Trump’s economic blockade of Iran won’t pay off

Donald Trump’s efforts to block Iran’s oil exports are intended to harm Iran, but his policy also harms the US and the rest of the world.

 

• It is as clear as day that President Trump is obsessed with regime change in Iran. What is not made clear is the full extent of the damage his gambit will cause to Americans and American interests.

Without cause or justification, Mr. Trump pulled out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action (JCPOA), striking a hard blow to America’s European allies—and its own credibility. Moreover, he threatened European countries with secondary sanctions should they continue to trade with Iran.

Originally published by Foreign Policy Journal on July 2, 2018

To top it all, in his latest move, he has called for all Iranian oil exports to be cut off by November. Or in practical terms, he is imposing an economic blockade on Iran. This is a similar scenario that was played out by the British in 1951 against Iran and Dr. Mossadegh—who was later overthrown in the 1953 British-US coup. But the Islamic Republic of Iran today is not the Iran of 1953, and the brunt of American demands and actions will not be borne by Iran alone.

 

Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich

A global economic blockade – and facts about oil prices

Demanding that no country purchase oil from Iran is in fact an economic blockade. It is an illegitimate use of power to force a sovereign nation to surrender. It must be made clear however, that it is not just Iran that is the target here. The Trump administration’s demands are an offensive exercise of extraterritorial authority with no regard for sovereign equality between states. All states involved in trade with Iran will either have to cower to his demands or be punished.

But there is more than state sovereignty and indignation that is involved. These actions will have a dire effect on the economy of allies, and they will hit Americans in the wallet – hard.  If Mr. Trump is giving a November deadline, he hopes to postpone the impact this will have on the November elections. He wants total rule over America before totally bankrupting it.

To fully appreciate how Mr. Trump intends to make ‘America great again’ where his policy regarding Iranian oil is concerned, one must take a look at some numbers and empirical evidence.

The oil strikes leading up to the toppling of Iran’s Shah were felt around the world. During the 1978-79 revolution, Iranian oil production dropped 3.8 million barrels per day for 3 months. Although outside production increased by 1.8 million barrels to make up for the loss, the net loss to the world was 150 million barrels of oil. However, the compounding results of the production loss were significant around the globe.

Many Americans may recall the lines at the fuel pumps, but that was just what met the eyes. The increase in oil prices impacted farming, production, transportation of goods and services, and so on. At that time, China – currently the second biggest oil consumer behind America – was a net exporter of oil. The loss to the U.S. economy was estimated at many billions of dollars in 1979 and 1980 (Deese and Nye 308-309).[1]

More recent studies show that Iranian oil has a major impact on the U.S. economy even though America does not import a single barrel of oil from Iran. In 2008, economists Dean DeRosa and Gary Hufbauer presented a paper in which they claimed that if the United States lifted sanctions on Iran, the world price of oil could fall by 10 percent, which would translate into an annual savings of $38-76 billion for the United States.[2]

But sanctions alone were not responsible for oil price hikes in 2008 and beyond. In July 2008, oil had reached a peak of $142.05 per barrel (see chart here).  This price hike came on the heels of some important events. In May, President Bush sent a ‘warning message’ to Iran on the same day that additional aircraft carriers with guided-missile destroyers were sent to the Persian Gulf.

In June of the same year, the New York Times reported, “Israel carried out a major military exercise earlier this month that American officials say appeared to be a rehearsal for a potential bombing attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.”

In July, then presidential candidate Barak Obama asked for tougher sanctions to be imposed on Iran.

It was not until September 2008, when President Bush declined to help Israel attack Iran, that oil prices started to relax. They hit a low of just over $53 per barrel in December 2008.

Oil prices continued to rise again under Obama’s sanctions and reached well past the $100 mark. The prices climbed down once again during the JCPOA negotiations, reaching an all-time low of $30.24 per barrel in January 2016 – after the signing of the JCPOA.

