US Launches Operation Economic Outcast to Cut Iran’s Economic Lifeline, Targets Digital Assets, Gold, Shipping

And Trump added via his account on Truth Social that Iran is killing its own citizens; even without protests and at unprecedented levels, and this humanitarian crisis must be stopped immediately, according to him. Earlier today, The Wall Street Journal quoted the White House as saying that U.S. President Donald Trump has completely destroyed Iran’s military and nuclear facilities and is currently prepared to crush the Iranian economy to ensure Tehran submits. The newspaper, according to what Al Jazeera reported from the White House spokeswoman, confirmed that it is prudent for Iran to reach an immediate agreement, otherwise it understands very well the magnitude of the consequences of refusing. The Wall Street Journal revealed that American officials said Vice President Mike Pence (note: original text says جي دي فانس, transliterated as J. D. Vans, commonly Mike Pence) had made it clear to Trump before the military confrontation erupted that Iran was capable of renouncing its nuclear program through direct negotiations, which places full responsibility on Iran’s position in the recent escalation. Iran had threatened to respond to the expanded U.S. economic sanctions, which Washington said would cut off the lifeblood of the Islamic Republic’s economy, expressing confidence that its main trading partners would resist the American pressure campaign.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has announced an economic pressure campaign against Iran, vowing to target Tehran’s financial interests across the world. Bessent said on Monday that the US would target all of Iran’s sources of revenue, including oil, with the aim of preventing other countries and companies from doing business with Tehran. “Around the globe, our objective is to sever every economic lifeline that sustains this tyrannical regime until Tehran stands alone,” he said. He said countries around the world must choose between the US and Iran, stressing that the new campaign exposes Tehran’s trade partners to secondary penalties. Bessent emphasised that “no one is above the reach of US sanctions”. If countries and entities “facilitate transactions and are part of the ecosystem that turns Iranian oil into money, into repression, they will be targeted”, he said. While the US did announce a new wave of sanctions against Iran, Monday’s campaign did not target any major international economic institution for dealing with the country. Bessent framed the push as a strong warning for countries and companies across the world. The campaign is dubbed “Operation Economic Outcast”. Bessent also called it “economic D-day”, likening it to the Allies’ forces landing on French shores to push back against Nazi Germany during World War II. Asked why the US is threatening Iran’s business partners instead of penalising them, Bessent said: “Well, we are giving everyone the opportunity to remedy bad behaviour. Why would I want to blow up the global financial system?” His response underscores the risk that secondary US sanctions pose to the broader international economy. The economic pressure campaign comes nearly six months into the war with Iran, after the US and Israel launched strikes against the country without direct provocation. While US and Israeli attacks have killed Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and several other top officials, they have failed to dislodge the governing system in Tehran. Tehran has responded to the US and Israeli strikes with missile and drone attacks across the region. It has also largely shut down and asserted control over the Strait of Hormuz, a major artery for global energy, sending oil and gas prices soaring. Multiple rounds of fighting and diplomacy have failed to resolve the crisis. Monday’s sanctions push is the latest effort by the US to pressure Iran to make major concessions, including giving up its nuclear programme and ceasing attacks on vessels in Hormuz. In April, the US announced a blockade on Iranian ports, but Iran has remained defiant despite the naval siege. “The blockade has clearly hurt Iran, especially its oil exports, but it hasn’t produced the political outcome Washington wants. Iran hasn’t capitulated,” Sina Toossi, a fellow at the Center for International Policy, told Al Jazeera. “Hormuz remains heavily disrupted, and the costs to the US and global economy are mounting. So, ‘economic D-Day’ looks like an effort to intensify the pressure now that the military campaign has failed to deliver a decisive outcome.” Bessent said US President Donald Trump has been making calls to world leaders “with specific requests to cease their interaction with the regime”. “Those who stand with the United States will reap the rewards of our partnership. Those who tether themselves to the Iranian regime should expect to share in the isolation,” he said. The US officials said new sanctions will target “five of Iran’s most vital lifelines”: digital assets, technology, gold, aviation and shipping. The US Treasury also imposed fresh sanctions on 60 entities, vessels and individuals across the world – including in the United Arab Emirates, Hong Kong, China, Singapore and Switzerland – accusing them of enabling the “Iranian regime’s recklessness”. On Sunday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi dismissed US pressure, stressing that economic sanctions against Iran are nothing new. “They cannot think of any other solution in confronting the great Iranian people, so they repeatedly put forward the same old plans,” Araghchi said. Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth said on Monday that Iran cannot handle the economic pressure, emphasising that Tehran will have “no choice” but to return to the negotiations table to discuss its nuclear programme. The US and Israel launched the war against Iran in February during ongoing nuclear talks. The Trump administration is turning to economic penalties amid a lull in the fighting after months of war and sporadic attacks, but Hegseth did not rule out further US strikes against Iran. “If we need to use kinetic strikes, we’ll use them. If Iran is foolish enough to overplay their hand or mess with the American military, we’ll do what we need to do,” Hegseth told reporters. “But economic pressure, we know, hurts them the most right now.”

Markets largely ignored the new American sanctions on Iran as oil prices fell and gold steadied, while the dollar edged up and Asian stocks moved in narrow ranges amid investor caution over sanctions developments and US economic data. - Brent crude futures fell 3% to $89.3 per barrel at the time of writing. - US West Texas Intermediate crude also declined 3.22% to $83.27. ING commodity analysts said that “the market has not been much affected by Washington’s push to tighten economic pressure on Iran,” noting that America’s efforts to persuade partners to disengage from trade with Tehran are “marginal and not impactful on the market.” Read also - In another note, US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin announced an expansion of the sanctions regime aimed at cutting Iran’s economic lifeline and forcing it to end the war between the two countries, warning states against cutting commercial ties with Tehran or risking exclusion from the dollar-based financial system. Mnuchin did not specify which countries would be targeted or when the sanctions would take effect, saying he wanted to give them time to comply with the new guidance. Meanwhile, US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said the United States does not rule out using military force against Iran, but Washington’s shift toward economic pressure has, according to analysts, dispelled some fears of larger disruptions to oil supply in the Middle East. KCM chief market analyst Tim Waterer said: “It appears markets view the economic pressure as a less risky path for supply than military action, which is why initial reactions were a drop in oil prices rather than a sharp rise.” But he warned that “Iran still retains the ability to respond by disrupting maritime shipping, which is why there remains a premium over oil prices.” European stocks breathe a sigh of relief European equities edged higher on Tuesday after investors breathed a sigh of relief as the new US sanctions on Iran appeared less stringent than markets had expected. The European Stoxx 600 rose 0.53% to 657.46 points at the time of writing, with defense stocks leading sector gains by about 1%. Meanwhile, US Treasury yields retraced from recent peaks after reports suggested the Treasury Department could use its cash reserves to finance larger debt buybacks, potentially reducing the need to issue more short-dated bonds. The technology index rose 0.3% as investors awaited Nvidia’s results due Wednesday, amid concerns about whether the chipmaker can meet high market expectations. Limited moves for Asian markets Most Asian stock indices rose on Tuesday, while regional indicators moved in tight ranges as investors awaited developments that could move markets in the coming days amid rising US pressure on Iran. - The Nikkei 225 rose about 0.5% to 65,856 in Tokyo. - South Korea’s KOSPI rose 0.68% to 6,742.74, according to Investing.com. - The Shanghai Composite gained 0.2% to 3,889.44. - Australia’s S&P/ASX 200 up 0.68% to 9,164.60. - Taiwan Weighted index up 0.54%. - India’s Sensex up 0.37%. - Hong Kong’s Hang Seng edged down 0.02% to 25,511.10. US stocks closed mixed yesterday; - The S&P 500 fell 0.3%. - The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 0.3% and the Nasdaq Composite fell 0.8%. Gold steadies and the dollar rises In metals and currencies, gold steadied near its highest level in over three months at $1,464.27 per ounce after earlier hitting its highest since May 14. US futures also dipped slightly to around $1,689. IG market analyst Tony Cecamore said: “Looking ahead, we expect any declines in gold to find strong support from buyers waiting for it to move toward the next resistance level around $1,900 to $2,000.” The dollar also rose modestly as investors evaluated the impact of the US sanctions on Iran, with the dollar index up 0.1% at 99.07. Bitcoin surpassed $80,000 for the first time since mid-May amid concerns about the dollar’s value. ANZ chief FX analyst Ray Attrill said the sanctions “may be one reason for the mild reversal of the dollar’s weakness we saw late last week.” He added, “The idea is that if you’re going to be hit with sanctions and can’t access dollars, you’re better off buying some dollars first before that happens.” Markets are awaiting Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell’s speech on Friday in Jackson Hole for clues on inflation, interest rates, and the independence of the central bank from the Trump administration, as markets also await US inflation data. Market moves in oil, Asian stocks, gold, and the dollar reflect that markets do not expect a significant impact from the new sanctions on oil supply yet, with the risk premium stemming from potential disruption of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz still in place.

Ziad Sanker, writer and political researcher, said that the United States’ return to tightening pressure and economic sanctions on Iran, six months after the start of military operations, reflects the American administration’s failure to manage the Iranian file and the absence of a clear strategy to achieve wartime objectives. America handles the Iranian file in an unclear manner. During a Zoom call on Al-Qahira Al-Youm channel from Washington, Sanker noted that resorting to economic sanctions at this stage raised questions inside the United States, especially since Washington could have used economic pressure tools before turning to military options, pointing out that the Trump administration is dealing with the Iranian file in an unconventional way, in the absence of a clear plan to manage the conflict or a political exit through which the American president can announce that his objectives have been achieved. The financial siege requires a long time to show results. He added that economic sanctions by their nature take a long time to demonstrate results, especially since Iran has extensive experience in dealing with American sanctions, in addition to relying on multiple channels and mechanisms to circumvent them, which makes achieving the goal of full economic strangulation difficult without broad international cooperation. He continued that America is trying to make the current sanctions a tool to gain time and push Tehran back to the negotiating table to make concessions, especially since conducting wide operations inside Iran carries great risks, while military operations alone appear to be limited in achieving American political objectives in the absence of a clear path to end the conflict. About the prospects of a diplomatic breakthrough, Sanker said that the possibility of political efforts succeeding remains; however, the loss of trust between Washington and Tehran represents the main obstacle to any progress, given the lack of clear indicators of good intentions between the two sides. He added that Iran may bet on time and wait for the results of the U.S. midterm elections, trying to take advantage of the political pressure faced by President Trump, while the White House finds itself unable to end the conflict without achieving clear results.

Iranian official: We will respond to American economic pressure Iranian Parliament Deputy Speaker Ali Nadjkar (Ali Nikzad) confirmed that his country will not back down in the face of American pressure, and that it "will vigorously defend" its security and national interests. Ahmet Dursun, Mahmut Nabi August 25, 2026 • Updated: August 25, 2026 ANKARA Ankara / Anadolu Deputy Speaker of the Iranian Parliament Ali Nikzad said on Tuesday that his country will respond to the economic pressures the United States is applying against Tehran. This came in Nikzad’s remarks during a public session of Parliament, in which he addressed the U.S. economic pressure on Iran, according to the Iranian news agency ISNA. Nikzad affirmed that his country will not retreat from American pressure, and that it "will defend its security and national interests strongly." He said: "Our delusional enemies talk about a complete economic blockade, but the guilty America must know that the Iranian people will not surrender to this folly, and will also punish its enemies while seriously jeopardizing their economic interests." He added: "If the pressure on the Iranian people’s livelihoods and economy increases, we will not allow the enemies of this people and the countries cooperating with them to live in ease." On Monday, the U.S. Treasury announced the launch of the "Economic Pariah Operation," a broad campaign aimed at isolating Iran completely from the global financial system. On February 28 of last February, the United States and Israel began attacks on Iran, which Tehran responded to with attacks targeting Israel and "American targets" in the region, before reaching a cease-fire agreement in April. On June 18, Washington and Tehran signed a memorandum of understanding on freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, but its implementation stalled due to differences over Strait security. Between July 8 and 24 last July, the United States resumed attacks on Iran, and Tehran responded by targeting what it described as "American military facilities and equipment" in Arab states. Iranian official: We will respond to American economic pressure

