Trump Vows Hormuz Stays Open as Iran Warns of Economic Pain

President Donald Trump declared late Thursday that Iran would not be permitted to use the Strait of Hormuz as a geopolitical weapon, while Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned that Americans face escalating economic pain from the conflict and a group of Democratic senators broke with the administration over the war’s domestic costs.

The overlapping volleys of rhetoric — from Washington, Tehran, and the halls of Congress — underscore how thoroughly the conflict has moved beyond a purely military frame and into a contest over who bears the economic burden of a war that has now entered its third month.

Trump: Hormuz ‘Will Be Open’

In a Fox News interview, Trump declared that the critical shipping lane through which a significant share of the world’s petroleum transits would remain open and that Iran would be prevented from closing it as a coercive tactic.

“The Strait of Hormuz will be open and we will ensure that the Iranians do not possess nuclear weapons and that the world remains stable,” Trump said. He added that Tehran “cannot use the Strait of Hormuz as a weapon against me,” noting that China depends on the passage for roughly 40 percent of its petroleum imports — a figure that makes closure an act of economic aggression against multiple global powers simultaneously.

The statement is the administration’s clearest public commitment to date on freedom of navigation through the strait. It follows days of back-and-forth signaling, including Iranian indications of a partial reopening tied to diplomatic progress, and an earlier bilateral access arrangement that left broader transit rights unresolved.

Araghchi’s Economic Warning

Hours earlier, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi posted a pointed economic warning on X, targeting American consumers directly in terms designed to resonate beyond the foreign-policy community.

“Put aside gas price hike and stock market bubble. Real pain begins when U.S. debt and mortgage rates start to jump,” Araghchi wrote. “Auto loan delinquencies are already at 30+-year high.”

The foreign minister characterized the conflict as “a war of choice” initiated by the United States and Israel, arguing that every economic consequence flowing from it is avoidable. The framing is a deliberate attempt to widen the domestic political cost of the war inside the United States — and the message found some resonance on Capitol Hill.

Senators Break With Trump

A group of Democratic senators went public Thursday with criticisms of the administration’s handling of the war’s economic fallout, using language that closely mirrors Tehran’s own framing — though arriving at that framing from a domestic policy vantage point.

Senator Tammy Baldwin said Trump’s conflict with Iran “has sent the cost of fertilizer and gas through the roof for our farmers.” The disruption to the Strait of Hormuz has interrupted global shipping lanes critical to fertilizer exports, compounding agricultural input costs across the Midwest.

Senator Mark Warner, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, put it more broadly: “From gas prices to home costs, Trump’s war of choice is making it harder and harder to afford the life you want.”

Senator Mark Kelly criticized the military operation as having “no goal in mind” and called on the administration to refocus on cost-of-living pressures. “We need leaders who are laser focused on lowering costs because this administration is making life more expensive,” Kelly said.

The senators’ criticism is notable given that Warner holds a senior intelligence oversight position, giving his remarks institutional weight beyond ordinary political opposition.

Iran’s UN Mission: Resolution Is ‘Cover for Aggression’

At the United Nations, Iran’s mission contested a Bahrain-backed draft resolution on freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, accusing Washington of engineering the measure to manufacture a false appearance of broad international support for its regional military posture.

“It is crystal clear that the U.S. is seeking to exploit the number of co-sponsors to manufacture a false image of ‘broad international support,’” Iran’s UN delegation said in a statement attributed to the account @Iran_UN.

The Iranian mission warned that all nations co-sponsoring the resolution would share responsibility for any escalation triggered by American actions — a diplomatic signal designed to discourage fence-sitters from lending their names to the measure.

The resolution, backed by the United States, Bahrain, and several Gulf states, calls for freedom of navigation through the strait and an end to Iranian interdiction operations in the Gulf.

The Economic Stakes

The convergence of Trump’s Hormuz pledge and Araghchi’s economic warning reflects how central the strait has become to both sides’ strategic calculus. The waterway carries roughly one-fifth of the world’s traded oil, and any sustained closure would drive energy costs sharply higher across importing nations — including the United States.

Trump’s decision to foreground China’s 40-percent petroleum dependency on the passage suggests the administration is using the strait not only as a military and diplomatic pressure point against Iran but as a piece of leverage in the broader U.S.-China competition. Beijing’s exposure to Hormuz disruption is, in the administration’s framing, a reason for China to push Tehran toward a deal rather than enable further escalation.

That argument has limits. China has shown little public appetite for applying that kind of pressure on Iran, and Tehran has calculated — correctly, so far — that the economic pain of prolonged hostilities can be distributed widely enough to complicate Western coalition unity.

The senators’ statements suggest the distribution is working, at least domestically. Whether rising mortgage rates and auto loan delinquency data shift the American political center of gravity on the war remains the central open question heading into the weekend.

Earlier this week, Trump issued an ultimatum demanding Iran reach a nuclear agreement or face escalating military action, and separately signaled diminishing patience with the pace of talks following an inconclusive summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping.