Washington is preparing for a pivotal decision by President Donald Trump on Iran as aides draw up military options that could revive air strikes if diplomacy fails to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and contain Tehran’s nuclear advances.
The deliberations follow Trump’s return from a three-day visit to Beijing, where he said Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed that Iran should not obtain a nuclear weapon and that the Strait of Hormuz should be reopened. The comments placed China, the largest buyer of Gulf energy, closer to the centre of a crisis that has pushed oil markets higher, strained maritime trade and raised fears of a broader war across the Middle East.
Trump has signalled growing impatience with Tehran after talks stalled over uranium enrichment, sanctions relief and security guarantees. He has not publicly committed to another round of military action, but senior officials have been examining plans that would allow the United States to resume strikes quickly if he concludes that negotiations have reached a dead end.
The Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway between Iran and Oman, remains the central pressure point. Roughly a fifth of global oil consumption and a large share of liquefied natural gas exports move through the passage. Any prolonged disruption would feed directly into shipping costs, inflation expectations and fuel prices, giving the crisis an economic dimension that reaches far beyond the Gulf.
Iran has restricted passage through the strait after the US-Israeli attacks on its military and nuclear infrastructure earlier this year. Tehran insists it has the right to regulate traffic through waters it shares with Oman, while Washington and its allies argue that commercial vessels must be allowed to move freely through one of the world’s most important maritime corridors.
Several governments are attempting to broker a formula that would let Tehran de-escalate without appearing to capitulate and allow Trump to claim a diplomatic success ahead of the November midterm elections. Oman has emerged as a key intermediary because of its geography, its long-standing ties with Iran and its history of facilitating back-channel diplomacy between Washington and Tehran.
European governments have pushed for an arrangement that restores unrestricted navigation while leaving space for further nuclear talks. Gulf capitals are watching closely, concerned that any miscalculation could threaten ports, energy infrastructure and investment flows at a time when the region is trying to sustain economic diversification.
Tehran’s position remains shaped by three pressures: domestic demands to respond firmly to military attacks, the economic damage caused by sanctions, and the strategic value of the strait as leverage against the United States and its partners. Iranian officials continue to deny any plan to build a nuclear weapon, but they have resisted demands to halt nuclear research and limit enrichment activity to levels acceptable to Washington.
Trump’s discussions in Beijing added another layer to the crisis. China has avoided a direct commitment to pressuring Tehran, even as it shares an interest in preventing a prolonged interruption to energy flows. Beijing has criticised the conflict and called for restraint, but it has also sought to preserve its relationship with Iran, a major supplier of discounted crude.
The White House is weighing whether China can help move Tehran towards compromise or whether Beijing will use the crisis to increase its diplomatic influence in the Gulf without taking on the political cost of confronting Iran. Trump has said he did not ask Xi for favours, but he also indicated that sanctions linked to Chinese purchases of Iranian oil remain part of the wider negotiating picture.
Military planning does not mean a decision has been made. Presidents routinely ask for updated options during crises, and Trump has used threats of force in previous negotiations to intensify pressure before seeking a deal. Yet the present standoff is more volatile because the target set includes nuclear facilities, missile sites and naval assets near a waterway that carries critical energy supplies.
Defence officials are also assessing the risk of retaliation. Iran could respond through missile attacks, naval harassment, cyber operations or allied armed groups in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. Israel, already central to the earlier escalation, would be expected to maintain a high-alert posture if Washington moves again.
