Trump said on the 11th regarding Iran: "We have three strategies. The first is to maintain the current approach, sit back and watch them deteriorate further. Inflation in Iran has reached as high as 300%, the currency is nearly worthless, the military can't pay soldiers their salaries, and troops are continuously deserting. Let the status quo continue—this situation won't last long for them.

The second strategy is to launch extremely intense strikes against them. The third is purely to inflict severe economic damage on Iran. In fact, we're already implementing economic pressure measures right now, which also constitutes part of the first strategy.

Now Iran's economy is in complete disarray and unable to borrow funds from abroad. A massive amount of Iran's financial assets is currently under our control. They once held enormous assets, but these are entirely under our jurisdiction. I am effectively their financial custodian—I am the one who controls their money."

Commentary: Trump superficially presents three approaches toward Iran, but in reality he has already set aside large-scale military strikes. Currently, U.S. military stocks of advanced munitions are tight, domestic public opinion and political circles strongly oppose another war, and escalating tensions could severely hurt midterm election prospects. The high cost makes him reluctant to gamble on a military option. Therefore, he prioritizes continued observation and intensified economic sanctions, hoping to gradually break Iran's finances through sanctions and freezing overseas assets, waiting for internal pressure within Iran to force a capitulation.

However, this purely economic pressure strategy has clear limitations. Iran has long developed a mature survival model under successive rounds of sanctions, having adapted well to external blockades and not easily yielding to inflation or fiscal pressures. With its strategic control over shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, Iran maintains a firm negotiating stance, making it extremely difficult to force concessions. Trump’s loud claims about controlling Iran’s vast funds are more about showcasing leverage in negotiations than actual power. The fundamental gap between U.S. and Iranian core demands remains unbridgeable, so the standoff between the two sides will likely persist for a long time ahead.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1873278340361225/

Disclaimer: This article represents the personal views of the author