The War Against Iran Divides the World and Undermines Trump’s Political Power

_{The World in Focus} 

One month after the start of the joint U.S.-Israeli military aggression against Iran, in the midst of negotiations, and with Trump’s words still ringing in our ears—that it would be “a short excursion”—Secretary of State Marco Rubio told the Group of 7 (G7), the world’s wealthiest nations, on Friday that expects the war against Iran to end “in weeks, not months.” Iranian resistance has thrown the Epstein alliance off balance. Although Trump has repeatedly claimed that Iran’s ”, that they will have to use rowboats, that the country has been left “leaderless,” and that most of its missile platforms have been destroyed, the Persian nation continues to launch them—as well as drones—toward Israel and U.S. bases stationed in neighboring Persian Gulf countries.

While Trump says the war is “practically over,” the Pentagon confirmed on Thursday that it is evaluating the deployment of 10,000 additional troops to expand the president’s military options, which would be in addition to the 7,000 military personnel stationed as part of the operation bearing the ridiculous name “Operation Epic Fury.” Meanwhile, Israel continues to devastate southern Lebanon, employing a strategy similar to that used in Gaza.

The resignation letter from Joe Kent, director of the U.S. National Counterterrorism Center and an Iraq war veteran appointed to that post by Trump, dated March 17, sums up the sentiment of most Americans: “I cannot, in good conscience, support the war being waged in Iran (…). That country poses no imminent threat to the United States. Intelligence was manipulated or misinterpreted to justify the conflict. The war was driven by pressure from the Israeli government and its powerful lobby in Washington, and the conflict serves Israeli interests, but not those of the American people. The public is being deceived with the promise that this will be a short and easy war (…). As a veteran who was deployed to combat 11 times in a war fabricated by Israel, I cannot support sending the next generation to fight and die in a war that does not benefit the American people.”

The Strait of Martyrs

While Rubio was attending the G7 foreign ministers’ meeting in France, Trump referred to the Strait of Hormuz as the “Strait of Trump” during a speech at the FII Priority investment summit in Miami. Although he immediately afterward said it was a “terrible mistake” and corrected the name, his remarks were interpreted as a mix of mockery and a declaration of intent regarding control of this key maritime route for global oil trade. Rubio himself had also said that “if the United States guarantees the total security of the area following a military victory, it is logical that the identity and order of that region bear our mark.” Rubio supports a name change on the State Department’s official maps to refer to the area as an “International Protected Waterway” or, colloquially, the “American Strait,” to underscore the end of Iranian control.

The Iranian regime’s response to Trump’s jokes and Rubio’s statements was immediate. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei declared in a statement that, if the United States attempts to change the name, the Muslim world will refer to it as the “Strait of the Martyrs.” The Iranian government has confirmed that it has mined the strait with a new generation of smart mines and underwater drones, asserting that “not a single barrel of oil will leave unless it is under Iranian sovereignty.” Furthermore, the government has begun demanding a “war tax” from any vessel attempting to cross, a move that Marco Rubio had described at the G7 meeting as an act of piracy justifying a “final offensive,” which on Friday sent the price of a barrel of Brent crude soaring to $114.81, representing a 6.30% increase in a single day.

The G7’s positions are divided between the Strategic Support bloc (the United States, Japan, and the United Kingdom); the bloc of Canada and Italy, which diplomatically back Trump but are unwilling to participate militarily; and France and Germany, which consider this action to be outside the bounds of international law. Furthermore, German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier has stated that the war initiated by Donald Trump against Iran constitutes a “disastrous political mistake” and that it is an “avoidable and unnecessary” war. Trump said he was disappointed with NATO because while the United States protects Europe from Russia, these countries are not supporting the United States in controlling the Strait of Hormuz, even though Europe’s oil supply depends on it.

As for Russia, President Vladimir Putin has described Trump’s offensive as illegal aggression and is supplying Iran with advanced air defense systems and satellite technology to track U.S. movements under the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Treaty, in effect since October of last year. Putin uses France and Germany’s criticism of the war to weaken NATO and portrays the United States as an “unpredictable ally” that jeopardizes Europe’s energy security. Therefore, the solution to their energy and military insecurity lies in resuming “a long-term partnership with Russia.”

