A prolonged operation in the Strait of Hormuz does more harm than good



With Brent crude futures surging past $115 a barrel, President Trump’s rejection of Iran’s latest Strait of Hormuz proposal is a test of whether Washington elites understand what ordinary Americans actually want: energy stability, not another forever war in the Gulf.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, through Pakistani mediators in the ongoing Islamabad process, recently floated a phased 14-point plan: reopen the Strait of Hormuz if the U.S. lifts its blockade, with nuclear talks deferred to a later stage.

Trump dismissed the offer as not acceptable, yet the real story is not Tehran’s maneuvering, but the widening gap between Beltway hawks who see confrontation as inevitable and voters who see confrontation as unaffordable.

Younger voters, already skeptical of 'forever wars,' view the Iran standoff as another distraction from domestic priorities.

As the administration officially activates Project Freedom — a mission utilizing U.S. naval assets to guide trapped commercial vessels — Washington is attempting a middle-path maneuver.

This operation is a band-aid on a bullet wound. Reports of U.S. helicopters destroying Iranian small boats and retaliatory missile fire toward UAE ports underscore the volatility. The public is not clamoring for a demonstration of strength; people are clamoring for relief at the pump.

Polling backs this up. The March 2026 Pew survey shows that foreign policy hawkishness is declining, with only 28% of Americans labeling China an “enemy” and similar fatigue evident in attitudes toward Middle Eastern entanglements.

Trump’s rejection of Iran’s deal, though well intentioned, misreads the electorate. Americans are not demanding another Gulf showdown that could shatter the current truce. They are demanding a pragmatic path to lower energy costs and a reprieve from endless deployments.

Iran’s offer was piecemeal, but it reflected a truth Washington ignores: Maritime choke points like the Strait of Hormuz are arteries of global commerce. Blocking them — or relying on risky naval escorts — is a gamble with the global economy.

Traders and shippers see the blockade as a distortion that ripples through supply chains. The attempt to isolate Iran has produced logistical chaos that even Project Freedom will struggle to untangle.

Americans feel this chaos in their wallets. Every increase translates to higher gasoline prices, higher shipping costs, and inflationary pressure. Younger voters, already skeptical of “forever wars,” view the Iran standoff as another distraction from domestic priorities.

The youth vote is not demanding ideological purity; it is demanding pragmatic management of global risks. By rejecting Iran’s offer outright, Trump risks alienating the very demographic that could give him cover for a diplomatic breakthrough.

RELATED: Trump administration establishes ‘red, white, and blue dome’ to allow safe passage through Strait of Hormuz

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

The Islamabad process — where U.S. and Iranian delegations are quietly exploring trilateral peace — reflects a regional appetite for pragmatic de-escalation. The same mood exists in the American electorate. Voters are tired of containment strategies that yield no domestic dividend.

The coming few weeks will be decisive. If the blockade continues, price spikes will drag inflation into the midterm season. If Trump pivots toward a phased maritime deal, he could claim a win that stabilizes the markets.

Washington elites may sneer at piecemeal diplomacy, but such diplomacy is often how to achieve real stability. The electorate understands this better than the pundits.

The American people are no longer the obstacle to pragmatic engagement; they are the engine of it. Rejecting Iran’s offer may satisfy Beltway hawks, but it risks alienating voters.

The smarter path is managed friction — accepting partial deals that stabilize markets while deferring ideological battles. The world does not need another forever war in the Gulf. It needs a recognition that energy stability is the foundation of strategic strength.

Joe Kent resigns from Trump admin, says Israel forced US into Iran conflict



Retired Green Beret veteran Joe Kent has resigned from his post as director of the National Counterterrorism Center Tuesday, citing his disapproval of the United States' strikes in Iran.

Kent said Iran posed "no imminent threat" to the United States and that the U.S. instead became involved in the conflict due to pressure from Israel. Kent also said continuing to serve in the administration would violate his conscience, especially after losing his "beloved wife Shannon in a war manufactured by Israel."

'This echo chamber was used to deceive you.'

"I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran," Kent said in a letter addressed to President Trump. "Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby."

"As a veteran who deployed to combat 11 times and as a Gold Star husband who lost my beloved wife Shannon in a war manufactured by Israel, I cannot support sending the next generation off to fight and die in a war that serves no benefit to the American people nor justifies the cost of American lives."

RELATED: Trump's hilarious response after intel reportedly tells him Iran's new supreme leader might be gay

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

Kent praised Trump's foreign policy from his 2016, 2020, and 2024 campaigns, saying that during those campaigns, Trump understood that wars in the Middle East "were a trap" that cost American lives. He also applauded Trump's killing of Qasem Soleimani and defeat of ISIS in his first term but says his administration has since been lobbied and persuaded by "high-ranking Israeli officials" who sought out a war with Iran.

"Early in this administration, high-ranking Israeli officials and influential members of the American media deployed a misinformation campaign that wholly undermined your America First platform and sowed pro-war sentiments to encourage war with Iran," Kent told Trump. "This echo chamber was used to deceive you into believing that Iran posed an imminent threat to the United States, and that should you strike now, there was a clear path to a swift victory."

