Brinkmanship in the Gulf: Why TACO’s Iran Deadline Keeps Sliding

 

Donald Trump’s five-day deadline threat against Iran’s energy infrastructure lapsed yesterday. Instead of striking, he postponed it by ten days—to April 6. He claims he was happy to give Iran another extension because talks were ongoing and productive. Do you believe him? Iran denies any such talks took place.

What is credible is this: Pakistan and possibly Egypt are now acting as intermediaries, conveying demands between the two sides. We must take all claims with a grain of salt.

The Real Pressures Behind the Pause
Trump realizes – though refuses to admit – that the war he has started with Benjamin Netanyahu has been a disaster, especially given the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Domestically, he faces strong economic and political pressure to end the conflict. Internationally, oil prices are spiking, allies are crying out for fuel, and the economies of Gulf states are coming to a standstill.

Nonetheless, strikes and military activities continue. Netanyahu is extending the war into Lebanon.

The “Boots” Are Still on the High Seas
The postponement is likely tactical and temporary. Two amphibious assault ships - Tripoli* and Bataan – have yet to arrive. *Tripoli* is Japan-based; *Bataan* is Atlantic-based. Both are being redirected toward the Gulf. The former is expected in early April, the latter slightly later. Each carries F-35B short-takeoff stealth fighters, attack and transport helicopters, and – more lethally – between 1,500 and 2,200 Marines, along with amphibious assault vehicles, light armored vehicles, artillery, and landing craft. They are capable of launching beach landings, raids, and ground troop deployments.

Except for Poland (if I am not mistaken), none of its allies have responded to the call to send ships to help open the Strait of Hormuz.

A Vulnerable Strategy
Amphibious ships are extremely vulnerable in the Gulf, especially in the Strait of Hormuz. Iran specializes in asymmetric coastal warfare. The northern side of the strait – Iran’s coastline – is one of the most dangerous environments in the world for large naval vessels.

The Strait is only about 33 km wide at its narrowest, with shipping lanes even narrower and highly predictable. Iran controls the entire northern coastline and key islands such as Qeshm and Abu Musa. Any ship entering the strait is already inside Iran’s weapons envelope. Iran has designed a system specifically for this scenario: naval mines, coastal and ballistic anti-ship missiles, drones, fast attack boats, and mini-submarines – all intended to overwhelm, confuse, and exhaust U.S. defences.

Amphibious ships like Tripoli and Bataan are especially vulnerable: large, slow, packed with troops, aircraft, and fuel. A successful strike would inflict massive casualties and cause a significant political shock.

The 82nd Airborne Division – widely described as the U.S. military’s rapid-response unit – has troops reportedly aboard Tripoli. While highly capable, the division is not designed to fight a full-scale war alone. It specializes in parachute assault and rapid seizure of key targets. Only about 2,200 troops of its total 15,000–20,000 are believed to be en route. The unit has limited armour and relies on speed, surprise, and air support – capabilities Iran already understands well. The U.S. would likely keep these ships outside the strait and move them in only after suppressing Iranian defences.

Thus, the Trump paradox: the ships are deployed to signal strength, yet using them aggressively inside Hormuz is extraordinarily risky.

A Pattern of Posturing
This pause is Trump’s own cocktail: a tactical pause, political calculation, and limited diplomacy. His behaviour is becoming a pattern – escalating rhetorically with ultimatums, moving forces into position, and then delaying at the last moment. This fits a broader style often associated with him: creating a crisis, personalizing the conflict, employing brinkmanship, and then stepping back to claim a deal.

It is unlikely that Iran, under its current leadership, will concede under pressure. Unlike Venezuela, its clerical leadership is driven by religious mission. The pause will only strengthen its position.

Trump’s Shameless Legacy Building
Trump’s shamelessness knows no bounds. His preoccupation with legacy has produced a series of episodes that range from the absurd to the self-aggrandizing:

1. A Statue in Venezuela

At a recent White House cabinet meeting, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum reportedly floated the idea that Venezuela might build a statue of Trump following U.S. actions there. Trump enthusiastically engaged with the notion, comparing himself to historical liberators.

2. Mount Rushmore Monument Addition

Trump has also asked about being added to Mount Rushmore. During a 2020 visit, South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem presented him with a model showing his face alongside Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt, and Lincoln. The monument sits on land sacred to Native Americans, and engineers warn that further carving could damage it. (Unfortunately, you don’t have someone like the late Tan Sri Lim Goh Tong of the Genting fame in the US. The late Lim could easily create a fake addition to Mount Rushmore to accommodate Trump’s fantasy.)

3. Trump’s Signature on U.S. Paper Currency 

I hardly read mainstream Western papers now. But my wife just showed me another ridiculous act of sycophancy. Apparently, the US Treasury has approved putting Trump’s signature on new paper currency—a break from a 165-year tradition in which notes carried only the signatures of the Treasury Secretary and the Treasurer. Treasurer Brandon Beach called the move “appropriate” and “well deserved,” and has also floated the idea of putting Trump’s image on coins, though placing a living person on circulating U.S. coinage would require congressional action.

Zhèng Qì [正气] versus Xié Qì [邪气]
In my last article, I wrote about zhèng qì – righteousness and moral courage – and xié qì – deviant or corrupting energy. I chose not to broadcast that piece because it used my cultural background to contrast Chinese and U.S. leadership in ways many might not appreciate.

Rather than saying Trump embodies xié qì, I would now put it this way: what we are witnessing is not the presence of zhèng qì restraining conflict, but it is the manifestation of xié qì in Trump - where threats, self-centredness, and brinkmanship replace moral clarity and strategic consistency. 

Conclusion
With Trump, you can never tell what rabbit he will produce next. One thing is certain: he will not be kindly remembered by most future historians.

 

End