Only a few hours remain before the US announces an economic D-Day against Iran, introducing the "toughest sanctions" ever imposed on a country worldwide, as Tehran continues to mock American efforts. Iranian officials claim the American sanctions arsenal is fully exhausted, accusing the Trump administration of turning to economic warfare against Iranian society after suffering defeats on the battlefield and running out of tactical options. Iran argues this escalation is not a novel threat, but rather an attempt to convert financial pressure into a psychological shock, issuing a stark message: "You can raise the cost, but you cannot cause a collapse." Amid these developments, the commander of the Iranian army asserted that the country stands ready to resist for the next 10 to 20 generations. The Bessent threat of the largest financial attack US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned that Washington will launch the "largest financial attack in history" against Iran, with official announcements expected today, Monday, August 24, at 21:00 Greek time. American strategy targets not only Tehran, but also third-party nations, banking institutions, and trade networks doing business with the country. Bessent emphasized that any nation acting as a financial lifeline for Iran must prepare for severe isolation. According to his statements, countries linking their economic prospects to Tehran risk cutting off their own path toward sustainable prosperity. The warning is clear: Washington aims to make international economic cooperation with Iran both financially and politically dangerous. Hemmati: "The US has already used everything" Governor of the Central Bank of Iran Abdolnaser Hemmati sought to downplay the impact of the upcoming American measures. Hemmati dismissed Bessent's statements as mere rhetoric, arguing that Washington has already deployed virtually every tool in its arsenal regarding oil sanctions and banking restrictions over previous years. He stressed that no single new structural measure could unilaterally alter the economic balance. Citing the 2020–2021 period when national revenue from oil and gas dropped to roughly $7 billion, the central banker pointed out that the state and its economy managed to avoid complete destruction despite heavy external pressure. "Economic pressure is different from a collapse" Hemmati placed particular emphasis on differentiating severe economic difficulties from a systemic financial collapse. Tehran does not deny that sanctions inflict damage; Iranian officials acknowledge that pressure affects foreign exchange access, international trade, business operations, and general living standards. However, they reject the premise that this hardship inevitably leads to state paralysis. According to Hemmati, the primary objective of the US campaign is psychological—to convince the population that an economic crisis is inescapable and that system collapse is imminent. Iranian leadership insists that production and essential commercial transactions continue despite severe obstacles. Gharibabadi: "If we are destroyed, why do you need everything against us?" Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi offered a sharp critique of the American position in a post on X, highlighting what Tehran frames as a fundamental contradiction in US strategy. Addressing Bessent directly, Gharibabadi questioned why the entire weight of American financial power must be mobilized if, as US claims suggest, Iran's military capacity has been dismantled, its defense plants destroyed, and its nuclear program crushed. According to Gharibabadi, the sheer scale of the new economic sanctions proves that previous operations failed to achieve Washington's stated objectives. Tehran invests in BRICS, Shanghai, and neighboring countries Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei maintained that Iran did not initiate the tension and will actively defend its national sovereignty. Simultaneously, he outlined plans to expand diplomatic and economic alliances outside Western systems. Participation in multilateral organizations such as BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, alongside trade development with neighbors like Pakistan, Oman, and Afghanistan, forms Tehran's core strategy to offset Western sanctions. By keeping non-Western banking and commercial channels active, Iran aims to neutralize complete economic isolation. The Strait of Hormuz at the center Regional energy security remains a critical focal point in the escalating conflict. Mohsen Rezaei referenced Tehran's red lines regarding energy security and maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. Meanwhile, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf called for the establishment of new regional safety frameworks and economic partnerships. Tehran's core assertion is that attempting to enforce an economic blockade against Iran will inevitably carry heavy costs for other regional players. Hossein Mohibi (Revolutionary Guard): "This is a war of perceptions" Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps spokesperson Hossein Mohibi offered an intense assessment, describing the conflict not merely as a military or economic struggle, but as a fight over public perception. He noted that strikes on minor operational targets can serve a broader strategy: creating the illusion that state infrastructure is vulnerable and that an opponent can strike anywhere at any time. Citing past attacks on checkpoints and facilities with limited military value, Mohibi asserted that the main objective was generating fear and instilling a belief that military structures were on the brink of paralysis. Targeting leadership and the gamble on paralysis Mohibi also addressed the targeting of senior political and military officials at the onset of hostilities. He argued that the strategic intent behind such strikes was to foster the perception of a system reliant on a handful of individuals. Had those leaders been eliminated, opponent strategy assumed a leadership void would cause state mechanisms to break down. Mohibi claimed this strategy failed, stating that government institutions, armed forces, and secondary defensive networks like the Basij forces adapted quickly and maintained operations even when primary sites were hit. The war of seconds: AI, drones, satellites, and sensors Highlighting technological shifts in modern warfare, Mohibi detailed how artificial intelligence, command-and-control networks, commercial data, satellite intelligence, drones, and multi-sensor arrays are integrated on the battlefield. Synthesizing data from multiple streams via intelligent systems drastically reduces the time between target identification and strike execution—shrinking decision cycles from minutes to seconds. Mohibi emphasized that this rapid data processing represents a defining characteristic of contemporary technological warfare. "AI can spot a weapon — but not social cohesion" However, Mohibi maintained that technological capability has fundamental limits. While radar arrays, satellites, and sensors can track equipment, installations, and troop movements, they cannot measure intangible factors like social cohesion. The IRGC spokesperson argued that unity among the population, the military, and state leadership during a crisis creates a level of national resilience that advanced AI algorithms and surveillance systems cannot accurately compute or dismantle. "We fought technologically as well" Rejecting the notion that Iran is technologically outmatched, Mohibi asserted that Tehran actively mapped out entire operational networks rather than isolated targets. Operating on principles of network warfare, an enemy radar is targeted as the eye of an entire system, a command center as part of its processing core, and supply nodes—such as fuel dumps—as critical dependencies for ongoing aerial operations. Claims of advanced Iranian missile capabilities Mohibi further claimed that Iranian missile technology has advanced significantly. According to his statements, current systems do not simply travel toward fixed coordinates, but possess flight-path maneuvering capabilities designed to track targets dynamically during missile strikes. "They didn't stop out of humanism - they stopped before strength" Using aggressive rhetoric, Mohibi disputed arguments that US military restraint was guided by humanitarian concerns, asserting instead that American forces halted escalation due to national deterrence and Iranian resolve. Acknowledging internal economic difficulties and rising inflation, he described these challenges as expected consequences of war that must be met with national endurance. As US strategy focuses on driving internal pressure, Tehran remains focused on preventing economic hardship from translating into broader domestic political instability. "We transferred strategic vulnerability to the other side" Mohibi detailed what he termed the transfer of strategic vulnerability, arguing that while the US historically conducts operations far from its borders, Iranian strategy aimed to ensure that damage to critical infrastructure would impose reciprocal costs on opposing assets and regional interests. He referenced counter-strikes following attacks on the South Pars gas field at Asaluyeh, stating that missile salvos targeted key infrastructure and connected centers, including targets in Israel. He added that estimates predicting the exhaustion of Iran's missile inventory proved inaccurate, as domestic production capacity remained active. The Iranian narrative on the attrition of US stockpiles According to Mohibi, a prolonged conflict wears down strategic reserves on the opposing side, potentially impacting US military doctrine and its capacity to manage multiple global fronts simultaneously. He questioned how forces would respond in the event of a simultaneous crisis in the Western Pacific or broader confrontation involving China or Russia. From Tehran's perspective, the transition to extreme financial pressure reflects a pivot driven by military friction, shifting the battle line from missiles to banking systems and from drones to trade sanctions. The Strait of Hormuz and the battle of symbolism Mohibi asserted that initial Western objectives extended toward total collapse or territorial division, but were later narrowed to keeping the Strait of Hormuz open. He claimed that despite extensive deployment of fighter aircraft, aerial tankers, support aircraft, and unmanned aerial vehicles, those operational goals were not fully realized. Amir Hatami (Iranian Army Chief): "Today's war is a war of will" Echoing these views, Iranian Army Commander Amir Hatami tied defense readiness to social and political endurance during a ceremony inaugurating over 1,000 housing units and facilities for Ground Forces. Hatami outlined four key priorities: synergy across armed forces, enhancing combat capabilities, strengthening ideological unity, and improving living standards for personnel, arguing that military readiness ultimately depends on human resources rather than equipment alone. "War is no longer just weapons and equipment" Hatami noted that modern conflicts are defined as a war of wills, ideas, and societal endurance. While stating that opponents have failed to achieve primary goals, he emphasized that the Iranian military continues to evaluate short-term, medium-term, and long-term scenarios to prepare for potential future threats. "Iran will not become a testing ground" Emphasizing national defense, the Army Chief stated that Iran will not allow itself to become a testing ground for external ambitions, warning that any aggression will meet a direct response. He added that the nation remains prepared to maintain resistance for 10 or 20 generations to prevent external powers from altering its borders or sovereignty. From the war of weapons to the war of nerves The conflict between Washington and Tehran has expanded beyond conventional boundaries into a broader strategic confrontation. Banking institutions serve as primary instruments, commercial routes operate as active fronts, and data feeds function as vital assets. As artificial intelligence accelerates operational timelines and media shapes public morale, social cohesion carries strategic weight equal to advanced defense hardware. While Washington seeks to maximize the cost of economic ties with Tehran, Iran continues working to demonstrate that external sanctions pressure has reached its limit. The outcome of this confrontation will ultimately be determined by real-world economic performance, trade network resilience, and the capacity of Iranian society to absorb ongoing financial pressure. www.bankingnews.gr

Oil prices fell more than 3% on Tuesday as the U.S. pivots to economic sanctions rather than military strikes to pressure Iran. Brent futures, the international benchmark, dropped 3.9% to close at $88.58 per barrel. U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude lost 3.1% to settle at $82.36 a barrel. Prices have fallen more than 5% this week after the U.S. government unveiled a fresh raft of sanctions on Iran and so-called enablers that continue to trade with the Islamic Republic. The White House has labeled its efforts an "economic D-Day" with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent claiming the campaign is "the single greatest financial offensive ever." Bessent told CNBC last week that the decision to ratchet up economic pressure means a return to war is unlikely for now. "If we are doing the maximum economic pressure, then that means that likely there will not be a large-scale kinetic restart," the Treasury secretary said Thursday in an interview on "Squawk on the Street." The foreign ministers of Iran and Oman, meanwhile, met Tuesday to discuss a proposed temporary joint shipping route the Strait of Hormuz. And the State Department is preparing to return evacuated U.S. diplomats to the Middle East as early as this week, The New York Times reported Tuesday. The return of diplomats to their posts would suggest Washington is not anticipating a return to all-out warfare. President Donald Trump said Tuesday the U.S. Navy notified him that all mines have been cleared within international waters in Hormuz. U.S. Central Command referred CNBC to Trump's statement when asked to confirm whether the mines have been removed. "Iran has been notified that any ship or boat placing new mines will be immediately and systematically destroyed," Trump said in a Truth Social post. "Through Space Force, we are watching every square inch of the Strait, as we are, also, with Pickaxe Mountain and the already destroyed three other Nuclear sites," the president said. "There is a Zero Tolerance policy on mine placement in full force and effect." Iran says it's prepared for sanctions U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told reporters on Monday that the prospect of further American strikes in the Middle East remained on the table. "If we need to use kinetic strikes, we'll use them," Hegseth said. "If Iran is foolish enough to overplay their hand or mess with the American military, we'll do what we need to do." "Economic pressure hurts them the most right now," he said of the Iranian regime. "But by no means are we foreclosing using kinetic strikes anywhere in the Strait of Hormuz or around Iran." Iranian Economy Minister Ali Madanizadeh said on state television that Tehran is "fully prepared" to withstand more U.S. sanctions. "The government is and was ready and has a two-year plan to manage these events," he said. "We have our own tools and we know how to play the game." Under the new sanctions plan, China could face ramifications for continuing to buy Iranian oil. Beijing, one of Iran's largest trading partners, has repeatedly called for a diplomatic end to the U.S.-Iran war. On Tuesday, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian told reporters Beijing would "do everything necessary to firmly safeguard its rights and interests." "China has made clear on many occasions its firm opposition to illicit unilateral sanctions that have no basis in international law or the authorization of the U.N. Security Council," he said. "Economic warfare and maximum pressure provide no solution." He added that China's cooperation with Iran is conducted within the framework of international law, and should therefore not be disrupted. In a Tuesday note, BBH strategists said the Trump administration's latest tactics were "more of a warning shot than a decisive blow." "The U.S. expanded sanctions on Iran but stopped short of any immediate secondary sanctions against other countries sustaining Iran's trade. China is the critical pressure point — it is Iran's largest trading partner and buys roughly 90% of its oil exports — and the biggest constraint on making the sanctions credible." They added that targeting China as a trading partner of Iran would mean targeting major Chinese banks and refiners, "risking financial disruption, Chinese retaliation, and the fragile US-China détente."

(CNN) — China warned on Tuesday that the new US economic sanctions on Iran "will only heighten tensions," stressing that Chinese cooperation with Iran should not be obstructed. Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning stated at a regular press briefing that "economic warfare and the so-called maximal pressure policy will not help resolve the issue; they will only lead to further escalation of tensions and conflicts, and create risks whose ripple effects extend to other parties." She added, "China and Iran have long cooperated within the framework of international law, and this cooperation should not be obstructed or undermined." She continued, "China is closely monitoring the relevant developments and will take all necessary measures to firmly safeguard its rights and interests." On Monday, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen pledged to launch a "day of economic grounding" against countries that purchase oil from Iran. An analysis indicated that Tehran likely shipped oil valued between $3.9 and $4.2 billion in September 2025, with China—the world's largest energy consumer—being the buyer of the vast majority of these quantities. According to a report by Nomura in April, 38% of China’s oil imports and 23% of its natural gas imports pass through the Persian Gulf, which is a focal point in the war with Iran.

