By admin 
President Trump’s decision to resume and escalate the war in Iran makes even less sense than his decision four and a half months ago to start the war in the first place. More jarring still, Trump announced on Monday that he would also take control of the Strait of Hormuz and charge a 20 percent toll to all ships passing through—which, besides defying credulity, blows to bits the tiny shred of moral claim that he had held against Iran’s government.
Read more Brett Kavanaugh May Have Accidentally Opened the Door to New Gun Restrictions
On Tuesday, just hours later, Trump walked back his demand for a toll—perhaps he was advised that it could double global shipping costs (if it could be enforced)—but supplied no details on how the U.S. would take control of the waterway. Nonetheless, both declarations, as well as the backpedaling, amplify what has been loud and clear for some time—that Trump makes major decisions off the cuff, often with no discussion of their implications, and that nothing he says should be taken seriously.
The war with Iran has been back on for a while now. The ceasefire, signed on June 17, was always shaky and collapsed entirely three weeks later, on July 6, when, in response to Iranian attacks on merchant ships, U.S. forces attacked 80 Iranian military targets, including more than 60 small boats manned by the Revolutionary Guard, and, the next day, struck 90 more targets, including air defense systems, missile and drone storage sites, and supply lines along Iran’s coast.
Then, on Tuesday, Trump restored the naval blockade on Iran, which he had lifted as part of last month’s ceasefire.
A statement issued by Central Command claimed the purpose of all this was to “degrade” Iran’s ability to attack commercial ships in the strait and various installations inside allied countries in the region.
But “degrade” is one of those slippery words in military jargon, signifying that an attack would do a lot of damage but acknowledging, sotto voce, that nobody knows how much damage—or, more to the point, what effect the damage might have on the course of the war, much less the likelihood of victory.
To put it another way: If striking more than 13,000 targets in the 38 days from Feb. 28 to April 7 wasn’t enough to accomplish any of Trump’s stated war aims (re-obliterating Iran’s nuclear materials, destroying its military, or changing its regime), it’s hard to imagine how hitting a few hundred more would tip the scales.
In some ways, the war to date has been counterproductive. The killing of the entire top echelon of Iran’s leadership on the first day opened the way for the Revolutionary Guard—much more militant, oppressive, and anti-Western—to take full control of the country. The bombing of many civilian structures—including a girls’ school (an accident, but no American has yet taken responsibility or apologized)—has only hardened many Iranians’ loyalty to the regime or at least deadened some dissidents’ hopes that Washington would be on their side.
Trump’s main goal now is to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, the transit for a quarter of the world’s petroleum. It’s worth recalling that, before Trump started the war, the strait was free and open—not even an issue of discussion. Now it is the fulcrum of Iran’s leverage in a strategy of “asymmetric warfare.” Iran will never blunt the massive edge in firepower held by the United States and Israel, but it can exert tremendous counterforce as long as it controls the Strait of Hormuz—and it doesn’t take much for it to keep control. Just a few drones or missiles or dynamite-packed small boats can dissuade shipping companies from entering the narrow waterway.
Read more ICE Backs Down—For Now
A month ago, in announcing the pending ceasefire, Trump wrote on social media, “I hereby fully authorize the toll-free opening of the Strait of Hormuz. Ships of the World, start your engines. Let the oil flow!” Trump’s claim was pretense—the Iranians still controlled the transit—and it appeared even more out of whack with reality when the U.S.–Iran memorandum of understanding, the 14-point document that set the ceasefire’s terms, were published a few days later. On the opening of the strait, the MOU obligated Iran only to “make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage of commercial ships with no charge for 60 days only.” This suggested that Iran would remain in charge of the strait—a privilege it did not enjoy before the war but that Trump and his underqualified negotiators were now enshrining.
The Iranians cite this aspect of the MOU to justify their attacks on certain commercial vessels. Their rationale is dubious and their behavior reprehensible, but they are right in criticizing the U.S. and Israel for failing to live up to other articles in the document (e.g., the U.S. lifting frozen Iranian assets and Israel observing a ceasefire in Lebanon).
Here is where Trump’s recent statements only worsen our standing in the war—and the world. On Monday morning, in an interview on Fox & Friends, he said, “We will become guardians of the strait. We’re going to hit [Iran] very hard and keep the strait, and probably run it.” As part of this guardianship, the U.S. will charge a toll of “20 percent on all cargo shipped.”
First, he did not explain how the U.S. would take control of the strait, mainly because there is no way it can, short of stationing ground troops along its shores on Iranian soil, which Trump isn’t likely to do, in part because his “base” would go nuts.
But the assertion of tolls, however briefly advocated, is more telling. The ironies are multiple. First, in late March, when Iran talked about charging a toll for ships entering the strait, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that the idea of anyone—not just Iran—turning the strait into a “tolling system” would be “illegal” and “dangerous to the world.”
More devastating, Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, mocked Trump’s plan to charge tolls. “POTUS is absolutely right,” he wrote on social media. “Whoever provides secure and safe passage of commercial vessels through the Strait of Hormuz should be compensated for this service. Iran has always been the GUARDIAN of the Strait and will remain so FOREVER.” But, he added, Iran will charge less than Trump would, noting, “20% is of course too much. We will be fair.”
Trump backpedaled on the toll plan one day after posting it, but, like many of his offhand remarks, it revealed his true state of mind. Rubio and others might tout the fine principle of free passage on open seas and even claim that this is why the U.S. needs to renew its military pressure on Iran. But to Trump, everything is all about money and almost nothing but money. The war with Iran, as he now sees it, is over who controls the strait and who collects the money from that control. He may have been dissuaded from imposing a toll, but this is the way he thinks, and this is how he defines U.S. interests. The old notion that the U.S. acts to preserve certain ideals—which, yes, serve its own interests but also preserve a system that benefits others—is no longer believed by the rest of the world. Trump has told them, after all, that he—the man twice elected to be president of the United States—doesn’t believe it either.
Read more A Judge Officially Confirmed What Everyone Knows About Todd Blanche and Donald Trump