By the numbers: 100 days of the US-Israel war on Iran
Sunday marks 100 days into a war that US President Donald Trump said was going to finish “very fast”. Despite a ceasefire agreed on April 8, the Strait of Hormuz remains largely closed, sporadic fir…
Sunday marks 100 days into a war that US President Donald Trump said was going to finish “very fast”. Despite a ceasefire agreed on April 8, the Stra
Read Full Story at Al Jazeera →Why This Matters
The prolonged closure of the Strait of Hormuz—even amid a declared ceasefire—underscores how quickly localized conflicts can escalate into global economic disruptions. With 30% of the world’s seaborne oil passing through the strait, the persistent stalemate isn’t just a military standoff; it’s a test of whether temporary truces can hold when economic leverage remains in play.
Background Context
The Strait of Hormuz has been a flashpoint for decades, but the current crisis reflects a shift in asymmetric warfare tactics, where naval blockades and proxy engagements now overshadow traditional battlefield confrontations. Prior to the recent flare-up, regional tensions had already pushed insurance premiums for Gulf shipping to historic highs, signaling that risk perception, not just physical threats, was reshaping maritime trade.
What Happens Next
The next critical phase will hinge on whether the ceasefire holds long enough to allow backchannel diplomatic efforts to gain traction, or if sporadic engagements escalate into sustained hostilities. Observers should watch for signs of whether Iran’s Revolutionary Guard shifts from direct confrontation to proxy attacks via allied militias, which could prolong the impasse without a clear path to de-escalation.
Bigger Picture
This conflict illustrates a broader trend where economic choke points—rather than territorial gains—are becoming the primary battlegrounds of modern warfare. As nations with strategic chokepoints (like the Strait of Malacca or Panama Canal) grow increasingly assertive, the world may face a future where wars are fought not for land or ideology, but for control over the arteries of global commerce.
