#美伊战争阴云再起 US-Iran conflict reignited, trapped in a "fight-and-talk cycle"?



On July 8 local time, U.S. President Donald Trump publicly stated he no longer wants to deal with Iran, hinting that the U.S. military might strike Iran again with greater force. Starting late that night, multiple locations in Iran, including Bandar Abbas, Sirik, and Chabahar, reported successive violent explosions as U.S. forces launched a new round of strikes against Iran. The recent sharp escalation in U.S.-Iran relations has fully exposed the fragility of the temporary ceasefire. Why has the hard-won peace shattered so quickly?

Tensions rise again between the U.S. and Iran

This marks the second consecutive day of U.S. strikes on Iran. U.S. officials say the scale of this round surpasses that of the previous day. Meanwhile, over 20 U.S. Navy warships are patrolling various waters in the Middle East, maximizing military deterrence. Under the impact of the situation, tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz has "basically stopped." As the U.S. steps up pressure, Iran shows no sign of weakness. Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf publicly warned the U.S. on July 9: "If you strike, we will retaliate," cautioning Washington not to waste efforts on military intimidation. Iran's military simultaneously signaled that its missile and drone units are on standby, ready to launch a large-scale counterattack against U.S. bases in the Middle East at any time.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu convened an emergency security assessment meeting overnight.

The Israeli military urgently raised its readiness level and maintained close coordination with U.S. forces. The core point of the game is control of the Strait. Analysts believe that each U.S.-Iran military conflict, though seemingly sudden, revolves around the same core issue — control of the Strait of Hormuz. Currently, during the special period of the funeral of Iran's late Supreme Leader, the U.S. launched a surprise attack, and Iran responded with resolute and tough retaliation, showing no fear of U.S. reprisal. This is enough to show that control of the Strait is Iran's non-negotiable bottom line. For Iran, controlling the Strait of Hormuz is not only a key bargaining chip in diplomatic negotiations but also a crucial means to rally domestic public opinion and shape a tough national image.

Kentaro Endo, Director of the Middle East Research Center at the Japan Institute of Energy Economics, said that today's game over the Strait of Hormuz carries far more weight than the traditional nuclear issue and is Iran's biggest card in taking the initiative in negotiations. Tehran will not easily compromise. On the other hand, the U.S. frequently launches limited military strikes, with the core purpose still being to seize control of the Strait and rebuild regional military deterrence. Washington has always insisted that the Strait of Hormuz should remain fully open. If it fails to respond to incidents like "attacks on merchant ships," it would not only lose the initiative in the Strait game but also its prestige in the Middle East.

European allies collectively back away

Notably, this escalation of the U.S.-Iran conflict has completely torn apart the superficial unity of NATO. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte called the U.S. airstrikes "absolutely necessary." However, this support was not echoed by European member states, some of which openly criticized the strikes, while others offered only limited backing. Spain refused to open its territory or airspace for operations against Iran, criticizing the current U.S. military actions as "illegal, absurd, and cruel." Italy emphasized that U.S. flights from its bases are limited to logistical support and do not involve combat operations. France also restricted U.S. use of its airspace for offensive operations against Iran.

The collective withdrawal of allies is driven by multiple practical considerations.

First, the U.S. launched unilateral military strikes without prior consultation with any allies. Second, restarting large-scale strikes under a ceasefire framework lacks legitimate international authorization. More crucially, Europe is highly dependent on Middle Eastern energy. The escalation of the conflict has caused oil prices to surge, directly impacting European economies and livelihoods. Coupled with widespread anti-war sentiment among European publics, governments are reluctant to rashly follow into war.

"Fight-and-talk cycle" may become the norm

Despite the U.S. and Iran refusing to yield, multiple experts believe that both countries will still try to avoid a significant escalation of the conflict, and in the short term, the situation will remain in a "fight-and-talk cycle."

From the U.S. perspective, domestic inflationary pressures remain high, war-weariness is strong among the public, and with NATO allies unwilling to follow, the Trump administration lacks the capacity to wage a large-scale war and can only maintain deterrence through limited military strikes.

From Iran's perspective, while continuing to take tough countermeasures, it will also seek to avoid a complete loss of control. The U.S.-Iran situation may maintain a game pattern of limited conflict and indirect contact.

Li Zixin, Assistant Researcher at the Institute of International Studies, believes that Iran will take further countermeasures, such as reducing transit quotas through the Strait or even re-blockading it, but the U.S. will not allow this to develop unchecked.

Overall, the U.S.-Iran standoff will not end, but a full-scale conflict will not occur. A prolonged tug-of-war may become the norm in the Middle East situation.
View Original
ThisIsTranslateContent:
#美伊战争阴云再起 US-Iran tensions reignite, trapped in a "cycle of strikes and talks"?

