Strait of Hormuz; Implicit Retreat One Day After Khamenei's Directive

Imagine you are one of the ambassadors of the Islamic Republic. On July 21, you meet with the Supreme Leader, who states: "The President's remarks during his recent trip to Europe that 'if Iran's oil is not exported, no country's oil in the region will be exported' are important statements and reflect the regime's approach [read Khamenei's approach], and it is the Foreign Ministry's duty to seriously pursue such positions of the President." Thus, you understand from the highest authority in the Islamic Republic that upon returning from Tehran to your mission, you should consider this directive your 'duty' and warn the country of your mission that the Islamic Republic will prevent the export of oil in the Persian Gulf by blocking the 'Strait of Hormuz.' (The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world's crucial waterways, through which one-fifth of the world's oil, nearly 18.5 million barrels per day, passes.) Then imagine that the next day, July 22, you visit the same President who had said during his European trip that if Iran's oil exports are cut off, the Islamic Republic will use its strategic position in the Strait of Hormuz to prevent the region's oil exports, but suddenly you hear him say: 'The Americans think that when we say that when Iran's oil is not exported, no one can export oil, we are looking to close the Strait of Hormuz. In reality, there are many ways, and closing the Strait of Hormuz is the simple method; however, we have many other straits for this purpose.' Naturally, you, as one of the regime's ambassadors, will ask yourself what 'many straits' means in Hassan Rouhani's words? Which straits does Iran control other than the Strait of Hormuz? Which other strait can Tehran block to stop the oil exports of the Persian Gulf? We all know that there is no second strait, let alone that we have 'many straits.' Therefore, Rouhani's statement only implies that Tehran has 'many tools' to counter American threats besides the Strait of Hormuz. If this is the case, why does he mention options other than closing the Strait of Hormuz? Here, you realize, based on your political understanding, that the regime's directive has changed within a day from your meeting with the Leader to your meeting with the President, so that your inference from Rouhani's words is that if the Islamic Republic does not close the Strait of Hormuz, it has other straits [i.e., other tools] to counter American threats. This means that contrary to the Leader's directive, upon your return to your mission, you have no duty to use such threatening language. In other words, Hassan Rouhani had made a hollow threat and has retracted it. In addition to the directive to the regime's ambassadors, Hassan Rouhani implicitly responded to General Soleimani, who had written to Rouhani in a message: 'Your Excellency's remarks... are a source of pride and honor... This is the same Dr. Rouhani that we knew and should know.' With the description provided, it becomes clear that Rouhani is the same as he was. He has not changed, and Soleimani has naively become excited and sent a message of appreciation to Rouhani. In this speech, Hassan Rouhani also unveiled a greater danger, stating that war with Iran is 'the mother of all wars.' This means he sees the White House's posture as a warlike one, aiming not to reform the JCPOA but to launch a military attack on Iran. Rouhani's hollow threat that Iran might close the Strait of Hormuz, if not retracted, would effectively put the country in the crosshairs of an American attack. Rouhani realizes that if this threat is acted upon, it would lead America to war against Iran. This is precisely what America is seeking. Hassan Rouhani knows well that the world's largest army has never fought on its own borders. This army has always engaged in wars beyond its borders. The next war led by Trump could be a war against Iran. Rouhani knows that giving Trump an excuse by closing the Strait of Hormuz is exactly like giving Saddam an excuse after the invasion of Kuwait. This excuse has the potential for America to destroy Iran's infrastructure under the pretext of keeping Hormuz open, resulting in Iran's fate being the same as Iraq's. Therefore, the smart decision is to keep the talk of closing the Strait of Hormuz under wraps. Instead, he found not only closing Hormuz to be futile but also extended a hand of friendship towards Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the UAE, mentioning that 'the essence and culture of Iranians is peace-seeking and helping neighbors,' and spoke of the possibility of renewing relations with these three countries; three countries that have established the closest relations with America and are unlikely to easily accept normalizing relations with Tehran.