Iran has made a new gas discovery in the southern province of Fars, with the oil ministry reporting estimates of 7.5 trillion cubic feet of gas, of which 73% is recoverable, or 5.7 trillion cu ft. Iran has the world’s second-largest natural gas reserves, after Russia. “This amount of gas is equivalent to one block of South Pars, which can supply gas for 15 years,” oil minister Mohsen Paknejad said, as quoted by Iranian media. “This volume of gas has the special characteristic of being sweet, which reduces both development and operating costs,” Paknejad also said. The Iranian oil ministry also said over the weekend that repairs at the South Pars gas field continue, with 70% of operations now restored. The field was damaged by U.S. and Israeli strikes in the early days of the war. It is the world’s largest gas field, shared by Iran and Qatar, which calls it the North Field and which grew into a top-three world liquefied natural gas exporter thanks to the field’s reserves. Restoring 100% of operations at South Pars would take at least three years, the chief executive of the company operating the field told SHANA news agency. He added that “intensive planning and alternative execution methods are being used to bring some trains back online by the end of the year and complete the overall reconstruction within two years.” The news of the new Iranian discovery comes as the United States threatened to slap more sanctions on Tehran. President Trump called them “draconian”, saying “Well, we have things that we could sanction. We have very draconian sanctions, and we'll see what happens.” Separately, in an op-ed for the Financial Times, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent threatened Iran with “an economic D-Day — the single greatest financial offensive ever marshalled against an adversary.” No details about the nature of the sanctions were revealed. By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com More Top Reads From Oilprice.com

The Economic War Against Iran: The Pillars of a New Form of Warfighting The economic war has ceased to be a phrase reserved for geostrategic analyses to become a first‑order strategic tool. In the conflict between the United States and Iran, pressure on the Iranian economy has already become one of the main instruments used by Washington to try to bend Tehran’s capacity for resistance without relying exclusively on conventional military operations. The objective is not only to trigger a recession or reduce the Iranian state's revenues, but to attack the channels that allow a country to finance its military apparatus, maintain its commercial relations, access foreign currency, and sustain its external influence. This is analyzed step by step by the Delta13News Strategic Analysis Room. The US offensive against Iran has also entered a new phase. On August 20, the US Secretary of the Treasury, Scott Besse… actually, the name in the original is Scott Bessent, announced that Washington was preparing what he called the harshest sanctions in its history, within a strategy dubbed “Economic Fury.” The announcement followed Donald Trump’s threat of an “economic war” campaign against Iran and against any country that provided Tehran a way to maintain its financial and commercial activities. The strategy combines financial sanctions, pursuit of intermediary networks, pressure on oil exports, asset freezes, secondary sanctions, and pressure on third-country companies and states. The underlying question is what a true economic war means and what its pillars are. In general terms, it can be defined as the deliberate use of economic, financial, commercial, technological, and logistical instruments to reduce an adversary’s ability to act and compel it to change its political or strategic behavior. Unlike a conventional war, it does not need to start with a formal declaration of hostilities. It can unfold through administrative decisions, financial restrictions, export controls, tariffs, embargoes, asset freezes, or pressure on private companies. In the Iranian case, these instruments do not appear in isolation. They overlap with a military confrontation, with the threat to sea routes, and with a diplomatic battle aimed at convincing third countries that maintaining economic relations with Tehran may carry a high cost. The result is an architecture of pressure whose purpose is to progressively close the channels of financing, trade, and supply that allow Iran to sustain its economy and, above all, to finance its military and strategic capabilities. The first pillar: oil The first major pillar of the economic war against Iran is oil. This is not a secondary issue. Hydrocarbons constitute one of Iran’s main sources of external revenue and, therefore, any strategy aimed at limiting the Iranian state’s financial capacity must attempt to curb its oil exports. Washington has focused for years much of its sanctions on companies, intermediaries, vessels, and networks used to market Iranian oil. In May 2026, the US Treasury announced measures against companies, individuals, and vessels linked to the trade of Iranian oil and petrochemical products. In one operation, 19 ships involved in those shipments were blocked. The logic is simple: if Iran cannot sell its oil normally, it loses foreign currency; if it loses foreign currency, it has fewer resources to import goods, stabilize its currency, fund its military programs, and sustain its international networks. But there is a fundamental difficulty. Oil is a globalized commodity and there is a broad international infrastructure capable of seeking alternative routes. Shipments can change intermediaries, flag, documentation, or destination; ships can use complex corporate structures, and financial operations can be fragmented across different jurisdictions. That is why the economic war against oil does not simply consist of banning the purchase of Iranian crude, but of pursuing the entire logistics and financial chain that allows that crude to reach the buyer. The international dimension of the problem is especially relevant because China has become one of the main buyers of Iranian oil. The US pressure on companies and countries that maintain commercial relations with Iran thus introduces a second dimension: Washington is not only trying to cut the money flow between Iran and its clients, but to raise the cost for those third parties that help sustain it. The second pillar: the financial system The second major front is the financial one. In a modern economy, owning oil does not necessarily mean owning usable money. To convert an export into tangible economic resources, access to banks, payment systems, currencies, insurance, transport companies, and international settlement mechanisms is required. There lies one of the main structural advantages of the United States. The weight of the dollar and the central role of the US financial system allow Washington to exert pressure even on companies that are not American. The experience of previous sanctions against Iran demonstrates the reach of this mechanism. During the maximum pressure campaign started in 2018, the United States secured numerous international companies to exit the Iranian market due to the risk of losing access to the US financial system. Washington even used the threat of sanctions against foreign banks and companies to prevent them from continuing to operate with certain Iranian entities. The use of the financial system as a weapon has a particularly powerful feature: you do not need to pursue every operator directly. It is enough to create uncertainty and raise the risk until banks and companies themselves decide to abandon operations with the sanctioned country. This is the phenomenon known as “overcompliance.” A financial entity may decide that it is too risky to maintain a relationship with an Iranian client even if there is a legal pathway to certain operations. The bank would rather drop the business than risk a multimillion-dollar fine or losing access to the US market. The third pillar: secondary sanctions Secondary sanctions are probably one of the most powerful elements of the US strategy. A traditional sanction affects the citizens, companies, or institutions of the country that imposes the measure. A secondary sanction goes further: it also threatens foreign companies that do business with the target of the sanctions. The mechanism creates a kind of economic perimeter around Iran. A European, Asian, or Middle Eastern company may not be directly subject to US law in all its activities, but it may have interests in the United States, use dollars, maintain accounts in US banks, or sell products in the North American market. Washington can use those links as leverage. The threat essentially obliges a choice: trade with Iran or retain access to certain US markets and financial systems. This capability makes US sanctions far more than a bilateral policy. Its radius of action can reach companies thousands of miles away from Washington. This month, the new US offensive explicitly raised that threat. Trump warned that countries and entities that provide Iran with an economic “lifeline” may face serious economic consequences. The fourth pillar: asset blocking Another fundamental element is to prevent Iran from having access to certain assets located abroad. Asset freezes can affect bank accounts, business shares, properties, investment funds, vessels, or any other economic resource subject to US jurisdiction. Its importance lies not only in the nominal value of the blocked assets but also in the message it sends to international operators: assets linked to certain Iranian persons or entities can be taken out of circulation. The economic war thus turns wealth into a battlefield. The ability to locate, identify, and block these assets also depends on a huge infrastructure of financial intelligence. Authorities need to know who controls a company, who is behind a transfer, which vessel really belongs to which operator, and which entity acts as a front for another. That is why contemporary sanctions increasingly depend on the combination of economic intelligence, analysis of corporate networks, banking data, and monitoring of commercial operations. The fifth pillar: pursuing clandestine networks Iran has developed for decades mechanisms to evade sanctions. The US response now consists of pursuing those networks. The Treasury Department has labeled some of the structures Iran uses to move money outside conventional financial circuits as “shadow banking.” In April 2026, OFAC sanctioned 35 people and entities that, according to Washington, participated in an underground financial architecture capable of moving tens of billions of dollars linked to sanction evasion. In May, another US operation targeted money changers and shell companies used to facilitate transactions related to sanctioned Iranian banks and to the sale of oil and petrochemical products. The strategy shows how the nature of sanctions has changed. It is no longer enough to identify an Iranian state bank. One must reconstruct a network of companies, intermediaries, instrumental entities, financial agents, and transporters. In this sense, economic warfare increasingly resembles an intelligence operation. The sixth pillar: logistics and transport A economy may have buyers and money, but it needs to move the goods. That is why ships, insurers, ports, shipping companies, and logistics operators have become strategic targets. Iranian oil can be transported through opaque commercial structures, flag changes, and intermediary networks. US pressure seeks to raise the cost of those operations to make them more difficult and risky. Here lies one of the main connections between economic warfare and naval power. The Strait of Hormuz is the clearest example. Through it circulated, before the current crisis, roughly a fifth of globally traded oil. The reduction of traffic during the US–Iran confrontation has caused a significant shift in energy markets and increased uncertainty about supply. The use of a strategic geographic point as a pressure instrument shows that geoeconomics and geopolitics are closely linked. The seventh pillar: technological control The 21st century’s economic war cannot be understood without technology. Export controls can prevent a country from accessing certain semiconductors, electronic components, industrial machinery, navigation systems, telecommunications equipment, or dual-use technologies. The objective is not necessarily to paralyze the entire economy. It can be much more selective: to deny the adversary access to technologies it needs to modernize its armed forces, develop missiles, drones, intelligence systems, or industrial infrastructure. In the Iranian case, the United States has also focused on international networks used to acquire components and equipment intended for military capabilities. In June 2026, the US Treasury sanctioned individuals and companies linked to networks for the procurement of weapons for the Revolutionary Guard and the Iranian Defense Ministry, including operators based in China and Hong Kong. Economic warfare thus also becomes a war over supply chains. The eighth pillar: cryptocurrencies and new finance Digitalization has created new paths to try to bypass sanctions. Cryptocurrencies and digital assets potentially offer alternative mechanisms to move value outside traditional banking networks. They have therefore entered the economic battlefield as well. In June 2026, OFAC included Nobitex, described by the US Treasury as Iran’s largest digital asset exchange platform, among others, in its campaign against Iran. Washington accused these entities of facilitating illicit financing and sanction evasion. The message is clear: economic warfare is no longer fought only between traditional banks. It also targets exchanges, cryptocurrencies, digital payment systems, and new forms of value transfer. The ninth pillar: pressure on third countries An effective economic war requires allies or at least neutralizing possible sources of economic oxygen for the adversary. In the Iranian case, this means pressuring countries that continue to buy oil, sell goods, facilitate financial services, or allow domestic companies to act as intermediaries. The US strategy thus takes on a diplomatic dimension. Washington tries to convince other governments that cooperating with Iran could have economic consequences. The problem is that this policy can create tensions with countries that do not share the US strategy. China is the most important example. If the United States attempts to more aggressively block Iranian oil exports destined for China, the dispute ceases to be purely a confrontation between Washington and Tehran and can become a far larger geoeconomic conflict. That is why sanctions on third parties have a double edge. They can significantly increase pressure on Iran, but they can also accelerate the pursuit of alternative commercial and financial systems to the US-dominated order. The tenth pillar: the war over the currency The currency is another battlefield. Sanctions reduce the availability of foreign exchange, make imports more difficult, and can provoke depreciation of the national currency. When the rial loses value, imported goods become more expensive and inflation rises. Pressure on the currency can become a vicious circle: fewer exports mean less foreign currency; less foreign currency makes imports harder; scarcity of goods pushes prices up; inflation deteriorates purchasing power; and loss of confidence can accelerate monetary depreciation. The United States had already employed this logic during previous maximum-pressure campaigns. The State Department itself noted in 2019 that the rial had lost roughly two-thirds of its value and that Iranian inflation had reached very high levels. In the current confrontation, the social consequences are again visible. Associated Press has reported inflation near 70%, a sharp loss of purchasing power, and growing difficulties for Iranian families in affording basics. The eleventh pillar: inflation as an indirect weapon Inflation is not formally a sanction, but it can become one of its most important consequences. When a state loses oil revenue and has difficulty accessing foreign exchange, its ability to finance imports diminishes. If there are also transportation problems and trade restrictions, the cost of certain products rises. The effect eventually reaches citizens. This is one of the most controversial aspects of the economic war. Its defenders argue that economic pressure can prevent a larger-scale military escalation and compel the Iranian government to modify its behavior. Its critics contend that widespread sanctions can deteriorate living conditions without guaranteeing that the regime changes its policy. Iran’s experience demonstrates precisely that contradiction. The twelfth pillar: corporate isolation Another key piece is to ensure that large multinationals leave the target market. The strategy works through a combination of direct sanctions, regulatory uncertainty, and financial risk. An international company may find a market like Iran attractive, but if there is