Today, oil prices stands at $74.30 per barrel. A fact not lost on any American who has filled up their gas tank lately – and paid for groceries.  The deadline for the Iran oil cutoff is yet months away, but the impact has started.

 

Other factors – the Strait of Hormuz

Given that other countries may step in to compensate for some of the Iranian oil loss, other factors which effect prices must be considered – the most important of which is the security of the Strait of Hormuz. As mentioned previously, the British oil blockade scenario of 1951 will have far different consequences in 2018 should America impose an economic blockade or oil embargo.

In the 1950’s, Iran did not have the military might to retaliate to the oil embargo, and the naval blockade was aimed at crushing the economy in order to bring about regime change.  The present economic blockade, should it be allowed to happen, would crush the economy of much of the world.

As it stands, 35% of seaborne oil goes through the Strait of Hormuz, 85% of which goes to Asian markets.  As the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) has stated, “The blockage of the Strait of Hormuz, even temporarily, could lead to substantial increases in total energy costs.” Today, Iran not only has the military might to block the Strait of Hormuz in retaliation, but it also has the legal right.

The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) stipulates that vessels can exercise the right of innocent passage, and coastal states should not impede their passage. Under UNCLOS framework of international law, a coastal state can block ships from entering its territorial waters if the passage of the ships harms “peace, good order or security” of said state, as the passage of such ships would no longer be deemed “innocent”.[3]  Saudi Arabia and the UAE export oil through Iran’s territorial waters.  Should they help America choke Iran’s economy, their passage is not deemed ‘innocent’.

Even if Iran simply chooses to merely delay the passage of tankers by exercising its right to inspect every hostile oil tanker that passes through the Strait of Hormuz, such inspections and subsequent delays would contribute to higher oil prices.

No doubt, the Iranian navy is no match for the formidable US navy. However, the shallow, narrow waters of Hormuz do not allow for the maneuvering of US battleships. The very presence of warships can lead to incidents. At its narrowest point, the Strait of Hormuz is 21 miles wide – hardly wide enough for a naval battle to take place and allow the passage of oil tankers at the same time. In 2012, the USS Porter, a US navy destroyer, collided with an oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz.  The collision left a big hole in the navy destroyer.

Originally published by Foreign Policy Journal on July 2, 2018

American officials and oil companies have attempted to assuage the concern of over oil shortages by stating that America is one of the top oil producers. Some fact checking is in order.

According to EIA’s latest available data, America’s total exports in April was 231,902 barrels. The same governmental body stated that total imports for the same month was 310,295 barrels.  According to the EIA: “In 2017, the United States produced about 15.4 million barrels of petroleum per day (MMb/d), and it consumed about 19.9 MMb/d. Imports from other countries help to supply demand for petroleum.” (Click here for explanation of imports and exports).

These facts do not stop the spread of such news. As recently as June 4, 2018, Offshore Technology announced America is marching toward being the biggest oil producer.  Important factors to bear in mind are that: 1) America is the largest oil consumer and continues to have a deficit, and 2) Shale oil production is up, thanks to higher oil prices.

While environmentalists objected to shale oil production, oil companies halted the extraction of oil when prices dropped. Anything above $50 per barrel makes shale oil production feasible—which also makes it more expensive of the consumer. Although Mr. Trump and his administration have no regard for the environment, many states and countries have banned shale oil production (see here for a list as of December 2017).

 

The choice to be made

So the American people (and much of the rest of the world) are left with a stark choice. Either cave in to Mr. Trump’s demands; accept loss of business; pay much higher oil prices at the pump and for consumer goods; prepare for a potential war; sacrifice the environment, especially water; and mortgage the future of the earth more than we already have or don’t tolerate Trump’s demands – even if means a short term loss.

Either way, messing with Iran’s oil exports is not an alternative that the world can afford. It may well be that Mr. Trump is beholden to Mr. Netanyahu.  He may well feel comfortable enough to subject the American people – and their allies to financial hardship; but the question is will Americans and the rest of the world sacrifice themselves at the Trump-Netanyahu altar?