On July 8 local time, US President Donald Trump publicly stated that he no longer wants to deal with Iran, hinting that the US military might strike Iran again with heavy force. Starting from late that night, multiple locations in Iran, including Bandar Abbas, Sirik, and Chabahar, reported a series of violent explosions as the US military launched a new round of strikes against Iran. The recent severe escalation in US-Iran tensions has fully exposed the fragility of the temporary ceasefire. Why did the hard-won peace shatter so quickly?

US-Iran tensions escalate again
This is the second consecutive day of US strikes against Iran. US officials said the scale of this round of strikes exceeded that of the previous day. Meanwhile, over 20 US Navy warships are patrolling various waters in the Middle East, maximizing military deterrence. Impacted by the situation, oil tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz has "basically stopped." The US is pressing hard, and Iran is not backing down. Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf publicly told the US on July 9, "If you strike, we will retaliate," warning the US not to engage in futile military deterrence. The Iranian military simultaneously signaled that its missile and drone units are on standby, ready to launch large-scale counterattacks against US military bases in the Middle East at any time.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu convened an emergency security assessment meeting overnight.
The Israeli military urgently raised its combat readiness level and maintained close coordination with the US military. The core of the game is control of the Strait. Analysts believe that the repeated US-Iran military clashes, seemingly sudden, actually revolve around the same core issue—control of the Strait of Hormuz. At a time when Iran is in the special period of the funeral of its late Supreme Leader, the US launched a surprise attack, and Iran responded with a resolute and strong counterattack, unafraid of US retaliation. This fully demonstrates that control of the Strait is a non-negotiable red line for Iran. For Iran, controlling the Strait of Hormuz is not only a core bargaining chip in diplomatic negotiations but also a key lever to rally domestic public opinion and shape a tough national image.

Kentaro Endo, a senior researcher at the Middle East Research Center of the Japan Institute of Energy Economics, said that the current game over the Strait of Hormuz has long surpassed the traditional nuclear issue in importance and is Iran's biggest card to seize the initiative in negotiations. Iran will not easily compromise on this. On the other hand, the US, by frequently launching limited military strikes, aims primarily to seize dominance over the Strait and re-establish military deterrence in the region. The US has always insisted that the Strait of Hormuz should remain fully open. If it fails to respond to incidents like "merchant ship attacks," it would not only lose the initiative in the Strait game but also forfeit its prestige in the Middle East.

European allies collectively pull back
Notably, the latest escalation in US-Iran conflict has completely torn apart NATO's façade of unity. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte described the US airstrikes as "absolutely necessary." However, this support did not receive a response from European member states—some openly criticized it, while others gave limited support. Spain refused to open its territory and airspace for operations against Iran, calling the US military action "illegal, absurd, and cruel." Italy emphasized that US flights from its bases are limited to logistical support and do not participate in combat operations. France also restricted the US from using its airspace for attacks on Iran.
The collective retreat of allies is driven by multiple practical considerations.
First, the US launched military strikes unilaterally without consulting any allies beforehand.
Second, restarting large-scale strikes under a ceasefire framework lacks legitimate international authorization.
More critically, Europe is highly dependent on Middle Eastern energy, and the escalation of conflict has caused oil prices to surge, directly impacting European economies and livelihoods. Additionally, anti-war sentiment is widespread across European countries, making governments reluctant to rashly follow the US into war.

"Cycle of strikes and talks" may become the norm
Despite the mutual intransigence between the US and Iran, many experts judge that both sides will still try to avoid a significant escalation and expansion of the war, and in the short term, they will remain in a "cycle of strikes and talks."
From the US perspective, domestic inflationary pressures remain high, the public is weary of war, and NATO allies are not following suit. The Trump administration lacks the capacity to wage a large-scale war and can only maintain deterrence through limited military strikes.
From Iran's perspective, while it continues to respond with toughness, it will also avoid a complete loss of control. The US-Iran situation may maintain a game state of limited conflict and indirect contact.
🇨🇳Li Zixin, an assistant researcher at the China Institute of International Studies, believes that Iran will take further countermeasures, such as reducing transit quotas through the Strait or even blocking the Strait again, but the US will not allow that to happen.

Overall, the US-Iran standoff will not end, but a full-scale conflict will not come. A prolonged tug-of-war may become the norm in the Middle East situation.
repost-content-media
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 28
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
Add a comment
Add a comment
User_any
· 1h ago
To The Moon 🌕
Reply0
User_any
· 1h ago
LFG 🔥
Reply0
My_Power
· 1h ago
LFG 🔥
Reply0
My_Power
· 1h ago
2026 GOGOGO 👊
Reply0
ShainingMoon
· 1h ago
To The Moon 🌕
Reply0
ShainingMoon
· 1h ago
To The Moon 🌕
Reply0
ShainingMoon
· 1h ago
2026 GOGOGO 👊
Reply0
BlackBullion_Alpha
· 2h ago
Bull Run 🐂
Reply0
BlackBullion_Alpha
· 2h ago
Ape In 🚀
Reply0
BlackBullion_Alpha
· 2h ago
Ape In 🚀
Reply0
View More
  • Pinned