Iran's Hormuz conflict shows why the regime's deals won't last, the op-ed says
NEWNow you can listen to Fox News articles!
The Iranian regime has just told us everything we need to know.
Within days, Tehran went from signaling that the Strait of Hormuz would remain open to threatening to close it. That change is a reminder that the state cannot be trusted to uphold any agreement it signs because its strategy depends on continuing threats and keeping the world out of balance.
The issue is not what they say. He is really in charge.
The Iranian regime does not function like a normal country. Its leaders often show composure to reduce pressure or buy time. But the real authority rests with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The IRGC controls missiles, proxy networks, and the ability to disrupt global transmissions. When it matters, they decide.
PAKISTANI GENERAL SAYS IRAN DIPLOMACY 'STILL ALIVE, DESPITE BLOCKADE, UNFALLING SPEECHES
And they benefit from instability.
The Strait of Hormuz is one of the regime's most effective instruments of coercion. A fifth of the world's oil flows through it. Iran doesn't need to shut it down to cause a problem. It is only necessary to make the threat believable. Even talk of a disruption could disrupt markets and drive up electricity prices.
The US Central Command said on Wednesday that “After implementing a blockade of ships entering and leaving Iranian ports, the US military has stopped economic trade and entry and exit from Iran by sea.” (CENTCOM)
That is exactly what we are seeing now. Tehran shows restraint, then goes back on the rise. It is not intended to sow confusion. It is meant to gain strength.
STEVE FORBES: NO MORE DECEIVING – AMERICA MUST FINISH THE JOB IN IRAN
This poses a major problem for anyone who still hopes that a new deal with the Iranian regime will bring lasting stability.
Deals subject to change. The Iranian system is designed for the opposite.
For years, American and European officials have argued that Iran's commitments on paper could translate into predictable behavior. But powerful state actors are invested in maintaining those commitments. This kingdom was not created to be suppressed, changed or tamed. The IRGC's influence depends on avoiding sanctions, regional militaries, and the constant threat of escalation.
KORNING GLORY: US-IRAN TALKS IN ISLAMABAD BECAME REYKJAVÍK 2.0
If Washington is serious about 'no nukes for Tehran,' it must realize that this regime was designed not only to pursue deadly weapons but also to use all tools as leverage in its dangerous agenda.
A protester holds placards saying 'Stop the killing in Iran' and 'Free Iran' placards during the demonstration. Demonstrators gathered outside Downing Street protesting the killings in Iran and supporting the independence of Iran. (Photos by Vuk Valcic/SOPA/LightRocket via Getty Images)
The Hormuz shift makes that clear. When forced to choose between appearing cooperative and maintaining power, the regime chooses power.
That has direct implications for US policy.
ROBERT MAGINNIS: WHY THE ISLAMABAD NEGOTIATIONS ALWAYS FAILED
Washington cannot afford to treat diplomacy as an end in itself. A deal that is not backed by real enforcement, credible military deterrence, and a clear understanding of who holds power in Tehran will not hold. It will be tested, stretched, and finally broken when the state decides it can succeed.
A regime that turns a critical power chokepoint into an instrument of oppression is not a responsible partner. It's the opposite. The back-and-forth over Hormuz is a stark reminder that Tehran's core strategy is one of intimidation, not cooperation.
As long as the system is connected in that way, any agreement with this regime will not be stable in nature. Why let the state decide what's next?
IRGC intelligence chief Majid Khademi was killed in an Israeli strike that also took out the commander of the Quds Force early Monday. (POOL via WANA/Reuters, AP Photos)
That should also tell us where US policy needs to go. Washington should stop pretending that this regime can be “managed” with better rhetoric and less stringent clauses. The problem is not the wording of the agreement. The problem is the type of government that signs. And no matter how many of their top leaders have been killed, it is still the same regime.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS PROGRAM
Therefore, negotiations should not be considered as a way to stabilize this leadership, but as a temporary tool while we strengthen the pressure for it to be changed. Any new deal with the current rulers in Tehran will follow the same script of brief restraint when it suits them, followed by another round of 'talking' when they need power. A critical strategy would focus on weakening the regime's power at home, targeting its security services and economic well-being, and openly supporting the Iranian people who continue to risk their lives to challenge them.
The war on Hormuz is a reminder of how this regime will treat every agreement it signs, until the day it expires.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE ON THE LISA LIST
