USA and Iran: Nuclear Program, Oil, and the American Goal of Ending the Ayatollahs’ Regime

Luis Augusto Medeiros Rutledge

Geopolitics and Energy

While rockets fall on Israel and Iran, we now see American bombs targeting the ayatollahs' regime. Meanwhile, Trump gives a speech of false conciliation, hoping the Iranian regime will completely surrender. That will not happen. For the leaders of Iran, Hamas, Israel, and the White House, war is both the beginning and the end of dialogue.

Iran is a highly developed scientific and technological giant. It has had a nuclear program for over 30 years. Countries like Pakistan and North Korea are far less developed than Iran, and yet they managed to achieve nuclear capabilities with much more ease.

Iran has a high capacity for nuclear penetration, meaning it is fully capable of producing enough fissile material to build a nuclear weapon, thereby violating international treaties and norms. However, Iran could be prevented from obtaining a bomb through international negotiations led by the United States. Let us not forget that there was once an agreement that would have prevented Iran from increasing its nuclear enrichment.

During Trump’s first term, it was the Israeli government, through Netanyahu, that persuaded the then U.S. administration to withdraw from the agreement, pushing Iran closer than ever to a nuclear explosion.

It was Netanyahu who brought Iran closer to a nuclear explosion. This war may lead to a new agreement preventing Iran from enriching fissile material on its soil, but that could have been achieved through diplomacy backed by serious military threats.

The attacks that have raised tensions between Iran and the U.S. leave open the question of the fate of Iran’s nuclear program and Tehran’s ability to respond. The now direct involvement of the United States in the war between Israel and Iran is also a reflection of political and strategic pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump to test the effectiveness of American weaponry and to attempt to incite the Iranian population into uprising against the current regime.

Iran's priorities are dictated by its inflexible ideology, including the pride it takes in its nuclear program as a symbol of independence. For the country, this program is a sign of progress and technical knowledge, as well as clear proof of its nation’s intellectual legitimacy. However, beyond energy and military concerns, the nuclear program—into which enormous resources have been invested—is above all a trump card in Iran’s diplomatic negotiations with the West and its Arab neighbors.

The impact of the U.S. attack on Iran's nuclear project logically has the potential to delay the progress of its nuclear program. On the other hand, however, the effects of the attack will not be disclosed by the Iranian government, and certainly, its stockpile of enriched uranium is being preserved for future purposes.

Regarding Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile, estimates indicate that with uranium enriched to 60%, Iran could produce several bombs in a short time. However, the dilemma also lies in Iran’s need to resolve its issues with Western countries in order to lift the sanctions that are suffocating its economy and putting enormous pressure on the regime’s survival.

Iran is accustomed to crisis management and thus has the capacity to maintain the regime’s survival. It will likely limit its response to actions already taken against Israel to avoid a large-scale joint U.S.-Israel attack.

The Iranian regime’s highest priority is maintaining its rule, and it recognizes the significant military disparity in the balance of power, with Israel backed by the United States.

The attacks on three major Iranian nuclear facilities—in Fordow, Isfahan, and Natanz—have surrounded the region with major concerns and tensions over the implications both within and outside of Iran.

Iran’s next steps will be decisive. We will see whether Iran is interested in starting a regional war involving its armed affiliates and triggering war in Yemen, Iraq, and Lebanon, or if it will settle for a symbolic retaliatory strike against a military base, causing no real damage and possibly even preceded by prior notification, just to save face.

As for oil, the U.S. attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities have increased Tehran’s threats to close the Strait of Hormuz. If that happens, global oil prices could skyrocket to unprecedented levels.

Just as the global economy is attempting to recover from Donald Trump’s trade tariff war, the escalating military conflict now poses a serious threat to the world’s oil resources.

This situation could lead to a major energy crisis. If tensions persist and the war spreads throughout the region, there is a real possibility that oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz will be blocked and that Iranian oil could be pulled from global markets. These concerns have already caused a sharp spike in the price of Brent and West Texas crude.

Iran is the third-largest producer in OPEC, and an escalation could disrupt the passage of oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital route for oil and petroleum products trade. From now on, oil prices will depend on any potential supply disruptions.

The only certainty at the moment is that the senseless and endless war in this region will shape the global economy and geopolitics over the coming months, and possibly until the end of the year.

Luis Augusto Rutledge

Luis Augusto Medeiros Rutledge

Petroleum engineer, graduated from UNESA, and holds an Executive MBA in Petroleum and Gas Economics from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ). He also holds a postgraduate degree in International Relations and Diplomacy from IBMEC.

Researcher at UFRJ, Analyst of Energy Geopolitics, and Consulting Member of the Islamic World Observatory of Portugal. Consultant to the Center for Foreign Trade Studies Foundation – FUNCEX.

Columnist at MenteMundo.