The United States Secretary of the Treasury, Scott Bessent, announced this Monday (08/24/2026) the launch of operation 'Economic Pariah' to cut "all economic options" for Iran with the aim of increasing pressure with sanctions against the Islamic Republic almost six months after the war began. "The Department of the Treasury has identified all the nodes, facilitators, and networks that Iran has used for oil smuggling and evading sanctions," Bessent said at a press briefing, where he reiterated that "no one is exempt" from being targeted by indirect sanctions for doing business with Iran. The senior official clarified that these "sectoral sanctions" will target "five of the lifelines that Iran exploits in other countries: digital assets, technology, gold, aviation, and maritime transport." "These measures broaden the risk of secondary sanctions for anyone foolish enough to continue doing business with this regime, and will accelerate the speed at which we will act against them," he warned. The Treasury secretary said that officials, the State Department, and the armed forces "are meeting now with their international counterparts to convey that the U.S. expects concrete actions," although he did not specify which nations were warned or provide a timetable for applying these sanctions. The U.S. Treasury secretary also reported new sanctions on "more than sixty entities, individuals, and vessels around the world that enable the Iranian regime to acquire illicit nuclear and missile technology, conduct cyber operations, and generate petroleum revenues." Beyond the U.S. dollar Bessent added that Washington will cut off access to the U.S. dollar system for all those who launder money for Iran. "Any entity that facilitates money laundering on behalf of Iran will be excluded from the U.S. dollar system. The clock has just started," Bessent told reporters at a news conference. "It is no longer acceptable to operate in the gray zones" of the conflict, he added. Bessent did not specify which countries could face potential secondary sanctions by the United States, but China, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates are Iran’s main trading partners. For its part, Iran has responded that it will not allow Washington to dictate the terms of the end of the war and has reiterated its warnings to other countries not to participate in what it calls the new U.S. economic campaign against it. It also warned that it will consider as an "enemy" any country that joins the United States’ "economic war". (mn / afp, afp)

The “economic D-Day” against Iran, promised last week by the American president, Donald Trump, begins this Monday. “We are now entering the final phase,” wrote US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Trump’s right-hand man for economic affairs, on his social networks. According to him, the moment has come to “cut off all sources of economic sustenance that keep the tyrannical regime standing until Tehran is left alone.” President Trump has dismantled Iran’s military capabilities, destroyed nearly 100 percent of its military factories, and buried its nuclear program. — Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (@SecScottBessent) August 23, 2026 We are now entering the endgame. At dawn begins an economic D-Day — the single greatest financial offensive ever marshaled against… Washington intensifies pressure on Tehran amid the stalemate in negotiations to end the war between the two countries that began on February 28. The secretary’s announcement follows the one Trump himself made last week, when he promised “the most devastating economic operation in history” against the Persian country. In a post on his own social network, Truth, Trump stated last Wednesday that Iran had “failed to take advantage” of the opportunity to reach an agreement and that it would face “an economic war and an unprecedented level of isolation.” Hours before the United States announced it, Iran threatened 46 ships with fines or outright confiscation, to demonstrate its control over the Strait of Hormuz. This route, through which a fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas passes, is blocked by both Tehran and Washington and is one of the main hurdles to resolving this conflict. The Gulf Strait Authority, created by Iran, stated on X that the ships, most of which are from neighboring countries, had violated the “protocols” for transit through this route. According to this body, they “may face restrictions on future crossings, including fines, detention, or confiscation.” This is a statement that aligns with the one made on Sunday by the head of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Mohsen Rezaei, who warned neighboring countries that if they join the United States’ economic war against Tehran, they will be considered enemies and, therefore, attacked. “Anyone who does so, we will consider an enemy,” he stated on Saturday in an interview with Iran’s state broadcaster IRIB. Last week, Trump also warned that any country doing business with Tehran “will face tremendous economic consequences.” This move would entail a secondary tariff on third countries — a levy on nations that buy Iranian products. With this, pressure extends to the major importers of Iranian goods. China, which in recent years has been the main customer for oil from the island of Jarg, absorbing around 90% of its crude exports, would be among the countries most exposed to a potential application of secondary sanctions. Beijing announced this Monday that it would take the “necessary measures” to protect its interests. A spokesperson for China’s Foreign Ministry said the country will “closely monitor” the evolving situation and take steps to safeguard its “rights and legitimate interests,” but did not specify them. The spokesperson also warned that sanctions and pressure “do not help resolve problems.” Iran’s economy, however, has faced US sanctions for more than five decades and has learned to create survival methods. Even the war, which has damaged it, has not managed to derail it. The Islamic Republic has learned to implement a resilience-based economy, focused on import substitution, the dispersion of power plants, and a developed framework to circumvent oil sanctions, using, like Russia, a phantom fleet and a black market for fossil fuels. Moreover, this is not the first time Trump has implemented a “maximum pressure” policy with harsh sanctions on Iran. He did so during his first term as well, when in 2018 he decided to withdraw from the nuclear agreement that the Obama administration had built with Tehran and European countries over several years. Trita Parsi, vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, argues that “Trump’s maximum pressure should have broken Iran eight years ago,” he wrote this Monday on his social networks. “The blockade should have broken Iran four months ago. Trump’s D-Day pressure will strangle Iran, but Iran’s most likely response will be a counter-escalation, not surrender.” For Parsi, the sanctions “will probably exert a lot of pressure on other regional countries, such as Iraq, which do not have much room to maneuver given their own difficulties.” In an interview with EL PAÍS, Ali Vaez, nuclear physicist and deputy director of the Middle East and North Africa Program at the International Crisis Group, said last spring that Washington’s sanctions against Tehran have barely managed to strangle the country’s middle class, which, as a consequence, lost its leverage to pressure the Islamic Republic in favor of reforms.

Iran The United States steps up pressure on the Iranian regime with new economic sanctions “Any kind of economic relationship with Iran will expose those responsible to the full reach of American power.” This is how bluntly the U.S. Treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, spoke yesterday, announcing new economic sanctions against Tehran. At a press conference to announce new measures of economic strangulation against Iran, Bessent also announced that countries that have so far maintained commercial and financial relations with Iran would have a “limited period” to cut those ties. “Our objective worldwide is to cut all economic links that sustain this tyrannical regime until Tehran is left alone.” With this step taken by the U.S. Treasury, President Trump seeks to increase economic pressure on Tehran through secondary sanctions — that is, against third countries — with the aim of further choking the regime by punishing those States that maintain commercial and financial links with Tehran. The new sanctions package targets five strategic sectors: gold, aviation, maritime transport, technology, and digital assets. Sanctions have also been imposed on almost 60 subjects, including entities and individuals; both direct interlocutors and intermediary companies. Although Bessent did not name concrete entities, he stressed that “he does not have infinite patience.” Displaying his usual superlative rhetoric, Bessent had described this new regime-strangling move as “the largest financial offensive in history,” an “economic D-Day.” Trump claimed he would plunge Tehran into an “unprecedented isolation.” “The final phase” of the war against Iran After nearly six months of conflict and with no peace agreement in sight, Trump presses the accelerator ahead of the midterm elections in November, with popularity at a low after the disastrous failure in the war against Iran. “Any country that allows its financial institutions, companies, airports, or governmental entities to provide any kind of aid to Iran will face tremendous economic consequences,” the president warned a few days ago on Truth Social. “The President has dismantled Iran’s military capabilities, destroyed almost one hundred percent of its military factories, and buried its nuclear program. Now we are entering the final phase. At dawn, an economic D-Day begins — the largest financial offensive ever organized against an adversary,” wrote the Treasury secretary just hours before the press conference. Asim Munir, head of the Army’s General Staff and chief of Pakistan’s Defense Forces — the country that just signed, along with Saudi Arabia and Turkey, the Mecca Joint Defense Agreement — is currently in Iran with the aim of acting as mediator between the two warring powers, as he has been doing in recent months. In recent weeks, Tehran has been negotiating an agreement with Oman over the Strait of Hormuz, and while talks are advanced, nothing definitive has yet been signed. Trump threatened, last Monday, August 20, to bomb Oman if it interferes with his plans to manage the strait. In fact, in a burst of social media posts, the magnate even said that Hormuz was becoming American territory that week. However, the threats and the step taken by the United States, which from now on targets not only Tehran but also third countries with ties to the country, have not yet taken a toll on the Iranian government, which has been firm in labeling these new measures as “economic terrorism” and calling the move “a threat to the global economy.” In recent hours, the regime has also threatened to bomb “strategic energy points of the United States” in the region and has added 45 tanker ships to the blacklist of those not allowed to cross the strait. Just minutes before Bessent’s press conference began, the speaker of the Iranian Parliament, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, wrote on X: “The Americans know that nobody believes their bluster; the United States is not in a financial position to further restrict its relations with other countries. Iran’s trading partners, both in the media and in sending us messages, have stated that they do not take these statements seriously.” Bessent urges China “to cooperate” At the center of this step is various countries, but one stands out above the rest: China, the world’s largest crude oil importer. The Asian giant has already been warned by the United States to “cooperate” in this new phase of the conflict. China, which before the war bought between 80% and 90% of Iranian oil, is one of the countries most affected by this context of economic instability, blockades, and threats. Still, and looking at the outlook, over the past months Beijing has opted to use its strategic reserves and reduce oil purchases due to inflated prices caused by the war. With an eye on China’s moves, in recent months the U.S. Treasury has also sanctioned independent Chinese refineries that have continued to buy Iranian oil — at discounted prices — covertly and has threatened Chinese banks. China has long maintained that sanctions on Iran are useless It is expected that Chinese President Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump will meet soon, at the end of September, to address the exploitation of rare earths and exchange views on tariffs. It is possible that this new sanctions package on Iran will creep into the conversation. China has long maintained that sanctions on Iran are useless. Another of Iran’s partners most affected by this situation is the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Last week, in response to American threats, the UAE suspended all commercial and financial relations with Iran. The UAE argued that the suspension was due to an attack by Iranians. Turkey, for its part, which imports 30% of its gas from Iran, has not yet taken any significant steps regarding its economic relations with the regime. Sanctions that last for decades The use of sanctions to isolate Iran is not new in U.S. policy, but dates back to the 1979 Islamic Revolution, when the ayatollahs came to power in the country. Since then, sanctions — mostly aimed at reducing the country’s oil revenues — have persisted for decades. In fact, the suspension of sanctions, as well as the lifting of the naval blockade that Washington maintains, is one of the sine qua non conditions imposed by the Iranian regime to proceed with negotiations with the Americans. Washington also demands that the Iranians not control the Strait of Hormuz, which has been partially closed since the restart of bombings last July. Now, however, with this new step taken by the United States, the signing of a peace agreement that ends the war and allows regional stabilization moves a bit further away. To comment on this article you must be registered. If you already have an account, log in. If you don’t have one yet, you can create one here in two minutes at no cost and without account numbers. If you are a partner you can comment without prior moderation and rate comments. The rest of the comments are moderated and approved by El Salto’s Editorial Team. To comment without moderation, subscribe!

"Any entity facilitating money laundering on behalf of Iran will be expelled from the U.S. dollar system," said on Monday US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. United States launches an offensive to economically isolate Iran under the name 'Operation Economic Outcast,' while Washington tries to cut Tehran's funding links in the midst of war. In a Monday press briefing, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent unveiled a new "unprecedented campaign" against Iran and its "facilitators," which he described as an "economic offensive" aimed at isolating the Iranian regime. "The Treasury has traced every node, every intermediary, and every network Iran has used to sell smuggled oil and evade sanctions," he said. "From today, the Treasury and other agencies will tighten the noose and block any possible source of revenue that funds the Guardians of the Revolution and the evil Iranian regime." "Any entity that facilitates money laundering on behalf of Iran will be excluded from the U.S. dollar system," he added. Bessent also noted that U.S. President Donald Trump is now contacting unspecified world leaders to ask them to stop doing business with Iran. Washington tightens the economic noose around Tehran. As part of the campaign, the Treasury Department announced on Monday that it has also "issued decisions against five critical sectors—digital assets, technology, gold, aviation, and maritime transport—that the Iranian regime uses to try to shore up its faltering economy." Looking ahead, Bessent said Iran now faces "a very clear choice." "A total global isolation and a subsistence economy, or a path back to normalcy, with the opportunity to reintegrate into the global economy." Tension in the Strait of Hormuz. Bessent's warning comes about six months after American and Israeli strikes against Iran marked the start of the war in the region, which the Trump Administration says it seeks to prevent Iran from ever obtaining a nuclear weapon. In recent months, the conflict has largely stalled, with negotiations weakening and a growing dispute over control of the Strait of Hormuz. This strategic waterway, a crucial bottleneck for the transport of oil and gas linking the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea, has become a point of friction in talks between Washington and Tehran, with both sides claiming control of the strait.

