The spokesperson for the Iranian Army, Brigadier General Mohammad Akraminia, assured this Sunday in statements to the IRNA news agency that “countries that follow the United States in imposing sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran will inevitably face difficulties when transiting the Strait of Hormuz.” The military also stated that the alleged “imposition of a blockade” is part of “a propaganda campaign aimed at neutralizing Iranian control over the strait,” while insisting that “Iranian maritime trade continues to flow normally.”
The new threat from the Iranian regime came shortly before IRNA reported that Tehran has sent, through the Pakistani mediator, its response to the latest US ceasefire proposal to bolster the end of hostilities. For now, both the content of the message and the reception by the Donald Trump Administration are unknown.
General Akraminia took advantage of his statement to the news agency to renew his threats against the United States: “We warn the enemy that if it commits aggression again and falls into another miscalculation, as it did in the past and for which it is still paying the consequences, it will undoubtedly face other surprising options,” said the senior officer.
Also this Sunday, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Garibabadi warned France and the United Kingdom that it will respond “firmly and immediately” to the possible deployment of military ships, reports the Efe agency. Paris and London plan to send warships to the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden to prepare a future joint cooperation mission to guarantee maritime security.
A questionable strategy
However, his words do not reflect a homogeneous position within Iran. More than a month after the ceasefire between Tehran and Washington, various political, academic, and economic figures have begun to publicly question the pressure strategy on the Strait of Hormuz and its possible consequences.
Mohammad Ghaedí, a political scientist at George Washington University, explains to EL PAÍS that “one must be cautious when talking about the degree of internal consensus on this matter, as there is no free and reliable survey on Iranian public opinion regarding the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.” Still, he considers that Iranian society is going through a clear polarization. “A part of the population accepts the Islamic Republic’s security narrative and may interpret these measures as a legitimate deterrent instrument,” he notes.
In contrast, he adds, another sector of society, marked by years of sanctions, economic deterioration, and international isolation, “perceives these initiatives as costly and dangerous and fears their economic and political repercussions.”
According to the economic media Eghtesad News, Davoud Ranguí, Vice President of Imports of the Iran Chamber of Commerce, defended the need to normalize maritime transit through Hormuz and warned of the risk that this route loses its influence capacity for Tehran. “We have no other option but to reopen the strait in some way and restore the flow of trade,” he said. In his opinion, the strategic value of the strait for Iran could erode quickly: “If today its strategic value for us is 100, in two months it will be 80 and in a year it will fall to 20 or 30.”
Ranguí also emphasized that international trade tends to adapt to prolonged crises. “The Persian Gulf littoral countries will seek alternative routes for their oil exports and for their trade exchanges,” he explained. In that sense, he also warned of the internal impact that a prolonged blockade policy would have: “Closing the strait means blocking our own regional trade and causing enormous damage to the country.”
Read more Complaint against Emilio Aragón and Movistar Plus+ for plagiarism of a musical interview show
Ata Hosseinian, an energy sector expert based in Berlin, states in statements to EL PAÍS that “the Islamic Republic needs financial resources, at least to rebuild and strengthen its military and armament capacity. Obtaining foreign currency income is not viable in a context of maritime blockade and growing economic imbalances. Therefore, it has no other option but to get out of this situation.”
Still, the expert adds that “the harsh economic realities, especially in the energy field, push Iran to the negotiating table, not the protests of civil activists nor the opposition of sectors against the war.”
The growing expression of critical voices has also caused a judicial reaction. The Tehran Prosecutor’s Office announced the opening of cases against reformist journalist and activist Abbas Abdi. According to the Mizan agency, the official organ of the Iranian judiciary, the accusation is based on an article published last week in the newspaper Etemad.
In that text, Abdi criticized the warmongering stances of the hardest sectors of the system and wrote that “another of the actions of the supporters of an endless war is to assume the role of spokespersons for the supreme leader,” promoting the continuation of the conflict “without precise information about the situation on the ground and in the country.” The journalist also warned that “the majority of the population will not sympathize with decisions imposed from the street by a rentier minority.”
The Prosecutor’s Office also filed charges against Sadegh Zibakalam, a political science professor and one of the 1979 revolutionaries, for statements given to the ANA agency. The academic stated that “part of the objective of the nighttime gatherings is to push the Government towards ultra positions,” while another part responds to “a nationalist and patriotic feeling.”
Austerity
In parallel, Iranian authorities have intensified their public calls for austerity. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkián and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf issued separate messages urging the population to reduce energy consumption.
“The country urgently needs to save,” said Pezeshkián, who even declared that “turning off each light is equivalent to shooting a bullet against the enemy.” Ghalibaf, for his part, asked citizens “not only to save themselves but also to seriously recommend others to do the same.”
Despite the growing internal debate, Ghaedí is skeptical about the ability of these pressures to alter the course of the Iranian state’s strategic decisions. “The decision-making structure in the Islamic Republic, especially in foreign policy and security matters, is highly centralized and independent of public opinion,” the political scientist maintains. “Since the system’s leaders do not face direct electoral competition nor true accountability to voters, they also do not feel a significant obligation to modify their policies based on social discontent.”
Read more Kylian Mbappé misses the clásico in which Barça can be crowned League champion
