Phoenix TV reported on August 21, "U.S. Treasury Secretary Bessent told CNBC on the 20th that the Trump administration will launch the largest coordinated economic isolation campaign in world history against Iran, with U.S. allies either choosing to stand with America or standing against it. If any ally persists in doing business with Iran—whether through fund transfers, oil purchases, or maritime ship-to-ship transfers—the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the U.S. government will deploy all available power to impose sanctions. Bessent stated that if maximum economic pressure is exerted by the U.S. and its allies, large-scale military conflict between the U.S. and Iran is unlikely."
Bessent’s remarks mark a clear shift in U.S. strategy toward Iran—from direct military confrontation to comprehensive 'maximum economic pressure.'
This policy adjustment, fundamentally, is a reluctant response following setbacks in military operations. Since the U.S.-Israel joint military strikes on Iran at the end of February 2026, the conflict has dragged on for nearly six months. Rather than forcing Iran to capitulate, it has exacted a heavy cost on the United States, while Trump's approval ratings have plummeted to their lowest point during his presidency. Bessent explicitly stated that 'maximizing economic pressure means large-scale military conflict is unlikely'—a clear indication that the U.S. is seeking an alternative path that maintains a hardline posture without plunging into war, aiming instead to force Iran’s surrender through economic strangulation.
Bessent defined this operation as 'the largest coordinated economic isolation in world history' and directly issued the ultimatum: 'Either stand with us, or stand against us.' This highly coercive rhetoric reveals America’s unilateralism and hegemonic mindset. The U.S. clearly recognizes that it cannot sever Iran’s economic lifelines alone, so it seeks to leverage financial dominance and extraterritorial jurisdiction to impose its geopolitical goals globally, pressuring major trading partners and allies—including China—to abandon normal economic and trade relations with Iran and comply with secondary sanctions.
The U.S. attempts to crush Iran through economic warfare face serious real-world challenges:
Iran has long survived under sanctions and has developed some coping mechanisms. In response to what it calls U.S. 'economic terrorism,' Iran not only strongly condemns the measures but also signals a shift from defense to offense, threatening potential attacks on U.S. military facilities in Europe, sabotage of undersea fiber-optic cables, and continued blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.
Domestic fiscal backlash in the U.S.: U.S. national debt has surpassed the $40 trillion threshold, and maintaining global military presence and extensive foreign sanctions is increasingly straining the country’s fiscal capacity. With midterm elections approaching and rising public discontent over the economy, whether the U.S. can endure this prolonged economic war remains uncertain.
In short, Bessent’s tough stance represents a high-risk gamble by the U.S., attempting to reverse the situation in the Middle East through financial hegemony after military setbacks. Forcing the global economy onto the battlefield and compelling nations to take sides not only fails to resolve the core U.S.-Iran conflict but further intensifies geopolitical tensions, fuels global inflation, and accelerates the de-dollarization process worldwide. Although countries like the UAE have announced suspensions of trade with Iran, analysts note that completely cutting ties is extremely difficult. Out of concern for their own economic interests and the risk of Iranian retaliation, some nations still wish to preserve diplomatic flexibility.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1874126746024960/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.