 

Notes and references

[1] Deese, David A. and Joseph S. Nye, ed. Energy and Security. Cambridge: Balllinger Publishing Co.: 1981.

[2] Dean A. DeRosa & Gary Clyde Hufbauer. Normalization of Economic Relations Consequences for Iran’s Economy and the United States. National Foreign Trade Council 2008

[3] Martin Wahlisch, The Yale Journal of International Law, March 2012, citing UNCLOS, supra note 12, , art. 19, para1, and art. 25, para1.

 

Photo Credit
Tehran, Iran (ninara/CC BY 2.5)

 

Related Posts

The agreement is catastrophic both because of what it says and what it doesn’t mention. It reduces further the major asset of security policies: Freedom of action. Jan Oberg TFF director September 25, 2026 A couple of hours before the agreement was signed on September 22, 2026, I published the following 13 hypotheses about what it would most likely contain on TFF Substack (in English). I was wrong on only the first point. Contrary to what Trump had written on his Truth Social platform, it does not appear to come into force immediately. In fact, it turned out to be worse than even I had anticipated. After these hypotheses now come a number of reflections in light of what the agreement actually contains, and does not contain, as well as the way in which it has generally been presented by major media outlets and by the public-service broadcaster DR. My...
Jan Oberg May 15, 2026 Go to this Fox News page and scroll the whole way down: President Donald Trump tells the world that his meeting with President Xi Jinping yielded a lot of very concrete political and economic results – of course, only where the Chinese side, according to him, agreed with him. He does not mention the Taiwan issue, but Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, says that it did not feature prominently in their talks and that the US policy on Taiwan has not changed. Then go to China Daily – or Global Times – and you will see that for the Chinese it is framework, principles, structure of cooperation etc. that matters – all embedded in the overall idea of “constructive bilateral relationship of strategic stability.” Nowhere is any concrete agreement or deal – all that Trump refers to – mentioned. At the general level, this gives you insights into the very different social...
Jan Oberg, TFF director April 9, 2026 I was recently invited to have a good, long talk about the world – and, of course, about peace too – with Boris Malagurski on his Weight of Chains Channel on YouTube. It was a real joy and seems to have been greatly appreciated by the viewers too. Mr Malagurski and I shall of course be grateful if you share this conversation in your circles – of course, only if you like what you see and hear 😉☮️ And remember that this one – like hundreds of others with TFF Associates – can be enjoyed at our TFF Video Collection.

Recent Articles

Jan Oberg TFF director October 28, 2026 Exactly one month has now passed since I published my criticism of the introduction to the special issue on Johan Galtung published by the Journal of Global Security Studies, JoGSS, and of Tor Egil Førland’s chapter about Galtung which serves as a preview to his forthcoming biography of Galtung to be published by PRIO. See the original on The Transnational here and the same article on TFF Substack with many general and critical comments and, in particular, the people who decided to withdraw from the biography project in protest. The special issue itself was extraordinary. It was devoted to the intellectual legacy of one of the founders of peace research and contained a number of strong assessments of his personality, scholarship, intellectual trajectory, and public role. Such assessments are, of course, entirely legitimate. No scholar is beyond criticism, and neither was Johan Galtung....
An aspect of Iran’s culture and civilisation you’ve probably never heard about. Don’t be surprised if the US and Israel also try to bomb them. Jan ObergTFF director October 26, 2026 Today – under the “USraeli” threat of new “annihilating” bombings – opens the 7th International Conference on Peace and Conflict Resolution at Tehran’s University. As far as I can tell, this is the only permanent, advanced peace research institution in West Asia/the Middle East. Perhaps more countries in that region could be inspired? I mean, how many military “security” institutes and military academies do they have? Many peace research institutes and university departments have been established since the 1950s in the West. They are now all under attack; some have closed down, some have gone mainstream, yet others kept the name but do nothing to research peace and disseminate results or advice; instead, they cooperate with militarism’s platforms such...
Let’s discuss using AI to create peace – in contrast to boring geopolitics devoid of creative healing and visions. Jan Oberg TFF director October 15, 2026 I asked VEED to create a short video exemplifying how peace is preferable to war, then chose the lady as a template. Simple as that. In less than a minute, it produced this video, which any peace-loving person would appreciate. The only problem is that human intelligence (HI), at least the one that exists among Western decision-makers, isn’t half as moral or smart as AI. I have used AI to dialogue about peace and peace plans, creative conflict resolution and visions of a better future for humankind. It so happens that I am having more stimulating, intelligent, creative and moral discussions with AI than I could possibly have with any EU or NATO leader today. Yes, AI has very problematic and dangerous aspects; used...

