TEHRAN- A top Iranian political figure is signaling that it retains significant, largely unexercised leverage in its standoff with Washington, framing the balance of power less in purely military terms and more through control over energy flows, geography, and timing.

Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf pushed back against assertions by Donald Trump that the United States “has all the cards,” arguing instead that Washington may have already deployed much of its usable leverage. At the same time, Tehran continues to hold key options in reserve.

Writing on X, Qalibaf described what he termed a balance between “supply” and “demand” cards in global energy markets. His formulation suggests that Iran’s influence lies primarily in its ability to disrupt or modulate supply routes, while the US has leaned on demand-side tools such as strategic reserve releases and consumption management.

At the center of Iran’s calculus is the Strait of Hormuz, through which roughly a fifth of global oil trade passes. Qalibaf characterized Iran’s use of the chokepoint as only “partly played,” implying that escalation — whether through tighter controls or selective disruption — remains an available, if high-risk, option.

He also pointed to the Bab el-Mandeb Strait as an “unplayed” lever. While Iran does not directly control the passage, its network of regional allies has, in past crises, demonstrated the capacity to affect maritime security there. Any sustained disruption across both chokepoints would have outsized effects on shipping costs and global energy prices.

A third “unplayed” card, according to Qalibaf, lies in pipeline dynamics. While pipelines are often presented as alternatives to maritime oil flows, their limited capacity means they cannot fully replace seaborne ????? routed through Hormuz, preserving Iran’s structural advantage in the event of a supply shock.

By contrast, the US toolkit, as described by Iranian officials, has already been partially deployed. Releases from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve — historically used to stabilize markets — are finite, while demand-side measures such as price-driven consumption adjustments tend to operate with a lag and carry domestic political costs.

Timing may also prove critical. Iran’s reference to rising seasonal demand — particularly during the US summer travel period — underscores a belief in Tehran that tighter market conditions could amplify the impact of any future disruption, narrowing Washington’s room for manoeuvre without incurring economic consequences.

These arguments come against the backdrop of a fragile ceasefire that took effect in April after weeks of direct confrontation between Iran and the United States. Talks, mediated by Pakistan, had been expected to resume before being abruptly cancelled by Washington, adding uncertainty to an already volatile diplomatic track.

Iranian officials maintain that their posture in Hormuz is framed as a security measure, though the implicit signaling suggests a broader strategy: preserving credible escalation options without immediately deploying them. For Tehran, the value of these “unplayed cards” may lie as much in deterrence and negotiation leverage as in their actual use.