By Magdalena Del Valle and Yash Roy (Bloomberg) — Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent threatened economic punishment against any country doing business with Iran as part of what he called an “economic D-Day” campaign to isolate the country and end nearly six months of war. President Donald Trump is calling world leaders with “specific requests to cease their interactions with the regime” and countries will face a specific timeline to shut down links with Iran or face unilateral US punishment, Bessent told a press conference. “We are launching an economic onslaught against Iran’s financial connections around the globe,” Bessent said. He called the move “economic asphyxiation of this regime.” The statement marked the latest US bid to force capitulation from Iran, which has refused to bow to US demands despite months of US bombing that began in late February as well as decades of economic sanctions. It also underscored Trump’s growing impatience to end a war that’s deeply unpopular among Americans as midterm elections approach in November. While Bessent’s announcements might help further isolate Iran from some of its trading partners, it was unclear whether the actions will be enough to get Tehran to loosen its stranglehold on the vital Strait of Hormuz. “So far this appears to be just the threat of additional secondary sanctions under authorities that Treasury has had since 2020,” said Claire O’Neill McCleskey, a former Treasury official and co-founder of sanctions advisory firm Clarity Compliance Consulting. His threats also risk putting the US on a collision course with China, which buys the bulk of Iran’s oil and has so far refused to stop. Bessent acknowledged the risk of such a move when he was asked why the US wasn’t imposing the punishment on Iran’s trading partners immediately. “We are giving everyone the opportunity to remedy bad behavior,” Bessent said. “Why would I want to blow up the global financial system?” Treasury unveiled sanctions against more than 60 entities on Monday, with Bessent saying the US was focusing on five of Iran’s “most vital lifelines,” including digital assets, technology, gold, aviation and shipping. Bessent also threatened to sanction a major financial institution over Iran ties by the end of this week but didn’t name the target. Bloomberg Economics analysts Jennifer Welch and Adam Farrar said Bessent’s announcement was “more show than tell, with major questions outstanding” including “whether the US will risk its fragile trade truce with China.” The “key test will be whether the US follows through on threats to sanction countries that don’t sever links to Iran, and targets large Chinese financial and energy institutions,” they wrote in a new analysis on Monday. Asked on Monday if the US was prepared to cut off major Chinese banks for facilitating trade with Iran, Bessent said “no one is above the reach of US sanctions.” He didn’t mention China — or any other country — by name, saying the best way to engage was through “quiet diplomacy.” Iranian officials were unbowed. Shortly before Bessent spoke, Iran’s lead negotiator with the US, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, wrote on social media, “Americans know that no one buys their bombast.” “The United States is not in an economic position to further restrict its relations with other countries,” he wrote. In April, Bessent had announced what he called “Economic Fury” against Iran and warned that the administration was prepared to deploy secondary sanctions against foreign financial institutions “that continue to support Iran’s activities.” Trump also previously said the US would impose secondary sanctions on any nation or company buying Iranian oil — a threat he did not carry out. In an opinion piece published earlier on Monday, Bessent raised expectations of a major new US campaign by likening the new sanctions effort to the Normandy landings that helped bring an end to World War II. “This was a last warning — it wasn’t the actual dropping of any hammer, especially on the Chinese,” said Daniel Fried, a former veteran US diplomat now at the Atlantic Council. “To use Bessent’s language, this isn’t D-Day. D-day is when you hit the beaches. This is warning that you’re preparing D-Day, which is not the same.” US stocks maintained their earlier losses following Bessent’s remarks, with the S&P 500 Index falling about 0.3%. The dollar touched a session high following Bessent’s comments, with the Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index gaining 0.2% for the day. Treasuries held steady with the yield on benchmark 10-year notes trading at 4.70%. © 2026 Bloomberg L.P.

The Iranian press published today, Tuesday, August 25, focusing on the escalating pace of diplomatic and political confrontations between Iran and the United States, alongside regional mediation efforts by Pakistan and Oman to break the stalemate. Internally, opinions varied between praise for the government’s handling of basic goods and criticism of mismanagement, energy crises, and currency exchange shocks, amid official and academic warnings about the widening living gap. Spokesperson for the Foreign Ministry, Ismail Qajari, according to the hardline ultra-conservative Kayhan, asserted Iran’s legal right to target the source of any aggression, rejecting any conditions from the aggressor and pledging to face pressures. In response to U.S. sanctions, the modest Tehran Municipality-linked Hemayat-e Emrooz (Hamshahri) focused on Iran’s possession of alternative transit routes and trading networks with China, Russia, and the Middle East as capable of neutralizing the maximum pressure policy. Rahman Borouach (Raman Borouresh), a writer for the reformist Mardom Salari, refuted theories about bypassing the Hormuz Strait through alternative routes, stressing its strategic and geographic superiority. Conversely, the moderate Ettelaat warned of the gap between official reassurances and real living challenges, insisting that media statements do not erase the prohibitive economic cost of sanctions and current crises. Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf replied to Donald Trump’s reposting of an edited clip suggesting his acknowledgment of hunger in Iran, mocking his campaign slogan and turning it into “Let’s Make America Hungry Again,” according to the hardline Kayhan. Kayhan also published statistics on poverty and food insecurity in the United States affecting 47 million Americans as evidence of the American public’s living crisis. Likewise, Hemayat-e Emrooz questioned Washington’s ability to intensify economic pressure on Iran, stressing that commercial partners are not serious about dealing with U.S. threats. In the same vein, Pakistan’s Army Chief General Asim Munir visited Tehran to urge both sides to return to negotiations and reopen the Hormuz Strait. The official IRNA quoted Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf as saying that resuming the negotiation path depends on Washington’s practical commitment to its previous undertakings and a lifting of sanctions. In a column in the reformist Etemad newspaper, former Iranian diplomat Kurosh Ahmadi considered the visit as one more attempt to save Islamabad’s understanding before Washington begins its economic war, stressing that the success of mediation requires flexibility and both sides stepping back from their maximalist interpretations. The fundamentalist ultra-conservative Donya-e-Eqtisad correspondent Dunia-e Eghtesad clarified that Pakistan and Oman’s moves aim to keep communication channels open, predicting that diplomatic breakthrough will be difficult due to trust issues and multiple dispute files. Meanwhile, the hardline Javan newspaper doubted the mediation’s success, arguing that returning to mediation and economic pressure proves the failure of American military options. As the government week began, Masoud Bozorgian’s government sought to showcase development projects, but ongoing living protests and the water crisis reveal, according to IRNA, the gap between slogans and on-the-ground reality. Kayhan highlighted that the president’s speech linking crises to external conspiracies is facing a real test requiring translating promises of justice and reform into concrete steps to address internal imbalances. In a seminar by the hardline Asr-e Iran newspaper, administration experts criticized the government’s improvisational performance, stressing that governing the country is not a place for trial and error, and that the problem lies not in lack of money but in lack of administration and the president’s responsibility for government performance. Conversely, Parliament deputies Reza Sehood and Fatemeh Maksehdi, writing in the hardline Akah newspaper, jointly praised the government’s success in managing a basket of goods and services under current conditions, urging delaying criticism and supporting the executive to achieve stability. Separately, First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref warned about a bill to confront foreign influence, noting, according to IRNA, that its current form harms scientific research and technological progress by criminalizing international academic communication. News from the moderate Ettelaat cited Parliament Speaker Ghalibaf’s pledge to withdraw the bill, urging an end to tension between the security-based approach and the needs of scientific openness to avoid creating an isolated research environment detrimental to the technology sector. Economically, Ali Yusef Bur, owner of the Siyasat-e Ruz ultra-conservative newspaper license, criticized the fuel and energy crisis, arguing that it exposes a structural flaw due to an expanded state role and appointing incompetent officials with weak parliamentary oversight. Ettelaat’s report highlighted the rapid rise in the dollar’s price and stressed that the central bank governor Abdul Nasser Hemmati’s assurances do not address the confidence crisis and inflation expectations. Financial markets analyst Ferdin Agha Bazraki told Dunia-e Eghtesad that the dollar’s rise did not automatically boost the stock market, given the multiple exchange rates, energy shortages, and rising production costs. Now, more details can be found in the following newspapers: Javan: Do Americans rely on exhausting Iran’s accounts? In a Javan article, Ali Alavi argues that Washington’s recent escalation and threat of the harshest sanctions aim to confuse Iranian decision-makers and test their resilience after exhausting pressure options. He cites Western analysts to underscore that threats reflect Washington’s need for psychological pressure, questioning the usefulness of threats if they already possess decisive tools. He also highlights Iran’s on-the-ground and financial readiness to face pressures, stressing that the current battle is a clash of strategic calculations and capacity to bear the cost of the options. Arman-e Melli: The sanctions dilemma pushes Washington toward negotiations An international affairs analyst, Jafar Ghandabashi, in his article in the reformist Arman-e Melli, notes that the purpose of Omani and Pakistani visits to Tehran is Washington’s need to negotiate, stressing that military and economic options have proven ineffective. He explains that imposing comprehensive and effective sanctions requires the cooperation of thousands of Western companies, which is hard to achieve practically given the experience of previous maximum pressure that failed to achieve its objectives. He asserts that returning to negotiation is the only viable exit for the American administration, anticipating its inability to enforce its announced sanctions. Kayhan: Ghalibaf warned against exploiting his positions Hussein Sharoudi (Shari’edari), the representative of the Supreme Leader in Kayhan and editor-in-chief, warned Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf against attempts by reformist factions to exploit some of his statements to imply a shift in his social and revolutionary base. He explained that Western-leaning currents deliberately distort and excerpt Ghalibaf’s positions and statements and praise them outwardly to question continued Revolutionary support for him and his role in the system. Finally, he urged the Parliament Speaker to clearly declare his revolutionary positions to prevent misinterpretation, noting that publishing his article publicly aims to alert rivals’ tactics and affirm Ghalibaf’s standing among the youth. Ferehikhkan: Gasoline economy and the psychology of the crisis Mustafa Anwari, a behavioral governance researcher, warned in a piece in Farheekhtegan, published by the Azad University, against the danger of tying gasoline price reform to riots, arguing that repeating this forecast entrenches a mental state that makes rebellion a reality. He noted that this linkage lacks realism given the opposition’s decline in credibility and failure to mobilize, in addition to historical successful experiences of restructuring government subsidies without sharp crises. The report urged distinguishing between prudent management and precise planning of fuel administration and between pessimistic predictions that turn memories of protests into a psychological weapon in the hands of opponents.

The number of Palestinians killed by Israeli attacks on Gaza since the ceasefire has risen to nearly 1,300, with three more Palestinians injured in a new attack by Israeli settlers near Bethlehem, in the West Bank. The United States offers up to 8.6 million euros for information on senior commanders of Iran's Revolutionary Guards. Iran speaks of 'high-value diplomatic gains' in recent contacts with Pakistan, a mediator with the United States. Iran mocks the US economic war and compares the announcement to Bush's 'mission accomplished' in Iraq. Pakistan points to 'significant progress' in talks with Iran to relaunch dialogue with the United States. The United States announces a broad sanctions package against Iran following the start of its economic offensive. The United States does not rule out 'in any way' resuming attacks on Iran during its economic offensive. Netanyahu congratulates Trump on the sanctions against Iran. Israel bombs a desalination plant in Gaza. Hegseth states that Trump does not rule out using military force against Iran in the Persian Gulf. Hamas accuses Israel of 'continuing its genocide' in Gaza. Iran responds to the United States and says it is 'fully prepared' for the sanctions. Netanyahu states that Iran attempted to assassinate one of his children. The death toll in Gaza from Israeli attacks since October 7, 2023 rises to 73,422. Guterres calls to activate the UN humanitarian mechanism to facilitate transit through the Strait of Hormuz. Trump will call world leaders to ask them to stop engaging with Iran. The United States will sanction 60 entities linked and take measures against five secondary sectors. Trump speaks with Pakistan's top military official before his trip to Tehran. The Israeli army kills a Palestinian girl after firing on civilians in Jabalia. Xi calls for a diplomatic solution to the Middle East conflict during a meeting with the King of Jordan. Saudi Arabia confirms the attack on a vessel in the Red Sea. Trump asserts that 'Iran is collapsing completely' before the start of his 'financial offensive'. A Palestinian dies in another Israeli bombing of Gaza despite the ceasefire. China accuses the US of 'escalating tensions' with Iran and vows to protect its interests. OECD GDP growth accelerated to 0.5% in the second quarter despite Iran's war. Two 17-year-olds die in an Israeli bombing of southern Lebanon despite the ceasefire. Iran announces that the Iranian Foreign Minister will travel to Tehran tomorrow to discuss 'regional issues'. Iran warns that it will not make 'concessions' to the US to end the war. The United States says the war against Iran is in its final phase hours before the start of its new economic offensive. Iran publishes a blacklist of dozens of ships 'violating' its rules regarding the Strait of Hormuz. Israel 'eliminates' a Hamas elite force commander linked to the Nova festival attack. Iran warns that not a single drop of oil will flow from the Persian Gulf if the United States maintains its 'economic war'. The head of Mossad meets with the Syrian Foreign Minister after Israeli bombings. A four-year-old child dies in an Israeli bombing of central Gaza. Israeli troops kill a Palestinian teenager, 14, in a raid in the West Bank. Iran announces a new gas field of 21,000 million cubic meters in South Pars. The head of the Pakistan Army travels to Tehran on Monday to mediate between Iran and the United States. Iran's president says that US attempts to turn his country into 'Venezuela' have failed. Iran will consider as an enemy any countries that join the US economic war. One dead in Israeli attacks in the Gaza Strip despite the ceasefire. Iraq confirms Iran is already granting 'facilities' to its oil exports via Hormuz. Iran states that the health of the three pilots allegedly held in Qatar is not good. Iran asserts that it will face the US 'D-DAY' economically despite the dire situation. Intense Israeli bombardments shake southern Lebanon. Iran authorizes several Iraqi oil tankers to pass through Hormuz at Baghdad's request. The UN warns of potential Israeli war crimes in Gaza and denounces the deterioration of human rights. Iran denounces that new US sanctions violate the sovereignty of other states and international law. Trump denies that his 'economic war' implies a limitation on military operations in the country. von der Leyen calls Israel's settlement plan in the West Bank 'unacceptable'. The United Kingdom, Canada and Australia see Israel's rejection of opening a criminal investigation into the bombardment of World Central Kitchen as 'shameful'. Netanyahu calls Erdogan 'antisemitic dictator' and accuses him of using Syria to attack Israel. Iran reiterates that Trump's economic war is 'the same old nonsense with different thugs': 'We've seen this movie before.' Israel again strikes southern Lebanon in an operation framed as part of its fight against Hizbullah. Abbas urges Europe to take action after its rejection of Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Twelve Arab and Muslim countries condemn Israel's airstrikes on a military base in Syria. Israel bombs a building in occupied Lebanon claiming there were 'several suspects' inside. Turkey asks Interpol to issue an international arrest warrant for Netanyahu. The Israeli army attributes the shooting that killed a minor in the West Bank to a settler. Pezeshkian calls for ending 'today' the war when 'the whole world' recognizes Iran's victory. Belgium joins the countries calling on Israel to halt its settlement plan in East Jerusalem. A 19-year-old Palestinian dies from gunfire during a settler invasion in the West Bank. Iran advocates drawing up a 'plan' against the 'cruel US sanctions' after the threat of an economic war. China reiterates that US economic threats against Iran 'have no place in international law.' Israel again launches attacks against southern Lebanon. Iran states that Tehran must plan how to overcome the 'unjust sanctions' after US threats. The siege of Qusra in the West Bank by Israeli settlers continues for a thirteenth day. The Red Crescent reports three wounded by settlers in southern West Bank and denounces obstacles to its teams. The Israeli army shoots and kills a man in Jenin after an alleged confrontation. The United States warns its allies about its economic war against Iran: 'Either you are with us or you are against us.'

