Iran’s strategic position has strengthened despite weeks of conflict that began on February 28, according to a prominent United States security scholar, who argues that disruption to vital oil shipping routes has shifted leverage in Tehran’s favour.Robert Pape, a professor at the University of Chicago and founding director of the Chicago Project on Security and Threats, said the conflict’s impact on maritime trade has amplified Iran’s influence rather than weakened it. His assessment centres on the Strait of Hormuz and surrounding corridors, which remain among the world’s most critical energy transit points, carrying a substantial share of global oil exports.
Pape contends that instability in these routes has heightened global sensitivity to supply risks, indirectly boosting Iran’s geopolitical weight. Even without direct control over all shipping flows, the perception of vulnerability in the Gulf has increased Tehran’s ability to shape outcomes, he argued, noting that energy markets tend to react sharply to even limited disruptions.
The conflict, which escalated at the end of February, has drawn international attention to the fragile balance underpinning maritime security in the region. Tanker movements, insurance costs and naval deployments have all been affected, with shipping firms adopting more cautious routes and higher premiums. Analysts say these developments underline the strategic importance of chokepoints where Iran maintains proximity and influence.
Energy market reactions have been immediate. Oil prices have shown volatility as traders assess the risk of supply interruptions, with spikes reflecting concerns over prolonged instability. Economists point out that even temporary disruptions can ripple through global supply chains, affecting fuel costs, inflation and broader economic activity in energy-importing countries.
Pape’s analysis diverges from conventional expectations that sustained conflict would weaken Iran’s economic and political standing. Instead, he suggests that the ability to impose indirect costs on global markets enhances Tehran’s deterrence posture. “Disruption itself becomes a form of leverage,” he wrote, arguing that adversaries must weigh the broader consequences of escalation.
Regional dynamics have also shifted as neighbouring states recalibrate their security strategies. Gulf countries, heavily dependent on uninterrupted oil exports, have increased coordination on maritime surveillance while seeking assurances from international partners. At the same time, diplomatic channels have remained active, with several governments advocating de-escalation to stabilise trade routes.
Military analysts note that the conflict has highlighted asymmetric tactics, including the use of drones and missile capabilities, which can target infrastructure and shipping without requiring conventional large-scale engagements. Such approaches complicate defence planning and raise the cost of maintaining secure passage through contested waters.
Tehran has consistently framed its actions as defensive, emphasising sovereignty and deterrence. Officials have denied seeking prolonged confrontation while asserting readiness to respond to perceived threats. This messaging, combined with the strategic geography of the Gulf, reinforces the perception that Iran retains significant influence over the pace and intensity of developments.
Global powers have responded with a mix of caution and engagement. Naval patrols have been reinforced in key areas, and diplomatic efforts have intensified to prevent further escalation. However, the challenge lies in balancing deterrence with the need to avoid actions that could exacerbate tensions or disrupt energy flows further.
Market participants are closely watching signals from both political and military fronts. Shipping data, insurance rates and official statements have become key indicators of risk, feeding into broader economic forecasts. Financial institutions have warned that prolonged uncertainty could affect investment decisions, particularly in sectors reliant on stable energy supplies.
Pape’s assessment adds to a growing body of analysis suggesting that conflict outcomes in the region cannot be measured solely in territorial or military terms. Instead, control over perception, risk and economic impact plays a decisive role. By this measure, Iran’s ability to influence global energy dynamics—even indirectly—represents a form of strategic gain.
Policy debates in Washington and European capitals have reflected this complexity. Some officials argue for stronger deterrence measures, while others emphasise diplomacy to reduce the likelihood of further disruptions. The interplay between these approaches will shape the trajectory of the conflict and its broader implications for global security.