US President Donald Trump faced a choice that could determine the further course of the war with Iran and change the situation throughout the Middle East. American and Israeli officials believe that Washington has two realistic paths left: agree to a ten-day ceasefire proposed by mediators or move with Israel to a significantly larger military campaign against Tehran.
A final decision has not yet been made in the White House. However, Axios sources claim that a choice may be made in the next few days. The possibility of continuing the current exhausting war without a clear political goal is diminishing: American airstrikes have failed to restore normal shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, Iran continues to attack commercial ships and American facilities, and the region’s economy is suffering increasingly heavy losses.
At the same time, Washington is acting on two fronts. The Trump administration is considering a diplomatic proposal from Qatar, Egypt, Pakistan, and other mediators, but is simultaneously deploying dozens of combat aircraft and aerial refuelers to the region. Israeli sources report that the IDF is on high alert in case the war expands into a full-scale coordinated operation.
Two scenarios Trump is choosing between
The first option involves a temporary halt to hostilities for ten days. During this time, the US and Iran must restore movement through the Strait of Hormuz and attempt to salvage a temporary agreement previously reached but effectively destroyed after new attacks on commercial ships and the resumption of American strikes.
The second scenario is a transition to a large joint campaign by the US and Israel. According to Axios, this is not about isolated retaliatory strikes, but an attempt to inflict such military damage on Iran that the country’s leadership will accept American terms. However, neither the White House, the Pentagon, nor the Israeli government has officially announced a decision to start such an operation. Reports of campaign preparations are based on information from American and Israeli officials, some of whom speak on condition of anonymity.
| Possible scenario | Main goal | Primary risk |
|---|---|---|
| Ten-day ceasefire | Open the Strait of Hormuz and return parties to negotiations | Iran and the US may use the pause to regroup, after which hostilities will resume |
| Joint US-Israel operation | Use military pressure to force Tehran to accept Washington’s terms | Expansion of the war to Israel, Gulf countries, Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, and the Red Sea |
| Continuation of the current campaign | Weaken Iran without sharply expanding the war | Protracted conflict, new losses, rising oil prices, and lack of clear results |
American officials acknowledge that the space for a third option—a prolonged war of medium intensity—is practically disappearing. For ten consecutive nights, American planes have struck Iran, but Tehran has retained the ability to restrict movement through the Strait of Hormuz and attack ships.
For Trump, this is becoming not only a military but also a domestic political problem. He has repeatedly stated that the United States has achieved victory over Iran, but ongoing attacks, the death of American servicemen, and rising fuel prices contradict claims of a completed campaign.
What regional mediators propose
The proposal for a ten-day ceasefire was conveyed to Washington and Tehran by representatives of Qatar, Egypt, Pakistan, and other regional states. Reuters confirmed that Iran received the relevant document and is considering the possibility of a temporary halt to the war to restore the agreement reached in the previous month.
The plan provides for the cessation of attacks, the resumption of movement along two main routes of the Strait of Hormuz, and the start of negotiations on a long-term shipping order.
The southern route passes through the territorial waters of Oman. Under the proposed scheme, Iran must cease attacks on ships using this corridor. The northern route is closer to the Iranian coast. To open it, the US must ease or lift the naval blockade imposed against Iran.
Within ten days, the parties must agree on the rules for the further passage of commercial ships. One of the options being considered provides for allowing Iran to receive limited fees for specific services—security, environmental control, and navigational support.
This is fundamentally different from Tehran’s demands to charge a general fee for passage through the strait. As a possible model, mediators are considering the Strait of Malacca, where coastal states receive money for separate services but do not impose a transit fee. The creation of a joint fund with the participation of the International Maritime Organization is also being discussed.
Diplomatic efforts involve Qatar’s Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, Qatari envoy Ali Al-Tawadi, Pakistan’s army commander Field Marshal Asim Munir, Egypt’s Foreign Minister Badr Abdel Aty, and Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi.