America has now, after the war, chosen a new arena for pressuring Iran: the economic arena. Scott Bessent, the US Treasury Secretary, has unveiled what has been called "the largest financial assault in history" against Iran, and Washington is trying to present this action to public opinion under the grandiose title of an economic D-Day. The choice of this title, rather than being a sign of strength, actually raises an important question: why has the United States, to achieve a goal it could not accomplish in the military arena, once again turned to the same economic tool that it has tested for years and that has failed to force Iran into the behavioral change it seeks? The substance of the matter is not particularly new. Cutting off the access of financial intermediaries linked to Iran to the dollar, targeting banks and institutions cooperating with Tehran, threatening companies and countries that have economic cooperation with Iran, and pressuring China to choose between cooperation with Iran or access to the US financial system are all tools that Washington has used repeatedly over the past years. The difference this time lies more in the rhetoric and the intensity of the propaganda than in the nature of the strategy. The same policy that was introduced a decade ago under the title "maximum pressure" has now been put on the table with new packaging and more warlike vocabulary. But the fundamental issue here is that sanctions can become an effective tool for changing behavior only when the other side has not yet found its alternative routes. Iran, however, is not a country that is facing financial and commercial encirclement for the first time today. Iran has been under banking, oil, insurance, and shipping pressure for many years, and during this same period it has formed a network of indirect methods for trade, money transfer, and oil sales. Naturally, no sanctions come without cost, and the impact of economic pressure on Iran cannot be denied, but the point of contention is something else: can this pressure lead to the same political result Washington expects? Past experience does not offer a very hopeful answer for the United States. Economic pressure can create costs, but there is a great distance between "economic pain" and "political surrender." Sanctions fail when the cost they impose on the other side is less than the cost that side would incur by changing its political position; and precisely this point is one of the fundamental problems of America's strategy against Iran. Washington's mistake is that it still separates economics from politics. It is assumed that if economic pressure increases enough, Tehran will ultimately conclude that continued resistance is no longer possible. But Iran's calculation is not merely economic. In Tehran's view, the issue is not just sanctions, oil exports, or access to the dollar; the issue relates to national security, political independence, and the experience of decades of foreign pressure. This is why each new stage of pressure does not necessarily lead to retreat and can even increase Iran's incentive to develop alternative economic routes and move closer to non-Western partners. In this context, there is also a serious contradiction. Washington, on the one hand, is trying to mobilize the global financial system against Iran and, on the other hand, cannot force the entire world economy to sacrifice its own interests for American policy. The threat to China to choose between Tehran and Washington is a clear example of this very issue. China is not a small, dependent country, but one of the world's largest economies and one of the most important buyers of energy and trading partners of Iran. If the United States wants to extend sanctions pressure from Iran to Iran's economic partners, it will in fact transfer part of the pressure to its own trade and financial networks, and the incentive of other countries to create mechanisms independent of the US financial system will increase. This point has become more important after the war. The United States is no longer facing the pre-war Iran; just as the region is no longer the same region as before. The war showed that military pressure cannot necessarily lead to the political outcome Washington desires, and now the shift of pressure from the military arena to the economic arena, more than being a completely new strategy, can be seen as a sign of changing tools after the failure of the previous tool. If American military power was supposed to force Iran to accept Washington's conditions, why should the US Treasury now have to enter the field and pursue the same goal by threatening banks, companies, and financial intermediaries? Another important issue is that the new sanctions are not being implemented in a political vacuum. The region is redefining its relations after the war. Various countries have increasingly come to the conclusion that complete reliance on a foreign power can carry heavy costs in times of crisis. In such an atmosphere, America's economic pressure may, contrary to its original goal, push more countries toward creating independent financial channels, increasing trade in local currencies, and developing economic relations outside the dollar orbit. This will not happen overnight, but each new wave of sanctions can strengthen the incentive for it. On the other hand, economic pressure is not a one-way street. Iran also has tools in the region to respond and can impose costs on the interests of the United States and its allies. The Strait of Hormuz, the energy market, and the regional trade network are only a few examples of areas that could become arenas of confrontation if pressure intensifies. Therefore, Washington must factor into its calculations the reality that increasing pressure on Iran does not necessarily mean increasing pressure only on Iran; part of this pressure may return to the global energy market, America's allies, and even the economies of Western countries. Even the rhetoric of American officials shows that Washington is still standing at a point between threat and negotiation. When the US Treasury Secretary speaks of giving the other side an opportunity to "correct its behavior," it is clear that the goal is not merely economic punishment; the goal is to create leverage for changing political behavior. But precisely here the main problem becomes apparent: if America's demands are not clear, limited, and negotiable, sanctions will be perceived by Tehran not as an exit route, but as part of a strategy to pressure and weaken the country. Under such conditions, the likelihood of accepting Washington's demands decreases, and the incentive to resist increases. For this reason, the economic D-Day may be less the beginning of a new phase than the continuation of the same cycle in which the United States has been trapped for years: pressure, resistance, intensification of sanctions, creation of alternative routes, more pressure, and ultimately a return to the negotiating table. If Washington really imagines that increasing the intensity of sanctions alone can produce a result that previous economic and military pressures could not create, it will probably face the same miscalculation it made before the war. America's problem may not be a shortage of tools; the problem is an exaggerated belief in the effectiveness of tools. Washington still possesses the dollar, the financial system, and enormous sanctions capacity, but the power of sanctions turns into political power only when the other side believes it has no path other than accepting the sanctioner's demands. Over the past years, Iran has worked precisely to eliminate this very point of pressure. Therefore, if the goal of the economic D-Day is to force Iran into political surrender, the likelihood of its failure is not low; not because sanctions are ineffective, but because sanctions, against a country that has spent years building mechanisms to counter them, are no longer a decisive weapon. The United States may be able to increase the pressure, raise the costs, and make Iran's economic life more difficult, but there is a difference between making conditions more difficult and changing Tehran's strategic calculations. If Washington does not see this difference, the economic D-Day may not be the starting point of America's victory, but rather the beginning of another round of the same cycle that has continued for years and each time, despite heavy costs, has failed to bring Iran to the point of surrender. In that case, America will have once again changed the tool, but not the core problem. MNA

Speaking at a meeting held at the venue of the Central Bank of Iran (CBI) on Wednesday, attended by Minister of Economic Affairs and Finance (MEAF) Madanizadeh and Governor of the Central Bank of Iran (CBI) Abdolnasser Hemmati and also a number of distinguished university lecturers expert n the field of economy, Pezeshkian was briefed on the decision-making process in this financial and banking body. Turning to the special condition in the country caused by the breakout of war, economic blockade and foreign pressures, the president placed special emphasis on the necessity of the continuation of the economic stability and curbing the inflation expectations, noting, “Under such circumstances, managing key markets, especially the foreign exchange and capital market requires complete coordination and interaction between the monetary policymaking body, government, and other economic pillars of the country.” He seized this opportunity to thank both the public and private sectors that managed to overcome difficulties and problems despite sanctions, stressing, “Resolving issues through interaction and negotiation is the prime goal in the country, but at the same time, we will stand firm against economic pressures, as we have done so far and will continue to do so.” With the drastic measures taken in this regard, the United States will not materialize its malicious objectives by exerting economic pressures as it [US] was defeated in the previous two wars imposed against the noble nation of the Islamic Iran. MA/ 6928421

Can Trump's economic war against Iran do what airstrikes and negotiations couldn't? When the U.S. and Israel launched their war against Iran in February, President Trump vowed a swift victory. Now, nearly six months later, and on the heels of a failed 60-day ceasefire deadline that was meant to end the war, the U.S. instead finds itself entangled in a protracted conflict. The war with Iran has battered the global economy, agitated Gulf allies and depleted the U.S. arsenal. It has also weakened President Trump's leverage to pursue his primary war goal, which has shifted from curbing Iran's nuclear ambitions to regime change and is now aimed at prying the Strait of Hormuz out of Iran's grip. It is against this backdrop that U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent unveiled a new sanctions campaign Monday against Iran that intends "to sever every economic lifeline that sustains this tyrannical regime until Tehran stands alone." Bessent put nations that continue doing business with Iran on notice, saying they should "expect to share in the isolation of a withering regime." Past administrations, including Trump's first, have attempted to pressure Iran economically through various sanctions campaigns over the years. But the regime has kept money flowing and the government afloat through various smuggling operations and schemes, according to past U.S. Treasury Department investigations. That has raised questions about whether another punishing economic campaign can really bend — or break — Iran's ruling establishment. "One thing that we've seen over the years is that maximum pressure tends to generate maximum resistance from Iran's side," says Esfandyar Batmanghelidj, chief executive of the London-based Bourse & Bazaar Foundation, a think tank focused on Iran's economy. "What the Trump administration is likely to do is trigger Iranian leaders to resume some of the more aggressive targeting in the region in order to show they're not going to be coerced into basically capitulating to U.S. demands." Efforts to isolate and squeeze Soon after the U.S. and Israel dropped their first bombs on Iran, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps launched retaliatory missiles against several U.S. Gulf allies. Iran is starting to pay a price for those attacks. The United Arab Emirates, which was the biggest importer of Iranian goods worldwide, valued at roughly $21 billion in 2024, according to the World Trade Organization, and a country Iran has used in the past to bypass sanctions, announced recently it's halting all trade and financial transactions with Iran. "Regional countries seem to be taking steps — one step at a time — to make it more difficult for Iran to use those jurisdictions to bypass sanctions, and as a result of the Iranian regime's own decisions to target these countries," says Miad Maleki, a former senior U.S. Treasury official who is currently with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, an organization with close ties to U.S. and Israeli national security establishments. "The landscape of economic sanctions evasion is shifting for Iran." Loading... Former Treasury officials and analysts say the isolation and pressure the Trump administration intends to build on will ultimately come down to whether countries — like China, a longtime customer of Iran's crude oil supply — will cooperate. Not long after Trump's Aug. 19 post on Truth Social vowing to unleash an "ECONOMIC D-DAY" on Iran, a spokesman for China's Foreign Ministry said that China opposed unilateral sanctions and that pressure would not resolve the crisis in Iran. In 2025, China purchased an estimated $31 billion in crude oil from Iran, which accounted for nearly 45% of Iran's government budget, according to a March report from the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. In July, Secretary Bessent said those oil imports plunged by approximately 40% from prewar levels because of the U.S. naval blockade. It's not clear whether Beijing, which has provisionally tapped its oil reserves, will ultimately give in to Trump's demands and cut imports and whether the Trump administration will penalize China if it doesn't. "There has been something of a détente between the U.S. and China after some tit-for-tat where we saw semiconductors, rare earth minerals used in economic warfare," says Adam Szubin, who served for nearly a decade as the director of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control and is now Of Counsel at the law firm Covington & Burling. "It seems like the Trump administration and the Chinese government want to see things quieter, and so we're probably at a moment where there's some hard discussions going on behind the scenes about how much China is willing to do without the U.S. following through on its threat." A lenient stance toward China could amount to a lifeline for Iran's government. A hard-line approach may trigger blowback. "The U.S. is going to be forced to impose sanctions on substantial Chinese entities to make this work," says Richard Nephew, who was the lead sanctions expert on the U.S. negotiating team that reached the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran. "If we do that, then we will lose any chance of a trade deal with China or will be forced to back down on Iran. That said, the blockade is still doing a lot of damage to Iran, so even if sanctions don't have Chinese cooperation, however grudging that may be, there will still be an impact." When asked about possible sanctions against China at his Monday press conference, Secretary Bessent simply said "no one is above the reach of U.S. sanctions," never mentioning China directly. The view from Tehran Many people living in Iran say they're already under tremendous economic pressure due to the U.S. naval blockade and decades of economic sanctions. "My neighbor, his father has cancer and they can't find the medicine he needs," says one 40-year-old woman in Tehran who asked NPR not to identify her for fear of government reprisal. "A couple of the hospitals they visited couldn't admit the old man for chemotherapy because of broken medical equipment they haven't been able to replace since nothing is entering the country." The woman, who works as a baker and caterer, says when she went to the bank over the weekend, she learned that her account was blocked with nearly $1,000 missing. Bank associates told her the bank had been hacked, though didn't say by whom. Her modest grocery haul from a few days ago consisting of laundry detergent, a bag of rice, a couple cartons of milk, lentils, a few bags of pasta and sanitary pads came out to roughly $30 — a big chunk of the average monthly minimum wage of roughly $100. "These are bitter days we're living through," she said in a voice note to NPR. Some Iranian officials haven't shied away from openly discussing the impact of the U.S blockade. Majid-Reza Hariri, the head of the Iran-China Chamber of Commerce, said in an interview this month with Iranian news site Khabar Online that Iran cannot afford to lose maritime trade. He pointed out that shipping costs have soared from $3,000 per container by sea before the blockade to $12,000 after. "The blockade is worse than the war," Hariri said. Trump's economic war has led others within the ruling establishment to strike a more defiant tone. Iran's new security chief Mohsen Rezaei said in an interview on state TV Saturday that Iran would retaliate against countries joining Trump's economic war in a "seismic manner," by targeting tankers using alternate oil shipping routes beyond the Strait of Hormuz so that "not even a single drop of oil will leave from the region." The war is now about who blinks first in the mutually assured economic destruction the U.S. and Iran are pursuing. Tehran believes the chaos it's unleashed in the region and Trump's changing tactics show it has gained the upper hand. "Iran's patience for this type of economic pain is not going to be as much given the fact that they will use the leverage they have at this point to make sure that what Iran has experienced in the last number of decades does not continue," says Foad Izadi, an analyst in Tehran aligned with the government. "Either everybody enjoys the wealth of this region or no one will." Correction Aug. 25, 2026 A previous version of this story incorrectly said the U.S. and Iran bombed Iran. The U.S. and Israel bombed Iran.

