Since the beginning of the "Epic Fury" war led by the United States against Iran, it has been said that a clear end to the conflict was not on the table, such that U.S. President Donald Trump could achieve his declared goals at the outbreak of the confrontation. These goals consisted of regime change in Tehran, the final elimination of the Iranian nuclear threat, the destruction of its ballistic missile capabilities, and an end to its support for armed proxies in the region.

Many also believed that Washington failed remarkably to anticipate Iran's move to close the vital artery of global oil tradethe Strait of Hormuzeven though Tehran had hinted at this option for years. According to this view, this placed the United States in a defensive position, forcing it to impose a blockade on Iranian ports, which effectively meant a naval siege on the entire Gulf region, carrying numerous military and economic risks.

However, contrary to this perception, the shift from direct military warfare to what can be described as an "economic pressure war"through sanctions and blockadesmay have placed Washington in the geopolitical position it sought from the beginning, whether by prior design or as a result of unforeseen developments.

In Trumps vision of the new world order, which is supposed to be divided into three major spheres of influence, the United States remains the dominant power, according to the 2025 National Security Strategy. While Washington focuses its direct influence in the Western Hemisphere, it retains the ability to rebalance other regions to protect its interests.

Within this framework, one of these circles is supposed to be formed either under the leadership of traditional European powerssuch as Britain, France, and Germanyor led by Russia should it emerge as a dominant power on the continent. In either case, the United States retains a leading role through existing alliances or new arrangements.

The greatest challenge, however, lies in the third circle: China. American concern has escalated since 2022, when the Russian war in Ukraine was viewed as a model that Beijing might attempt to replicate in Taiwan, especially given Chinese President Xi Jinping's statements regarding military readiness by 2027.

The United States faces greater difficulty in containing China compared to Europe or Russia, as it does not possess the same political and economic leverage over it, and Beijing has sought for years to surpass Washington as the world's largest economic power.

Yet, China suffers from a major structural weakness: its heavy reliance on energy imports. Here, the Middle East emerges as a primary source of oil and gas, prompting Beijing to expand its influence in the region through its previously launched Belt and Road Initiative, which is based on concluding long-term agreements with regional countries in exchange for massive investments.

China has specifically bolstered its influence in both Iran and Iraq, where it controls a large portion of their energy sectors. Furthermore, Tehran's regional influenceextending across the so-called "Shiite Crescent"gave Beijing an additional advantage in expanding its impact.

The strategic importance here lies in the fact that control over vital energy corridors, such as the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, grants immense geopolitical leverage. From this standpoint, Washington believes that Iranand China behind itcannot be allowed to control these vital arteries.

Therefore, the broader American goal may be to ensure that control over these corridors remains outside of Chinese influence, whether through direct military presence or future political arrangements with Iran.

This strategy is not limited to the Middle East; other American moves indicate a broader pattern involving the securing of strategic passages worldwide, such as the GIUK gap (Greenland-Iceland-UK), the Panama Canal, and enhancing influence in the Strait of Malacca and the South China Sea through defense partnerships.

In this context, analysts believe the primary goal is no longer to lower oil prices, but rather to secure geopolitical control over vital waterways, even if this results in energy prices remaining high for a long period.

Some experts conclude that a significant reduction in oil prices may only be achieved in the event of a radical change in Iran that grants the United States direct or indirect control over the Strait of Hormuza scenario that remains distant at the present time.