Greg Sheridan's column in The Australian (link below) argues that Iran has Donald Trump "politically snookered." According to Sheridan, Tehran has weathered American pressure, maintained control through the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, and turned the Strait of Hormuz crisis into a strategic victory by forcing the US into a fragile ceasefire while the blockade continues. Iran, he suggests, has demonstrated resilience that exposes the limits of Trump's maximum-pressure approach. This shallow reading gets the dynamics backwards. Iran is not playing 4D chess against a politically cornered Trump. It is engaged in classic asymmetric brinkmanship, betting that America's domestic political calendar and aversion to prolonged entanglement will eventually force Washington to blink. 

So far, the evidence points the other way. The Current Reality on the Water As of 22 April 2026, the situation remains tense but revealing. The US Navy has enforced a naval blockade on Iranian ports, intercepted and disabled the Iranian-flagged cargo ship Touska by firing on its engine room, and seized the vessel with Marines aboard. Trump described the action bluntly: the crew ignored warnings, so the Navy "stopped them right in their tracks." Iran has responded with gunboat attacks on commercial tankers, reimposed restrictions on the Strait, and issued threats of broader retaliation. Shipping traffic is disrupted, oil prices are elevated, and both sides continue the familiar dance of escalation and denial. This is not Iran "winning." It is Iran testing the red lines of a US administration that has already shown willingness to use kinetic force rather than endless diplomacy. The Touska incident demonstrates that Washington is prepared to enforce its blockade physically, not just rhetorically. Iran's ability to harass shipping with gunboats is real, but it is also limited; asymmetric tools work best when the stronger power lacks the political will to respond in kind. 

The Midterms Factor – Realism, Not Weakness Sheridan and others highlight the approaching US midterms (November 2026) as Trump's vulnerability. The argument runs that Trump cannot afford a long, costly confrontation that drives up energy prices and hands Democrats a campaign issue. Therefore, Iran can play for time, prolong the crisis, and emerge relatively intact. This underestimates Trump's transactional style. History shows Trump prefers short, visible demonstrations of strength followed by declarations of success and disengagement — exactly the pattern he has used in the past. A limited escalation (targeted strikes on infrastructure if needed, continued enforcement of the blockade, visible seizures like the Touska), followed by a claim that "objectives have been met" and a partial pullback, allows him to project toughness without owning a forever conflict in the Gulf. Regional allies and global markets would likely accept a tense pause enforced by American power more readily than endless Iranian disruption. America does not need oil passing through the Strait of Hormuz, and Trump seems willing to let the rest of the West deal with this problem. Iran, by contrast, risks far more. Its economy is already strained, its regime faces internal pressures, and prolonged closure of the Strait hurts its own oil exports as much as anyone else's. 

The "victory" of simply surviving Trump's pressure looks less impressive when your population endures higher hardship and your proxies face setbacks elsewhere. Strategic Leverage Still Favours Washington Control of the Strait of Hormuz is a powerful card, but it is not a trump card for Iran in a direct test of wills with the United States. America's navy retains superior power projection. The US can escort tankers, interdict Iranian vessels, and sustain operations far longer than Tehran can afford chaos that spikes global energy prices and alienates even its remaining partners (including China, which prefers stable oil flows). Sheridan's framing implies that any failure to achieve total Iranian capitulation equals American defeat. That is a category error. Great-power competition in chokepoints rarely ends in clean surrender. It ends in managed tension, with the stronger party extracting concessions over time while avoiding quagmires. Trump's approach — blunt threats, naval action, and willingness to walk away from a "deal" that doesn't deliver — aligns with that reality far better than endless negotiation that rewards Iranian delay tactics. Iran knows it cannot win a conventional military contest. Its strategy relies on political warfare: exploiting Western media narratives, domestic divisions in the US, and the hope that progressive voices (and war-weary publics) will pressure Washington to de-escalate.

Calling this "snookering" Trump credits Tehran with more mastery than the facts support. No Sweet Ending — But Clearer Realities Like the earlier Hormuz flare-ups and the looming risks around the Strait of Malacca, this confrontation is unlikely to have a tidy resolution. Miscalculation remains possible. Iran's regime has shown it can absorb punishment and survive. But surviving is not the same as prevailing. Sheridan is right that trust in Iranian commitments is low and that ceasefires in the region are fragile. Where he errs is in portraying Iran as the player holding the stronger hand. 

The US retains the initiative through raw capability and the political flexibility that comes with not being the revisionist power desperately dependent on a single vulnerable chokepoint. Trump has not been snookered. He is playing a high-stakes game of leverage in which America's overwhelming advantages in naval power, economic resilience, and alliance options still outweigh Iran's asymmetric harassment. The coming weeks, with midterm calculations in the background, will test whose assessment is closer to reality. The Strait of Hormuz has reminded the world, once again, that maritime chokepoints expose true power balances more honestly than diplomatic communiqués. Iran's gamble is risky; America's response so far suggests it is not bluffing. 

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/iran-knows-it-has-donald-trump-politically-snookered/news-story/47daa799c8419a4955a8e4719499d6c1