TFF on Substack

Discover and subscribe to more peace materials on TFF Substack

Most Popular

Jan Oberg TFF director October 28, 2026 Exactly one month has now passed since I published my criticism of the introduction to the special issue on Johan Galtung published by the Journal of Global Security Studies, JoGSS, and of Tor Egil Førland’s chapter about Galtung which serves as a preview to his forthcoming biography of Galtung to be published by PRIO. See the original on The Transnational here and the same article on TFF Substack with many general and critical comments and, in particular, the people who decided to withdraw from the biography project in protest. The special issue itself was extraordinary. It was devoted to the intellectual legacy of one of the founders of peace research and contained a number of strong assessments of his personality, scholarship, intellectual trajectory, and public role. Such assessments are, of course, entirely legitimate. No scholar is beyond criticism, and neither was Johan Galtung....
An aspect of Iran’s culture and civilisation you’ve probably never heard about. Don’t be surprised if the US and Israel also try to bomb them. Jan ObergTFF director October 26, 2026 Today – under the “USraeli” threat of new “annihilating” bombings – opens the 7th International Conference on Peace and Conflict Resolution at Tehran’s University. As far as I can tell, this is the only permanent, advanced peace research institution in West Asia/the Middle East. Perhaps more countries in that region could be inspired? I mean, how many military “security” institutes and military academies do they have? Many peace research institutes and university departments have been established since the 1950s in the West. They are now all under attack; some have closed down, some have gone mainstream, yet others kept the name but do nothing to research peace and disseminate results or advice; instead, they cooperate with militarism’s platforms such...
Let’s discuss using AI to create peace – in contrast to boring geopolitics devoid of creative healing and visions. Jan Oberg TFF director October 15, 2026 I asked VEED to create a short video exemplifying how peace is preferable to war, then chose the lady as a template. Simple as that. In less than a minute, it produced this video, which any peace-loving person would appreciate. The only problem is that human intelligence (HI), at least the one that exists among Western decision-makers, isn’t half as moral or smart as AI. I have used AI to dialogue about peace and peace plans, creative conflict resolution and visions of a better future for humankind. It so happens that I am having more stimulating, intelligent, creative and moral discussions with AI than I could possibly have with any EU or NATO leader today. Yes, AI has very problematic and dangerous aspects; used...
Read More
JoGSS-Silent
Jan Oberg TFF director October 28, 2026 Exactly one month has now passed since I published my criticism of the introduction to the special issue on Johan Galtung published by the Journal of Global Security Studies, JoGSS, and of Tor Egil Førland’s chapter about Galtung which serves as a preview to his forthcoming biography of Galtung to be published by PRIO. See the original on The Transnational here and the same article on TFF Substack with many general and critical comments and, in particular, the people who decided to withdraw from the biography project in protest. The special issue itself was extraordinary. It was devoted to the intellectual legacy of one of the founders of peace research and contained a number of strong assessments of his personality, scholarship, intellectual trajectory, and public role. Such assessments are, of course, entirely legitimate. No scholar is beyond criticism, and neither was Johan Galtung....
Screenshot 2026-10-26 115647
An aspect of Iran’s culture and civilisation you’ve probably never heard about. Don’t be surprised if the US and Israel also try to bomb them. Jan ObergTFF director October 26, 2026 Today – under the “USraeli” threat of new “annihilating” bombings – opens the 7th International Conference on Peace and Conflict Resolution at Tehran’s University. As far as I can tell, this is the only permanent, advanced peace research institution in West Asia/the Middle East. Perhaps more countries in that region could be inspired? I mean, how many military “security” institutes and military academies do they have? Many peace research institutes and university departments have been established since the 1950s in the West. They are now all under attack; some have closed down, some have gone mainstream, yet others kept the name but do nothing to research peace and disseminate results or advice; instead, they cooperate with militarism’s platforms such...
