens a regime does not necessarily lead to its surrender.
The Escalation Dilemma
As pressure on Iran mounts, Tehran’s incentive to prove it can still harm American and Western interests also grows. From the regime's perspective, relinquishing control over shipping lanes or its ability to export oil without receiving anything in return could be interpreted as defeat. This is the central paradox: the more effective American pressure is in weakening Iran, the greater Tehran's incentive to escalate to prove that pressure cannot force its surrender.
The tanker war illustrates this dynamic: Iran attacks ships to raise the cost of pressure against it, and the US responds by striking Iranian tankers to make clear that attacks on freedom of navigation will be met with blows to regime revenues.
The Limits of Washington's Leverage
This cycle of action and reaction occurs below the threshold of total war, weakening Iran while simultaneously increasing the risk of escalation without producing a clear endpoint. Compounding this is a significant American constraint. Despite military superiority, Washington’s political room for maneuver is limited. Rising energy prices and concerns over the war's impact on the American public make a return to total war a major political risk for the Trump administration, especially ahead of the midterm elections.
Iran is well aware of this constraint. Reports from sources close to the White House that the administration wishes to calm the situation ahead of the elections reinforce Tehran’s belief that a window of opportunity has opened to escalate, raise the costs for the United States, and alter the reality on the ground in its favor. Consequently, economic pressure has become a more attractive tool for Washington than an unlimited expansion of airstrikes. Yet a central limitation remains: effective economic pressure on Iran largely requires confronting China.
The China Factor
This is perhaps the most critical strategic development in the current phase of the war. The conflict with Iran is no longer just a bilateral standoff between Washington and Tehran; it is directly tied to the strategic competition between the United States and China. China is the destination for approximately 90 percent of Iranian oil exports, and the economic ties between the two countries provide Tehran with room to maneuver under sanctions.
Simultaneously, reports indicate that China supplies Iran with weapon systems, components, and technologies that help it rebuild missile programs and military systems damaged in the war. The mere existence of a Chinese market for Iranian oil, alongside economic channels enabling Tehran to operate under sanctions, makes it difficult for Washington to turn economic pressure into a decisive lever.
Trade Wars and Geopolitical Limits
However, exerting pressure on China to sever Iran’s operating space could exact a significant toll on the United States itself. In 2025, in response to the escalation of Donald Trump’s trade war, China restricted the export of rare earth metals and critical minerals to the United States. The move disrupted essential supply chains, including within defense industries, and demonstrated how deeply vulnerable the United States remains to Chinese dependency despite American efforts to build alternatives.
Chinese pressure ultimately contributed to an American retreat from certain measures, leading to understandings between the two superpowers and a truce in the trade war until November 10. Therefore, American capacity to tighten economic pressure on Iran depends not only on Washington's ability to impose sanctions, but also on its willingness to pressure Beijing and the price it is prepared to pay.
Ahead of the planned meeting between Donald Trump and Xi Jinping on September 24, Washington must weigh whether intensifying pressure on Iran justifies the potential cost in relations with China. Thus, the campaign against Iran is also becoming a test of the limits of American power vis-à-vis Beijing.
Conclusion and Future Outlook
This leads to the most important question: where is this all heading? The cumulative pressure on Iran is substantial. The economy has been severely damaged, oil exports have dropped to near zero, military infrastructure has been degraded, and the regime faces escalating war costs. Yet weakness is not the same as collapse, and cumulative pressure is not an exit strategy.
Authoritarian regimes do not necessarily collapse when they weaken; they collapse when they lose the monopoly on the use of force within the country and internal structures begin to disintegrate. Will such conditions materialize in Iran? At this stage, it is impossible to know. Therefore, gambling on external pressure bringing down the regime is an option, but not a strategy in its own right.
Ultimately, the true test will come after the US midterm elections. Will Trump escalate pressure on Iran, or maintain the current combination of a naval blockade and severe sanctions without diplomatic progress? Can American pressure translate into a political outcome? Without a clear objective and an exit mechanism, even effective pressure risks becoming an endless, inconclusive campaign. In the end, one can always dream of regime collapse, but dreams are no substitute for strategy. Time will tell.