For its part, China has invited the disgruntled European powers to participate in an alternative “energy stability mechanism” and has guaranteed them a secure land and sea route (the New Silk Road) across Eurasia should the United States block the Strait of Hormuz. Russia and China have issued joint statements at the UN demanding an immediate ceasefire, and have accused the United States of seeking “regime change” in Iran under the pretext of denuclearization. Both governments have strengthened the CRINK bloc (China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea), which has reportedly evolved from an informal cooperation forum into a strategic alliance. India has avoided taking sides within the BRICS bloc and has formally called for a cessation of hostilities. Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke with Trump on March 26, emphasizing the importance of keeping the Strait of Hormuz open and accessible, given India’s energy dependence. Brazil has maintained one of the most critical stances in the region: on February 28, it officially condemned the attacks by the United States and Israel, describing them as a violation of international law occurring in the midst of the negotiation process. The African Union, comprising 55 countries, has formally condemned the war, denouncing that the attacks violate the principles of sovereignty and non-intervention enshrined in international law, while also highlighting the human cost of the conflict and the risk of an escalation that would further destabilize the economy.

———————————–

“When a leader’s megalomania collides head-on with the economic reality of the citizenry and the self-preservation instinct of his own armed forces, when he humiliates the adversary and scorns his allies, violence is stoked and the established order is shaken. That is what is happening to Trump.“

—————————————

It’s the economy…

The consequences of the war are having a devastating impact on the global economy and are backfiring on Trump. Rising oil prices, by driving up inflation, will prevent him from lowering interest rates—something he pressured the still-sitting Fed Chair, Jerome Powell, so hard to do—and will slow growth. The war with Iran has shattered the optimism from the beginning of the year regarding a rapid return to the 2% inflation target. The average price per gallon has risen 35% ($3.96) in just one month, directly affecting perceptions of economic management. The OECD has raised its inflation forecast for the United States to 4.2% for 2026, a significant jump from the previously projected 2.8%. In March 2026, inflation surged to 3.3% due to the direct rise in fuel prices. Only 25% of citizens approve of how the president is handling rising prices following the start of the attacks on February 28.

Internationally, the IMF has shifted from caution to alarm. The institution’s managing director warns of “significant disruptions” that could lead to a recession in 2026 if the conflict drags on, particularly affecting highly indebted countries. Similar sentiments have been expressed by Larry Fink, CEO of BlackRock, the world’s largest investment fund manager, who has noted that if oil stabilizes at $150, the global economy will enter a “deep and prolonged recession.” Likewise, Jamie Dimon, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the U.S. bank JP Morgan, has noted that the private credit sector (shadow banking) is taking excessive risks that could backfire under the pressure of the war. In fact, BlackRock and Blackstone have had to impose withdrawal limits (corralitos) on their retail-oriented funds to prevent a forced run amid the uncertainty caused by the war. According to President Putin, the magnitude of the global economic crisis is already comparable to the consequences of the coronavirus pandemic, an impact that affected virtually every country without exception.

The loneliness of power

The war has begun to erode Trump’s political base in the United States, just ahead of the November midterm elections. Unlike other wars, this one has not led to a rallying of support behind the president. March polls show that only 27% of Americans approve of the military campaign, and Trump’s approval rating has fallen to 36%, the lowest in fifteen months of government in the last 70 years. Support among independent voters has plummeted to 24%, and support among Latinos has fallen to 28%—both groups are critical to winning any election in the United States. Voting intention polls for Congress reflect a drastic shift in states that were once considered safe for the Republican Party. Thus, for the first time in more than 20 years, Democratic turnout in the Texas primary (early voting) surpassed the Republican turnout by 200,000 votes, a 126% increase compared to previous election cycles. Furthermore, on March 24, a Democratic candidate won a special election in Palm Beach County, home to Trump’s residence—a territory the president himself comfortably won in 2024.

Against this backdrop, a massive march took place yesterday—one of the largest in U.S. history—under the slogan “No Kings.” The slogan refers to Trump’s monarchical style of governing: he started a war without congressional approval and demanded total immunity in his legal proceedings. The march, scheduled in more than 50 cities, succeeded in uniting very different sectors: from the progressive left to Marjorie Taylor Greene’s anti-war right, whose common ground is refusing to send young people to die abroad and demanding that the $1 billion a day consumed by the war be used to solve domestic problems such as inflation and the housing crisis in the country. Although it was not an explicit goal of the march, some groups demanded that the war not be used as an excuse to stop investigating the Jeffrey Epstein files and other corruption scandals that the war has overshadowed in the news.

When a leader’s megalomania collides head-on with the economic reality of the citizenry and the self-preservation instinct of his own armed forces, when he humiliates the adversary and scorns his allies, violence is stoked and the established order is shaken. That is what is happening to Trump.