The main leverage they have is controlling the output of oil in the strait of Hormuz. Oil exports have definitely dropped. That is leverage and they definitely have not lost it.
If you think US is the only one who can circumvent through this, then so can Iran. So is not exactly losing leverage because Iran is adapting as well.
You focus on black or white scenario yet casually ignoring the grey region that exist. "American bad faith" as you put is actually negotiations to buy time. Iran has already experienced this last year, and even way before that when they tore up the JCPOA. Of course Iran is not going to be stupid to fall for that same trap again and they know where exactly US interest lies.
Which is why I mentioned minimal economic activity. No doubt a super tanker will be the optimal scenario. But that doesn't mean they cannot adapt and sell its oil. There is always a way and Iran is still far from cracking yet. US itself has a very big problem of maintaining that blockade on a longer term. Like I mention, Iran has time on itself and US doesn't.
Don't put words in my mouth. I did not claim unlimited leverage. They have a very strong leverage and it's geography is already extremely advantageous to it. It's not going to be removed unless Iran specifically decides to surrender.
If you claim Iran's strikes are just retaliatory, then the same can be same about US. They are unable to deter Iran from launching its counter-attacks either on the exporting ships or its bases.
And yes, it's overall position is declining as well because they have completely no answers to Iran's capability, which has been thought out for decades.
You are entitled to your opinion and that's fair enough. However, my argument to you is this? Even if Iran had cash in on those terms, what makes you think that agreement would prevent US from ripping it up and proceeding to attack Iran again in a distant future? Jun'25 only emboldened Trump to go for Feb'26. To frame it as a mistake, is actually enveloped with a lack of foresight. There was nothing that could have guaranteed peace. Iran's strategy right now is to hold out till the next president takes charge.
We are going in circles now. I never claimed hormuz had stopped being leverage or that any agreement guaranteed permanent peace. My point is that the value of leverage changes, and iran failed to cash it in when its position was better.
Iranian crude loadings falling from around 2 million barrels per day to roughly 220,000. Iran can still hurt global oil markets, but it is also choking its own main source of foreign currency.
And you demand a guarantee that the US would honour an agreement, while presenting “wait for the next president” as a strategy. What guarantee is there that the next president will offer better terms or reverse course? Trump remains in office until January 2029, while Iran is paying the economic cost today.
Iran may still eventually obtain a favourable outcome. That does not change my argument that it passed up a better opportunity earlier. Future possibilities do not erase past miscalculations.
I cannot argue same point again and again, so this will be the last message on this line of argument from me.









