TEHRAN- An economic analyst, emphasizing the technical and deterrent limitations of enforcing a naval blockade against Iran, warned that such threats would immediately cause price shocks in energy markets and put European and East Asian economies under stagflation pressure.

Hossein Razavipour, speaking to IRNA about the recent action of the US president to impose a naval blockade on Iran aimed at exerting political and economic pressure on Tehran, stated: First, we must examine whether such a blockade is technically possible. When Iran blocks the passage of ships through the Strait of Hormuz, it should be noted that the Strait of Hormuz is a waterway with a narrow passage that can be monitored even with the naked eye, and ship traffic there can be controlled.

He added: Regarding waterways, it must be noted that these routes can be threatened with the simplest tools, including inexpensive but high-quality drones, to target unauthorized ships if they attempt passage. However, at distances farther from the Strait of Hormuz, where they would want to seize ships, the enforcing military force must be present within close range of the vessels.

Razavipour continued: During the recent military aggression by the US and the Zionist regime against Iran, we saw that many American warships and destroyers were stationed in the Indian Ocean to stay out of range of Iran's naval cruise missiles. This itself is a technical deterrent factor that prevents them from effectively controlling and exerting authority over ship traffic at close range. Therefore, from a technical and military standpoint, seizing ships that dock at Iranian ports will not be very easy.

Razavipour continued: On the other hand, Iran's current most important trading partner is China, and it is unlikely that the US, under current circumstances, would want to directly engage with Chinese ships or maritime trade, because there is a possibility of China retaliating in kind. This is another technical and deterrent factor that casts doubt on the success of such actions.

Regarding the impact of these threats on energy markets, the economic analyst said: Interestingly, immediately after Trump announced this decision, global energy prices began to rise. For example, European gas futures grew by 18% within a single day. This indicates that the future outlook of the energy market is more crisis-ridden than the current situation. The reason is clear: when the energy supply outlook declines due to restrictions in the Strait of Hormuz and reduced oil and gas production or exports in the Persian Gulf, any shock that further reduces supply will fuel price increases.

A naval blockade will fuel an energy shock

He recalled: For this reason, at the beginning of the war, we saw that even the Americans suspended some oil and gas sanctions on Iran and Russia to allow more supply into the global market and to overcome the initial shock. Now, the same America is threatening oil tankers or cargo ships associated with Iran or originating from Iranian ports—an action that will likely add to the energy shock and put more pressure on those parts of the global economy that are vulnerable to energy shocks.

This economic expert stated: Europe and Southeast Asian countries such as Japan, Hong Kong, China, and South Korea, and even the US itself, will be affected by the stagflation caused by rising energy prices. It seems this policy will be a mistake with counterproductive results for the US; it will not be very successful in practice, but in terms of psychological shock, it will have negative effects on the oil market.

Razavipour added: In the US itself, many have mocked Trump's adoption of this unwise and ill-timed policy, considering it a sign of his lack of understanding of the situation and his inability to resolve the Strait of Hormuz issue. It seems that the US currently does not have many cards on the table and is using options that have little chance of creating a superior position for it.

Iran’s geographical expanse covers a large part of the risks

The economic analyst then addressed the management of domestic markets and said: Undoubtedly, Iran's economy is also affected by this war and the policies imposed by the United States, and the recent fluctuations observed in the foreign exchange market are due to these threats, which, it must be said, are mostly psychological in nature.

Razavipour noted: With the targeting of some energy infrastructure and then industrial infrastructure—which is natural for any country during wartime—there will be some problems in the production chain of certain products.

At the same time, he emphasized: The country's geographical expanse and the possibility of using non-maritime borders for key trade with neighbors cover a large part of Iran's risks.

He added: Just as we saw with grains and some other inputs—where northern ports replaced southern regions and commodity needs were largely met—trade affairs can be managed through various methods.

The former head of Iran's Plan and Budget Organization referred to Iran's land borders and the advantage of having numerous neighbors, stating: Iran's borders with Iraq, Pakistan, Central Asia, Turkey, and the Caspian Sea provide the possibility that the country will not face famine due to disruptions in imports.

Razavipour added: Some goods may arrive with delays or at higher cost, but during transitional periods and war, such shocks are manageable for a vast country like Iran.

He concluded: This situation may impose costs on the country, but compared to the costs incurred for the Americans themselves and the financial gains from rising energy prices for Iran, it seems these costs can be compensated.

MA