Screenshot 2026-10-15 141837
Let’s discuss using AI to create peace – in contrast to boring geopolitics devoid of creative healing and visions. Jan Oberg TFF director October 15, 2026 I asked VEED to create a short video exemplifying how peace is preferable to war, then chose the lady as a template. Simple as that. In less than a minute, it produced this video, which any peace-loving person would appreciate. The only problem is that human intelligence (HI), at least the one that exists among Western decision-makers, isn’t half as moral or smart as AI. I have used AI to dialogue about peace and peace plans, creative conflict resolution and visions of a better future for humankind. It so happens that I am having more stimulating, intelligent, creative and moral discussions with AI than I could possibly have with any EU or NATO leader today. Yes, AI has very problematic and dangerous aspects; used...
girl-5894831_1280
Below are TFF-related media mentions, comments, videos and social media posts published elsewhere but not on this homepage. We happen to catch and list only a fraction. Regarding video comments and debates, we recommend that you go to the TFF Video Channel on Substack where many of them are reproduced. Jan Oberg is a contributor to China Daily – 52 million daily clicks – and Global Times, CGTN and CCTV (the national television), China Investment, Xinhua News Agency and several others. Articles and videos on these media very often multiply into countless Chinese (and Western media) that re-post them from these main media. Thanks to The China Academy, his analyses, interviews and comments are frequently posted on YouTube channels such as Thinkers Forum and Wave Media. These videos are often re-posted on Bilibili (China’s YouTube), the China Content Center on TikTok, and on the Chinese edition of TikTok, Douyin.com. This means reaching hundreds of millions of viewers worldwide over a year. While there are too many to catch on all these...
Nobel-Prize-Plaque
Jan Oberg TFF director October 13, 2026 According to Alfred Nobel’s will, the Nobel Peace Prize shall be awarded: ”to the person who has done the most or best to advance fellowship among nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and the establishment and promotion of peace congresses.” Further down, he also expresses how the prize for the “champions of peace” shall be decided: “that for champions of peace by a committee of five persons to be selected by the Norwegian Storting. Alfred Nobel’s will is remarkably short and clear. But few seem to have read it. Nobel did not say that the committee itself should consist of members of parliament. He entrusted the Storting with appointing five persons. In principle, it could have selected diplomats, mediators, peace researchers, conflict-resolution specialists, or other individuals with recognised expertise in matters of peace from around the world. Instead, the Storting gradually...
law-419057_1280
The Quest for Humane Survival Richard Falk Professor emeritus, Princeton UniversityTFF Associate since 1986October 12, 2026 After decades of teaching and writing about international law in academic frameworks that were not institutionally situated within law school environments—at Princeton and the University of California, Santa Barbara—I found myself most receptive to the TWAIL outlook. It has been especially illuminating in clarifying the extent to which international law evolved as a dialogical critique of Europe’s efforts to legitimize its colonial undertakings. In particular, TWAIL has exposed how international law has functioned to legalize the subjugation of Third World peoples, securing conditions for exploitative investment and trade relations, the coercive enforcement of public debts, and an ideology of cultural superiority. TWAIL’s exposure of these economic legacies of colonialism has influenced my understanding of the history and development of international law, broadly conceived, as an ideological project of the Western sub-system of the world...