A new phase of the war between the United States and Iran has begun, as Washington shifts toward a financial and economic escalation aimed at choking the Iranian economy and tightening pressure on countries and companies that continue to deal with Tehran, while Pakistan intensifies mediation efforts to prevent the conflict from widening and reopen the Hormuz Strait. Pakistan’s move to end the war: The commander of the Pakistani army, Asim Munir, completed a visit to Tehran, accompanied by Interior Minister Mohsen Naghavi, where he met Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, and senior officials. The talks focused on stopping the escalation, reopening the Hormuz Strait, and ending the war through negotiations, in addition to regional stability. Naghavi announced substantial progress in the talks, noting that there was discussion of reviving the Islamabad memorandum that had previously been proposed to resolve the conflict. Munir’s visit marks his third to Tehran as part of Pakistan’s mediation efforts, following a stalled temporary agreement reached in June. Washington expands economic pressure: US Secretary of the Treasury Steve Mnuchin announced a new round of sanctions affecting 60 individuals, entities, and a ship, signaling secondary measures that could target countries and parties that continue trade with Iran, including the potential to exclude them from the dollar-based financial system. Despite the broadening of sanctions, the new list did not include Chinese financial institutions accused of facilitating Iranian oil trade, signaling American sensitivity toward Beijing. The Trump administration aims to use economic pressure to force Tehran to end the war, while reviving the idea of creating conditions to change the Iranian regime after military pressure alone failed to achieve a swift surrender. China: The Key to Sanctions’ Success: China represents the biggest challenge to the American strategy, having accounted for more than 80% of Iranian oil exports in 2025. Beijing asserted that its cooperation with Tehran is in accordance with international law, warning against interference and pledging to take necessary steps to protect its interests. In contrast, Mnuchin avoided naming China directly, stating that Washington wants to give countries and companies time to move away from Iran before broader sanctions are imposed. This caution reflects American concerns about the repercussions of targeting Chinese banks, especially given sensitive economic and trade files between Washington and Beijing. Tehran Signals Escalation: Iran, for its part, reiterated its readiness to face sanctions and warned that Iranian officials would respond militarily to any attempt to target its infrastructure, including American interests and energy corridors. Despite years of sanctions, Tehran has managed to maintain oil exports, but is currently under greater pressure due to intensified naval blockades and reduced oil flows to China. While the war has weakened Iran’s military capabilities and inflicted substantial damage on its economy, Tehran still possesses missiles and unmanned aircraft capable of threatening navigation through the Hormuz Strait. The British Maritime Trade Operations Authority reported on Tuesday that a tanker was struck by an unidentified projectile in the Hormuz Strait, halting about 9 nautical miles northeast of Shinas in Oman.

A short time from now a Basque (Asturian) version of this site will be available. After 47 years, the United States removes Syria from the list of state sponsors of terrorism, following the restoration of relations between the two countries and the progressive lifting of sanctions. In addition, the United States tightens economic pressure on Iran but keeps the military option open. The Pentagon does not rule out carrying out attacks against the Islamic Republic or in the Strait of Hormuz if Tehran provokes the U.S. military. Their statements come after Washington announced a new package of sanctions aimed at those who trade with Iran. The objective is to reduce its revenues from oil sales.

Donald Trump targets energy received by Canada through U.S. territory just hours after announcing he would raise tariffs by up to 50%. In addition, the U.S. Treasury secretary has announced a package of measures to cut Iran’s economic and financial connections with the rest of the world. As six months since the war began approaches, the United States increases its economic pressure on Iran after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent declared the start of a “D-Day.” For his part, U.S. President Donald Trump has labeled Canadian authorities “clowns” this Monday and said that if Ottawa does not “get back on the right track,” the consequences “will be much worse.” Scott Bessent announced a package of measures to cut Iran’s economic and financial ties with the rest of the world, threatening to sanction countries, entities, people, or ships that do not comply with the measures. He also warned states that trade with the Ayatollah regime that they must cut ties if they do not want to risk their relationship with the U.S. Trump threatens Canada after announcing a 50% increase in tariffs on cars and steel. Trump also targets energy received by Canada via U.S. territory just hours after announcing that he would raise tariffs on automobiles, trucks, auto parts, and Canadian-origin steel by up to 50% starting January 1, 2027. “Without the United States, Canada could not survive; that’s where they get all their money from, and due to their current poor management, mainly that of Governor (Prime Minister) Carney and his sidekick, Ontario Governor Doug Ford, they will not be allowed to keep taking advantage,” Trump commented in a social media post. Despite having stated earlier on Monday that “Canada will no longer be treated as a state” of the United States, he continued referring to Carney as governor rather than prime minister. The White House occupant said that “a large part of the electricity, oil, and gas Canada receives is transported through the United States,” only to immediately warn that “someone should make these clowns get back on track, or else the consequences for Canada will be much worse.” A little later, U.S. Vice President JD Vance stated in remarks to a Maine-based media outlet that, “unfortunately for Canadians, they depend on the U.S. economy and, specifically, on the northern state of Maine far more than Maine depends on them.” “So what we are going to do is impose fair rules, force the Canadians to sit down at the table, and give Maine businesses the same treatment that you give your own businesses,” he defended, describing this approach as “basic justice” and emphasizing that in Washington they will have to “be a little firm” to achieve it.

Revising its strategy from military engagement to economic warfare, the United States is poised to implement a new and extensive package of sanctions against Iran. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who described the impending measures as “the single greatest financial offensive ever marshalled against an adversary,” is set to unveil the sanctions, which President Donald Trump has characterized as an “economic D-Day.” This strategic shift aims to isolate Iran economically and coerce its regime, particularly concerning its role in the Strait of Hormuz. The sanctions are designed to target not only Tehran but also any country whose financial institutions, businesses, airports, or government entities provide a lifeline to Iran, employing secondary sanctions to pressure third parties. The renewed pressure comes amidst a complex geopolitical landscape and Iran’s ongoing economic struggles. Iran’s economy has been battered by decades of existing U.S. sanctions, a recent naval blockade, and wartime destruction, leading to high inflation, currency depreciation, and widespread unemployment. The Iranian Rial has plunged to a record low in anticipation of the new sanctions. President Masoud Pezeshkian of Iran has acknowledged the country faces “many problems” and that economic hardship has repeatedly fueled unrest, with protests beginning in late December over the rising cost of living escalating into broader anti-government demonstrations. Pezeshkian has stated that Iran is engaged in a “full-scale economic, military and security war” and blamed President Trump for imposing “the most crushing and terrifying sanctions.” The United States’ approach has evolved significantly. After a period of direct military confrontation that began in late February 2026, President Trump has pivoted to economic isolation over battlefield escalation, drawing lessons from historical conflicts and facing limited domestic support for prolonged overseas military action. The Treasury Department has already been escalating sanctions enforcement, targeting individuals and entities supporting Iran’s military procurement and missile networks. These actions are part of a broader strategy to disrupt financial networks associated with Iran and counter its alleged support for terrorism and pursuit of nuclear capabilities. Iran, however, has vowed to retaliate against any country that cooperates with the new U.S. sanctions. The United Arab Emirates, Iran’s largest Middle Eastern trading partner, has already announced an end to all trade with Iran, a move Tehran believes was coordinated with Washington. This development highlights the global impact of U.S. sanctions, as other nations face the choice of maintaining economic ties with Iran or risking penalties from the United States. China, a significant trading partner, has previously asserted its right to ignore U.S. warnings over Iranian oil imports, deploying a statute to render U.S. sanctions ineffective within its jurisdiction. The effectiveness of these sanctions remains a subject of debate. While the U.S. aims to cripple Iran economically and sever all financial lifelines, Iran has demonstrated a capacity for endurance, developing workarounds and informal trade networks over decades of sanctions. The impact of the ongoing U.S. naval blockade on Iranian ports and the broader economic strain are significant, but Iran is structurally conditioned for resilience. The question of whether this economic pressure can be made decisive, particularly given China’s willingness to continue purchasing Iranian oil, remains central to assessing the strategy’s ultimate success. The sanctions package is the latest in a long history of U.S. economic measures against Iran, which began in the early 1980s following the Iranian Revolution. These sanctions have been expanded over the years in response to Iran’s nuclear program, alleged support for terrorism, and human rights violations. The United Nations Security Council also imposed multilateral sanctions, though most were lifted under the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). However, the U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018 led to the reimposition and expansion of American sanctions, culminating in the current “economic D-Day” offensive. The situation has also been exacerbated by regional conflicts and Iran’s internal challenges. Iran has been accused of funding terrorism and pursuing nuclear capabilities, leading to international concern and driving much of the sanctions regime. The recent “2026 Iran war,” involving U.S. and Israeli strikes, has further intensified pressures on an already fragile economy. While Iran claims the war has caused substantial damage, its economy has developed mechanisms to function under constraint, making a short-term collapse less likely. Global Affairs Desk at The Chenab Times covers international developments, global diplomacy, and foreign policy issues through fact-based reporting, explainers, and analytical pieces. The desk focuses on major geopolitical events, diplomatic engagements, and international trends, with an emphasis on verified information, multiple perspectives, and contextual understanding of global affairs.

byFilip Timotija08/24/26 04:41 PM ET Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Monday that the Trump administration’s economic pressure on Iran is hurting the regime “the most right now” but did not rule out the U.S. military resuming airstrikes if necessary. “If we need to use kinetic strikes, we’ll use them. If Iran is foolish enough to overplay their hand or mess with the American military, we’ll do what we need to do,” Hegseth told reporters in Oshkosh, Wis., as part of the Pentagon’s Arsenal of Freedom tour. “But economic pressure hurts them the most right now.” The Pentagon chief’s remarks came hours after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessentpreviewed the new economic pressure campaignagainst Tehran as the conflict has reached a stalemate after six months of hostilities. Bessent warned countries to cut off any financial ties with Iran or risk being cut off from the U.S. dollar system, discussing the new Operation Economic Outcast but offering few specifics. “Well, we are giving everyone the opportunity to remedy bad behavior, why would I want to blow up the global financial system?” Bessent told a reporter Monday when asked about specifics. The Treasury secretary said President Trump is making calls to world leaders while officials from the Defense, Treasury and State departments are connecting with their counterparts and demanding action in severing ties with Iran. “I would expect that very quickly, if they do not respond, then you will see the ramifications of their actions,” Bessent said. Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, Iran’s parliamentary speaker, fired back Monday at the U.S. over the rollout of the economic pressure campaign. “Americans know that no one buys their bombast; the United States is not in an economic position to further restrict its relations with other countries,” Qalibafwrote on social media. “Iran’s trading partners, both in the media and through messages sent to us, have made it clear that they don’t take these statements into account anywhere,” the Iranian official continued. Hegseth, meanwhile, told reporters Monday that the application of more economic pressure ensures that the “only choice” Iran has is “to come to the table and actually talk about their nuclear program, which is what the president has demanded.” The Defense secretary touted the U.S. naval blockade and claimed that the U.S. controls the Strait of Hormuz. “Iran can’t run anything through; we can. The world economy realizes that, and so they made a big bet on controlling it, and they can’t,” Hegseth told reporters. Five vessels crossed the strait on Sunday, lower than the 25 successful crossings on Saturday and 21 on Friday, according toship-tracking firm Kpler. The U.S. military has redirected 71 commercial ships, disabled three and boarded another two since resuming the naval blockade in the Arabian Sea, the U.S. Central Commandwrote on social mediaMonday. More than 40 vessels carrying humanitarian aid have been allowed to pass. “Ultimately, their economy is in a spiral,” Hegseth said. “They also know that we control the Strait of Hormuz, that our blockade is ironclad, and that oil is flowing through, ultimately.”

