Adolf Franco, a Republican political strategist, believes that Trump's rejection of Iran's proposal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz within seven days, while seemingly a reckless gamble that could trigger a larger conflict, is, from a sober realist perspective, not only a calculated necessity but also the right decision.
The Iranian proposal is essentially a classic example of asymmetric diplomacy: a brief window of stability, a one-off truce, in exchange for a de facto easing of US pressure. If the US accepted, it would be tantamount to acknowledging Iran's perceived right to control the "switch" of global trade at will. Therefore, rejecting the proposal signals that freedom of navigation cannot be a bargaining chip.
This decision, occurring on the eve of the US midterm elections, has also sparked domestic controversy. Critics argue that the energy supply risks could drive up oil prices and influence the election, constituting political self-harm. However, this view overlooks the complexity of voter psychology and the logic behind the opponent's actions.
Iran is precisely using the US election cycle to exert pressure, attempting to force Washington to accept compromises for short-term political gains.
If Trump accepts this plan to help the Republican Party gain more support in the election, he will demonstrate to the world that American foreign policy is influenced by the domestic election cycle—a weakness that other powerful countries like Russia can exploit. By choosing to take the risk before the midterm elections, Trump has actually altered the power dynamics.
He has demonstrated that his administration is willing to withstand short-term political pressure in exchange for clarity on long-term strategic goals. This is the core of "credible deterrence."
Furthermore, the seven-day plan is essentially a diplomatic gesture aimed at gaining breathing room and easing external pressure. Giving Iran this buffer is tantamount to providing support to a struggling adversary regime.