"This was a lie and is the same tactic the Israelis used to draw us into the disastrous Iraq war that cost our nation the lives of thousands of our best men and women," Kent added. "We cannot make this mistake again."

RELATED: 'Die in your rage': Islamist attacks and murder plots are quickly adding up

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

Kent signed off with a warning to Trump, urging him to "reverse course" in the war with Iran.

"I pray that you will reflect upon what we are doing in Iran, and who we are doing it for," Kent said. "The time for bold action is now. You can reverse course and chart a new path for our nation, or you can allow us to slip further toward decline and chaos. You hold the cards."

"It was an honor to serve in your administration and to serve our great nation."

Blaze News has reached out to the White House for comment.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

'Very difficult choice': Zelenskyy rejects fundamentals of Trump's peace plan



Despite numerous setbacks, President Donald Trump remains committed to ending the war between Russia and Ukraine — a war that has resulted in over a million casualties and turned much of Eastern Ukraine into drone-netted wasteland.

To this end, his administration has drafted a 28-point peace plan that would give both warring parties something they want: for Russia, concessions to much of the land it presently occupies in Eastern Ukraine; and for Ukraine, a NATO-style security guarantee from the United States.

'We're back to square one.'

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy initially expressed a willingness to work with the administration on the plan, which was presented to him in writing on Thursday by U.S. Army Secretary Dan Driscoll, but he has since joined others in casting doubt on its workability.

The plan

Secretary of State Marco Rubio noted on Wednesday evening, "Ending a complex and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of serious and realistic ideas. And achieving a durable peace will require both sides to agree to difficult but necessary concessions."

"That is why we are and will continue to develop a list of potential ideas for ending this war based on input from both sides of this conflict," Rubio added.

RELATED: Zelenskyy's hold on power uncertain as criminal charges reach his inner circle

Photo by Nicolas Economou/NurPhoto via Getty Images

The following day, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt acknowledged that Rubio and U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff "have been working on a plan quietly for about the last month."

"They have been engaging with both sides, Russia and Ukraine equally, to understand what these countries would commit to in order to see a lasting and durable peace," Leavitt continued. "That's how you get to a peace negotiation."

The plan's 28 points as of Thursday are as follows, according to Axios and Agence France-Presse:

  1. Ukraine's sovereignty will be affirmed.
  2. A comprehensive non-aggression agreement between Russia, Ukraine, and Europe will be established, thereby settling all ambiguities of the last 30 years.
  3. The expectations that Russia will not invade neighboring countries and that NATO will not continue its expansion will be codified.
  4. A U.S.-mediated dialogue will be scheduled between Russia and NATO in order "to resolve all security issues and create conditions for de-escalation in order to ensure global security and increase opportunities for cooperation and future economic development."
  5. Ukraine will receive an explicit security guarantee — apparently from the United States.
  6. Ukraine's military will be limited to 600,000 personnel.
  7. Ukraine will codify in its constitution a prohibition on its joining NATO, and NATO will agree to statutorily forbid Ukraine's admission in the future.
  8. NATO will agree not to station troops in Ukraine.
  9. European fighter jets will be stationed in neighboring Poland.
  10. The U.S. will receive compensation for its guarantee; invalidate the guarantee if Ukraine invades Russia or fires a missile at Moscow or St. Petersburg without cause; and revoke recognition of the new territory and respond both militarily as well as with global sanctions if Russia invades.
  11. Ukraine will be eligible for membership to the European Union and enjoy special access to the European market in the meantime.
  12. The U.S. and other parties will help rebuild Ukraine.
  13. Russia will be reintegrated in the the global economy.
  14. Frozen Russian assets will be poured into American-led efforts to rebuild Ukraine — a venture from which the U.S. will receive 50% of profits.
  15. A U.S.-Russian working group on security issues will be established to ensure compliance with all provisions of the agreement.
  16. Russia will codify a policy of non-aggression toward Europe and Ukraine.
  17. The U.S. and Russia will "agree to extend the validity of treaties on the non-proliferation and control of nuclear weapons, including the START I Treaty."
  18. Ukraine will agree not to acquire or develop nuclear bombs.
  19. The Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant will be launched under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency and distribute electricity equally between Russia and Ukraine.
  20. In addition to both nations implementing educational anti-discrimination programs and guaranteeing the rights of Ukrainian and Russian media and education, Ukraine will deal with its Nazi infestation and adopt EU rules on religious tolerance and the protection of linguistic minorities.
  21. The U.S. will recognize Crimea, Luhansk, and Donetsk as de facto Russian; Kherson and Zaporizhzhia will be divided along the current line of contact; Russia will cede other territories under its control outside the five regions; and Ukrainian forces with abandon the part of Donetsk Oblast currently under their control, which will become a neutral demilitarized buffer zone.
  22. Once the territorial arrangements are settled, neither Russia nor Ukraine will attempt to change them by force.
  23. Russia will not prevent Ukraine from using the Dnieper River for commercial activities, and agreement will be made on the free transport of grain across the Black Sea.
  24. A humanitarian committee will be established to deal with prisoner exchanges as well as the return of remains, hostages, and civilian detainees. A family reunification program will also be implemented.
  25. Ukraine will hold elections in 100 days.
  26. All parties involved in the conflict will receive full amnesty for their actions during the war and agree not to consider any complaints in the future.
  27. The agreement will be legally binding, and sanctions will be imposed for violations.
  28. The ceasefire will take effect immediately after both sides retreat to agreed points and begin implementing the terms of the agreement.