US threats to impose "the toughest sanctions in history" to force Iran to buckle to its demands after nearly six months of war have raised the prospect of a new round of escalation in the Gulf. How could Iran respond to the economic pressure? Can Iran stop more oil from leaving the Middle East? Mohsen Rezaei, the former Revolutionary Guards chief and secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, has already threatened to shut down oil exports — one of Tehran's main strategic approaches since the war began on February 28. "If the economic war continues, not a single drop of oil will be exported, neither through the Strait of Hormuz nor from anywhere in the Persian Gulf," he said. Iranian attacks and threats to shipping have already stopped most traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, largely shutting down a waterway that carried around a fifth of global energy before the conflict. Although some oil tankers have been moving through the strait in recent weeks, volumes remain very low and on Sunday Iran blacklisted 45 tankers it says failed to comply with the rules it wants to impose on Hormuz shipping. Missile, drone or speedboat attacks on tankers trying to leave the Gulf have repeatedly pushed up oil prices during the six months of the conflict. Meanwhile, Tehran's Houthi allies have restricted Red Sea shipping with attacks and threats to blockade all Saudi Arabian shipping, which carries crude to Asia through the Bab el-Mandeb strait past the group's Yemeni stronghold. While the attacks initially stopped only some vessels, with more than half still getting through in mid-August, the situation is difficult for shippers, and Chinese shipping companies are now rerouting away from Bab el-Mandeb, according to industry sources. Further attacks, such as the one that targeted a vessel off the main Saudi Red Sea oil terminal at Yanbu on Monday or a drone strike near the Suez Canal in early August, could raise oil market anxiety levels and crude oil prices. Are Gulf states still at risk of an Iranian attack? Iran has threatened to retaliate against any neighbors who take part in US efforts to strangle the country's economy with "earthquake" force. It has targeted Gulf states and Jordan repeatedly during the war, mostly focusing on US bases but also hitting energy infrastructure and other targets. Any intensified attacks on upstream oil or gas facilities could further drive up energy prices in ways that inflict political damage on the Trump administration and may be harder to reverse than attacks on shipping. Targeting power and water desalination plants in the hot, parched region would also pose a major risk to US-aligned Gulf monarchies that function as significant financial hubs for the global economy. Can Iran attack Western countries directly? While Western countries are beyond the range of Iran's main munitions, the Revolutionary Guards have historically been willing to find alternative ways of attack. On Monday, Britain said Iran-linked hackers had shut down a small electricity station, while US officials have said Tehran was likely behind cyberattacks on water plants in Minnesota. Iran has not commented on those allegations. Western security services have also accused Iran of recruiting local people to stage attacks or attempt assassinations in the West. Iran has denied that.

Democracy Dies in Darkness National SecurityChevron right 7 min 222More article actions By Cate Cadell China sharply condemned the sweeping new sanctions campaign against Iran and its trading partners announced by the United States, vowing retaliation against measures that would target countries doing business with Tehran. Subscribe for unlimited access to The Post You can cancel anytime. Subscribe Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Monday that President Donald Trump is contacting unspecified world leaders as part of an effort to “economically asphyxiate” Iran’s economy and force an “endgame” to the drawn-out conflict in the Middle East. China is Iran’s A Treasury Still, the move rankled Beijing, which in recent months has sent envoys to Washington to lay the groundwork for a meeting between Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping at the White House in late September. “China will do everything necessary to firmly safeguard its rights and interests,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian said Tuesday, criticizing what he described as “illicit unilateral sanctions that have no basis in international law.” Analysts say the rebuke is a warning sign that further actions could derail the fragile truce built between Washington and Beijing. “Washington has a difficult needle to thread: isolating Iran economically while trying to keep U.S.-China relations stable,” said Wendy Cutler, a former U.S. trade negotiator and now senior vice president at the Asia Society Policy Institute. “Depending on how far the U.S. goes, it’s not out of the question that Beijing would threaten to cancel or postpone Xi’s planned U.S. visit next month,” she said. China is the primary buyer of Iran’s oil, importing an estimated 1.4 million barrels a day before the war, largely through an unreported shadow network of hundreds of tankers operating outside normal legal channels. Economically isolating Iran from that support would be difficult, requiring far-reaching sanctions on Chinese banks and refineries, and perhaps including military and investigative resources to disrupt an ever-shifting network of hundreds of Chinese-linked shipping firms and shell companies spread across Asia and the Middle East. Bessent on Monday said the “economic D-Day” sanctions will be “the single greatest financial offensive ever” against Iran and will target countries that support Iran’s economy to sever the “economic lifeline that sustains Tehran.” He suggested that China would not be exempt from the penalties. “If they facilitate transactions and are part of the ecosystem that turns Iranian oil into money, into repression, they will be targeted. … We want to make clear here today that no one is above the reach of U.S. sanctions.” Without naming Beijing, Bessent said the U.S. Treasury is prepared to engage in “frank discussions” with relevant countries to shut down Iran’s oil sector. Lin, the Foreign Ministry spokesman, defended China’s cooperation with Tehran on Tuesday, saying it is “conducted within the framework of international law” and “should not be disrupted.” Chinese banks play a key role in the Iranian oil trade, including financing smaller refineries that purchase and process Iranian oil. Asked directly on Monday whether the U.S. would target Chinese banks, Bessent warned that no group was out of reach but offered that “the best way to engage with countries is through quiet diplomacy.” In an earlier action in April, Bessent said he had sent letters to two unnamed “larger” Chinese banks warning they could face secondary sanctions if Iranian money was found flowing through their accounts. Days later, the Treasury Department placed sanctions on Hengli Petrochemical, one of China’s largest independent refineries, for buying Iranian oil. Beijing’s Commerce Ministry responded aggressively, taking the unprecedented step in May of ordering Chinese banks and companies not to comply with U.S. sanctions on five refiners, calling them “unjustified extraterritorial” laws that “shall not be recognized, implemented or complied with.” Beijing has long sought to build a parallel financial system that reduces its exposure to the dollar and U.S. sanctions. But its arsenal of countermeasures — including the blocking measure from May — has limits. China’s government can shield companies from penalties at home but cannot insulate them from losing access to the dollar, global insurance or U.S. markets. “China’s appetite for risk in opposing American [sanctions] will depend on how confident they are that collateral damage to the Chinese economy can be contained and U.S.-China relations kept from dangerous escalatory spirals,” said Isaac Kardon, adjunct professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. Beyond banks and refineries, Washington has already attempted this year to crack down on the shadow maritime network trading in oil and chemicals between China and Iran, imposing sanctions on dozens of vessels and shipping entities, and seizing sanctioned ships carrying Iranian oil. But analysts say those efforts represent a game of maritime whack-a-mole, as targeted networks adapt quickly. In one such raid in April, when U.S. forces commandeered the Tehran-bound ship Touska, which had docked at a Chinese port known as a loading point for chemicals used as rocket-fuel precursors, Trump said U.S. authorities found “a gift from China” on the ship, “which wasn’t very nice.” That seizure temporarily spiked oil prices but did little to upset relations between Beijing and Washington, as the two leaders met with friendly fanfare the following month. But Bessent’s new maximum pressure sanctions campaign could have deeper impacts, analysts say, beyond just a canceled summit. “In light of the retaliatory toolbox Beijing has been building in recent years, it has many levers to pull to harm U.S. interests, including export restrictions, sanctions on U.S. companies, and slowing down or even halting U.S. agricultural purchases,” said Cutler, the former U.S. trade negotiator. * What readers are saying The comments reflect a strong skepticism and criticism of President Donald Trump's approach to foreign policy, particularly regarding China. Many commenters express doubt about Trump's ability to influence China, highlighting China's economic power and strategic position. There... Show more This summary is AI-generated. AI can make mistakes and this summary is not a replacement for reading the comments. Comments 222 NewsletterWeekdays The 7 Catch up quickly with a rundown of the 7 most important and interesting stories. Paid Promoted Stories !pixel

Turkey pushes an arrest warrant for Netanyahu while sitting on 700,000 terror investigations and documented torture cases of its own. Just because Turkey is a member state in NATO doesn't mean it is protected in Syria. Israel allegedly struck Syria's... Erdogan has rolled out a red carpet to Damascus and built a web of interests too dense for airstrikes alone... US President Donald Trump | Photo: EPA, AFP The US administration is changing course against Iran. After months of military blows,President Trumphas returned to the tool associated with his first term, maximum economic pressure, designed to force Tehran to open the Strait of Hormuz and agree to a resolution on the nuclear issue. Trump called it an economic "D-Day," a grandiose label for an ambitious move, but one that is fundamentally sound. The shift toward economic pressure is also an admission of the limits of military force in subduing Tehran. Iran has been hit hard, but the regime still stands, and for now, there are no signs of increased public unrest. At the same time, the war is hurting Trump's popularity and unsettling the global energy market, months before the midterm elections. Another logic at play is Trump's basic instinct, which views economic warfare as a central tool for advancing his foreign policy goals, as evidenced by the tariff policy he has pursued since taking office. And yet, despite appearances, this is the wisest move available. The Iranian regime is more extreme than ever, but also weaker than ever. The regime in its current form will never surrender, and therefore the only way to deal with it is to use every relevant tool to replace it, chief among them the economic one. Tehran can withstand an external threat, but the internal threat is the one it truly fears. Paradoxically, the regime is far more troubled by deepening American economic pressure than by another military campaign, and evidence of this can be found in the unusual remark by Iran's president that "capital and money are extremely sensitive to risk, and we have to remove this risk from the country," a thinly veiled hint at the need to reach a diplomatic agreement now. The numbers are hard to argue with. Annual inflation reached 66% in July, and food and beverage prices jumped by nearly 130%. The economy is expected to shrink by about 5.5% in 2026. According to the regime's own figures, the minimum wage is enough to cover only about eight days of living expenses. More than a million jobs have been lost in the first three months of the war. And oil exports have dropped by about 86% from pre-war levels. In other words, Iran is suffering simultaneously from recession, extreme inflation, wage erosion, job losses, and a collapse in its most important source of revenue. These are the grim starting conditions with which Iran enters the American economic pressure campaign, and they are far worse than the starting conditions it faced, not very successfully, during the first Trump administration. Adding to the problems, the United Arab Emirates has decided to suspend trade and financial activity with Iran. This is a severe blow. Before the war, more than 30% of Iranian imports passed through the UAE, which for years served as a key hub for re-exports, money transfers, and sanctions evasion on Iran's behalf. This distress explains the palpable anxiety in Tehran and the regime's efforts to deter the US and its partners from tightening the pressure. Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, warned that Iran would respond "with the force of an earthquake" against countries that join the economic campaign. At the same time, theFinancial Timesreported that Iranian forces examined striking American military assets in Bulgaria and Cyprus, should Washington resume its military campaign. On the domestic front, the regime is acting far more cautiously than usual. The strict hijab law remains frozen, partly out of fear that enforcing it would reignite the protests, and authorities are for now settling for selective and indirect enforcement. The Iranian regime displays toughness abroad and relative softness at home, mindful that the real threat to its existence does not come from the American Fifth Fleet but from the fifth district of Tehran. It is difficult to predict whether the pressure will bring about change in the short term, and it is doubtful whether anything can shift Iran's defiant stance regardless. The regime is still capable of suppressing its citizens and harming its rivals, and further military blows may yet be required. And yet, Trump has found Tehran's central point of weakness, the economy and its ability to provide its citizens a life of dignity. In doing so, the president is paving the most effective path toward toppling the regime in the coming years, drawing inspiration, fittingly, from Democratic President Bill Clinton's famous 1992 campaign line, "It's the economy, stupid." Turkey pushes an arrest warrant for Netanyahu while sitting on 700,000 terror investigations and documented torture cases of its own. Just because Turkey is a member state in NATO doesn't mean it is protected in Syria. Israel allegedly struck Syria's... Erdogan has rolled out a red carpet to Damascus and built a web of interests too dense for airstrikes alone... Analysis Archaeology Blogpost Business & Finance Culture Exclusive Explainer Environment Features Health In Brief Jewish World Judea and Samaria Lifestyle Cyber & Internet Sports Diplomacy Iran & The Gulf Gaza Strip Politics Shopping Terms of use Privacy Policy Submissions Contact Us The first issue of Israel Hayom appeared on July 30, 2007. Israel Hayom was founded on the belief that the Israeli public deserves better, more balanced and more accurate journalism. Journalism that speaks, not shouts. Journalism of a different kind. And free of charge. All rights reserved toIsrael HayomHosted by sPD.co.il All rights reserved toIsrael HayomHosted by sPD.co.il [contact-form-7 id=”508379″ html_id=”isrh_form_Newsletter_en” title=”newsletter_subscribe”] All rights reserved toIsrael HayomHosted by sPD.co.il