Why the dispute over the Strait of Hormuz is almost insoluble
The main contradiction is not just about shipping safety, but about who will actually control the Strait of Hormuz after the war ends.
Washington demands that Tehran publicly declare that the strait is open for international shipping and that commercial ships will no longer be attacked. The Iranian side, on the contrary, insists that the opening of the strait, its demining, and regulation of movement should be exclusively within Iran’s competence.
Iran’s representative to the UN, Amir Saeid Iravani, stated that attempts by external states to establish their own order of management of the strait would violate the temporary agreement and lead to further tension. Tehran also promotes the idea of charging passing ships, although for decades the Strait of Hormuz has been considered by the international community as a crucial international maritime route.
Before the war began, about one-fifth of the world’s oil and natural gas trade passed through Hormuz. After the effective halt of a significant portion of shipping, energy prices have sharply increased, and Gulf countries have begun seeking alternative export routes.
NANews — Israel News notes that the dispute over the strait has gradually turned into a struggle for the future security architecture of the entire Persian Gulf. If the US agrees to a special role for Iran, Tehran will be able to present this as recognition of its regional power. If Washington tries to completely deprive Iran of control, achieving this without a prolonged military operation will be extremely difficult.
Why the previous ceasefire collapsed
The United States and Iran have already reached temporary agreements. In April, Trump agreed to a two-week ceasefire, which was then extended. In June, the parties signed another preliminary agreement providing for the cessation of war and the opening of the Strait of Hormuz. However, a permanent peace treaty was not concluded.
After new attacks on ships, Trump declared the previous ceasefire over, although he agreed to continue negotiations. The American side claimed that the attacks could have been organized by a radical group within the Iranian system, not fully controlled by the central leadership. For the White House, this explanation was not a reason to refrain from retaliatory strikes.
The situation highlights another problem: even if Iranian negotiators sign an agreement, Washington doubts that all regime structures, including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, will comply with it.
Iranian Foreign Ministry representative Esmail Baghaei confirmed receiving new proposals through mediators but refused to disclose their content. At the same time, he stated that the Iranian armed forces would continue to respond to American strikes. Thus, Tehran has not yet demonstrated a willingness to cease fire without additional political and economic guarantees.
The US is building up forces, Israel is preparing for war expansion
Simultaneously with diplomatic negotiations, the United States is strengthening its military presence in the Middle East. According to Axios, dozens of fighters and refueling aircraft have been sent to the region. Reuters separately confirmed that the deployment of additional aviation forces began even before the latest Iranian attacks on American servicemen.
Refueling aircraft are of particular importance. They allow American fighters and bombers to stay in the air longer, strike targets deep within Iran’s territory, and conduct prolonged operations without the need to station all aviation directly near the combat zone.
The US Central Command stated that the latest series of strikes targeted Iran’s military command centers, naval forces, missile and drone launch positions, and air defense systems. The goal of the operation, Washington says, is to protect commercial shipping and punish the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps units for attacks on American servicemen.
However, after ten consecutive nights of strikes, Iran retained the ability to attack ships. On July 21, Iranian forces struck a tanker in the Strait of Hormuz, forcing the crew to abandon the ship. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps claimed responsibility for two more attacks on ships carried out the day before.
This poses an unpleasant question for the Trump administration: can an air campaign alone force Iran to relinquish control over the strait? So far, the results of the strikes show that destroying individual radars, launchers, and command posts does not guarantee the restoration of safe shipping.
US losses increase pressure on the White House
An additional factor has been the losses of the American army. As a result of Iranian attacks in Jordan, two American servicemen were killed, and another went missing. Separately, it was reported that a serviceman died in Iraq while defusing a munition left from a downed Iranian drone.
Since the resumption of American strikes on July 7, nearly 100 US servicemen have been injured. A Pentagon representative claims that most of the injured suffered mild concussions, and 96% have already returned to duty. Since the start of the war on February 28, 17 American military personnel have died.