Flies in the ointment

European diplomats and other establishmentarians immediately began clutching pearls over the plan, apparently convinced that there is yet a better way to resolve or win what is effectively an 11-year-old war.

"We're back to square one," one senior European official told the Financial Times.

Another European diplomat working on a response to Trump's plan said, "It basically means capitulation [to Moscow]."

"For any plan to work, it needs Ukrainians and Europeans on board," said European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas. "We haven't heard of any concessions on the Russian side."

RELATED: Orbán emphasizes to Trump that Hungary survives today as Christian 'island of difference in a liberal ocean'

Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said, "Peace cannot be a capitulation."

'Our red lines are clear and unwavering.'

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, for instance, suggested that the plan was a "surrender agreement," adding that "Ukrainian courage and patriotism should not be betrayed by Americans growing tired of stopping evil."

Douglas Murray, a gay neoconservative who complained last year that the West was "drunk on peace," wrote in his New York Post column, "Perhaps this is just an opening gambit, but it must be clear to any observer that these are not terms that any Ukrainian government could agree to."

The Institute for the Study of War said that "the stipulations of the reported 28-point Russia-U.S. peace plan amount to Ukraine's full capitulation to Russia's original war demands."

Zelenskyy, whose presidential term officially ended 18 months ago, initially broke from the naysayers, tweeting on Thursday, "Our teams — of Ukraine and the United States — will work on the provisions of the plan to end the war. We are ready for constructive, honest and swift work."

However, in a 10-minute address on Friday to his beleaguered nation, Zelenskyy framed the choice of accepting the peace plan in dire terms.

"Now the pressure on Ukraine is one of the most difficult. Now Ukraine may find itself facing a very difficult choice: either the loss of dignity or the risk of losing a key partner," Zelenskyy said. "Either [Trump's] 28 points or an extremely difficult winter, the most difficult and further risks — life without freedom, without dignity, without justice."

The previous day, Zelenskyy stated, "It is important that the outcome be a dignified peace."

Kristina Gayovishin, Ukraine's deputy permanent representative to the U.N., effectively told the globalist body's security council that concessions to Moscow and military reductions were off the table.

"While Ukraine stands ready to engage in meaningful negotiations to end this war, our red lines are clear and unwavering," Gayovishin said. "There will never be any recognition, formal or otherwise, of Ukrainian territory temporarily occupied by the Russian Federation as Russian. Our land is not for sale."

"We will not accept any limits on our right to self-defense or on the size and capabilities of our armed force," the Ukrainian diplomat continued. "Nor will we tolerate any infringement on our sovereignty, including our sovereign right to choose the alliances we want to join."

Gayovishin added, "Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine. And nothing about Europe without Europe."

American officials have emphasized that the 28-point peace plan is a working document and therefore prone to change.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

How Trump Rebuffed D.C. Warmongers With One Surgical Strike Against Iran

[rebelmouse-proxy-image https://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-29-at-8.46.53 PM-1200x675.png crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Screenshot-2025-06-29-at-8.46.53%5Cu202fPM-1200x675.png%22%7D" expand=1]For the first time in a generation, the United States is exclusively pursuing its vital interests, not the ambitions of its NatSec elites.

Two Years And $113 Billion Later, D.C.’s ‘America Last’ Crew Has No Plan For Ending The Russia-Ukraine War

You don't have to be a Putin stooge to see that dumping endless U.S. funds into Kyiv without proper oversight is a terrible idea.

In White House Remarks, Biden Refuses Responsibility And Blames Trump And Afghans For Taliban Takeover

Missing from Biden's speech Monday was any admittance that the withdrawal was completely botched and left thousands scrambling for their lives.

How Two Decades Of Lies And Incompetence Led To Disaster In Afghanistan

"Anyone who spent some time in Afghanistan knew that when the U.S. left, eventually the Taliban would come to power once again," said veteran Amber Smith.

Biden Said There Would Be No Diplomats Airlifted From Kabul. Did He Believe It?

President Joe Biden pledged a Taliban takeover of Afghanistan was near impossible. The terrorist group took over the capital of Kabul on Sunday.

There Will Never Be Enough Blood Or Money Spent In Afghanistan For Warmongers Like Dan Crenshaw

As Kabul falls, Crenshaw claims it is proof America should further commit itself to a country 7,000 miles away and with absolutely nothing to offer.

Would Ending Endless Wars Make America Safer?

President of the Quincy Institute Andrew Bacevich argues that we must end the previous ways of "endless wars and a succession of moral and material disasters."