Several international relations experts have commented on US President Donald Trump’s decision to postpone strikes on Iranian power plants and infrastructure for five days.
This delay comes after he threatened yesterday to “obliterate” Iran’s energy grid unless the Strait of Hormuz was reopened within 48 hours.
Expert analysis: A tactical retreat to soothe global markets
Al Bashir Mohamed Lahsen, a researcher in international relations at the University of Seville in Spain, stated that President Trump’s statements since the outbreak of the war have been characterized by confusion and contradiction, making it difficult to rely on them or predict their trajectory.
Speaking to Al-Masry Al-Youm, Lahsen explained that Trump’s retreat from his threats came after realizing that Iran was prepared to retaliate in kind by targeting energy facilities in Israel and the Gulf states. He noted that this reversal can be interpreted as an attempt to contain the escalation and soothe global energy markets.
The cost of defense and the strategy of attrition
He emphasized that this step contributed temporarily to lowering oil prices, despite failing to end the war according to the U.S. vision. Since the conflict began on February 28, Iran has launched thousands of low-cost “suicide drones” and ballistic missiles, forcing the U.S. and Israel to use multi-million dollar interceptors to protect civilian cities.
Lahsen noted that Iran, despite the losses it has sustained, still possesses strong leverage—most notably the exhaustion of U.S.and Israeli missile defense systems, the cost of which far exceeds the cost of offensive missiles.
Maritime corridors and the risk of regional spillover
He explained that Tehran also relies on the “maritime corridors” card, primarily the Strait of Hormuz, to pressure the global economy. He pointed out that any further escalation could prompt other parties, such as the Houthis, to expand the scope of tension across Bab al-Mandab.
He continued by stating that Iran appears to be in a position that allows it to hold out militarily, based on a long-term strategy of attrition. He added: “Surviving the shock of the initial strikes and the loss of some of its leaders has granted it a greater ability to reorganize its cards and continue the confrontation.”
Regional mediation: Turkey, Egypt, and Pakistan open new channels
Dr. Raslan Ibrahim, Professor of International Relations and Political Science at the State University of New York, stated that the recent statements from Washington followed mediation efforts led by three regional countries—Turkey, Egypt, and Pakistan—which handled the transmission of messages between Tehran and Washington.
He explained that these developments indicate the existence of indirect communication channels between the two sides, which enhances the chances of reaching a political settlement.
The war of narratives and a window of hope for stability
These statements reflect preliminary indicators of the possibility of starting negotiations that could lead to ending the war, while also contributing to reducing the state of anxiety dominating global financial and energy markets.
Dr. Ibrahim further noted that statements issued during times of conflict are inseparable from the “war of narratives” and psychological warfare between the conflicting parties. He emphasized that Iranian reactions fall within the same framework, as Washington, Tehran, and Tel Aviv all seek to direct political and media messages that serve their positions in the conflict.
He concluded that the most prominent effect of these developments is giving the markets a measure of reassurance and opening a window of hope for an agreement, though the course of the crisis remains dependent on the seriousness of the parties to negotiate on the ground.