Trump stated that for every American soldier killed, Iran will pay “many times more.” According to Axios, the advancement of the truce project slowed down precisely after the strike on Americans in Jordan. One official reported that the president has not yet completed retaliatory actions and may continue strikes before returning to serious discussions of a ceasefire.
For Israel, the situation means the need to prepare for several options at once. If Washington chooses negotiations, the Israeli leadership will try to secure guarantees that the truce will not allow Iran to restore its military infrastructure. If Trump decides to expand the operation, Israel may become a full participant in the new campaign and simultaneously the main target for retaliatory Iranian missile and drone strikes.
Axios sources claim that the IDF is on high combat readiness and can transition to a full-scale coordinated campaign within a few days. However, there is no official announcement of the start of such an operation.
The war could engulf the entire region
The risk of conflict expansion is not limited to Israel and the Persian Gulf. Yemeni Houthis have declared a naval blockade of Saudi ports and threatened to attack ships in the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait area, connecting the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden.
This creates a threat of simultaneous disruption of movement on two of the world’s most important energy routes. The Strait of Hormuz provides the exit of oil and gas from the Persian Gulf, while Bab-el-Mandeb is used by ships heading through the Red Sea and the Suez Canal.
Saudi Arabia has begun to use the oil pipeline to the Red Sea coast more actively to reduce dependence on the Strait of Hormuz. The Houthi threat puts pressure on this alternative route as well. Saudi military officials stated that they intend to ensure freedom of navigation and will consider attacks on ships as acts of maritime piracy.
Iran has also struck states where American forces are stationed. Reports have been made of attacks against facilities or airspace in Jordan, Qatar, Kuwait, and Bahrain. Jordanian military officials reported on July 21 about intercepting five Iranian drones.
Thus, the new phase of the war could quickly spread to countries that formally do not seek to become participants in the conflict but provide the US with military bases, airspace, or logistical infrastructure.
The economic cost of a protracted war
Military escalation is already affecting global energy markets. On July 21, the price of Brent oil remained above $88 per barrel, and earlier briefly exceeded $90. The average gasoline price in the US reached about four dollars per gallon.
The rise in fuel costs creates additional pressure on Trump ahead of the midterm elections in Congress. The president built his political position on the promise not to drag the US into prolonged Middle Eastern wars, but the conflict with Iran is becoming increasingly large-scale, expensive, and difficult to end.
NANews — Israel News emphasizes that the economic factor may be as important as the military one. Even if American strikes continue to destroy Iranian infrastructure, a prolonged blockade of the Strait of Hormuz will harm US allies, global markets, and American consumers themselves.
A decision has not yet been made, but time is running out
Currently, the existence of a proposal for a ten-day ceasefire, the diplomatic activity of Qatar, Egypt, Pakistan, and Oman, the deployment of American aviation, and Israel’s heightened readiness have been confirmed.
However, the assertion that Trump has already chosen a large-scale joint operation with Israel is premature. The White House continues to explore the diplomatic option and urges the Israeli leadership not to take actions that could completely close the window for negotiations. Simultaneously, the US is demonstrating to Tehran that it is ready to move to a much heavier military campaign if mediation efforts fail.
In the coming days, three key signals are possible. The first will be the official agreement of Iran and the US to a ceasefire. The second will be a real reduction in the number of attacks on commercial ships and American facilities. The third will be the further deployment of aviation and Israel’s transition from heightened readiness to open strikes.
The main problem is that the parties are trying to improve their positions directly before possible negotiations. The US continues bombings, trying to force Iran to make concessions. Tehran attacks ships and military facilities, showing that air pressure cannot deprive it of influence over the Strait of Hormuz.
That is why the ten-day pause could become either the first step towards ending the war or a short respite before its most dangerous phase. If diplomacy fails, Trump may face the necessity to fulfill threats and move to a campaign whose consequences will affect not only Iran and Israel but the entire Middle East.