President Trump told Fox News the war with Iran is “very close to over,” projecting confidence even as a two-week ceasefire holds, a naval blockade tightens around the Strait of Hormuz, and Pakistan pushes to broker new peace negotiations. The remark landed Wednesday amid a flurry of developments, fresh Treasury sanctions, Israeli warnings about resumed strikes, and a sharp exchange with Pope Leo over the morality of the campaign, that together suggest the administration is pressing Tehran on every available front while keeping one eye on the exit.
Whether Iran sees it the same way is another matter entirely. The regime’s first vice president used the day to appeal to the pope for sympathy, and its football federation is still refusing to send its World Cup team to American soil. But the facts on the water tell a clearer story than the rhetoric on either side.
U.S. Central Command announced Wednesday that ten vessels have been turned around since the naval blockade began on Monday. Zero ships have broken through. CENTCOM said an Iranian cargo ship departing Bandar Abbas tried to evade the blockade in the Strait of Hormuz on Tuesday before the USS Spruance redirected it. American naval vessels remain on patrol in the Gulf of Oman, CBS News reported in its live coverage.
An audio recording shared by CENTCOM on X captured the tone of enforcement. A U.S. voice warned a vessel it “will be boarded for interdiction and seizure” and added plainly:
“If you do not comply with this blockade, we will use force. The whole of the United States Navy is ready to enforce compliance.”
That is not the language of a country looking to back down. The blockade is the administration’s most visible pressure tool, and so far it is working exactly as designed, choking off maritime traffic through the strait that Iran has long treated as its strategic leverage point.
While the Navy enforced the blockade at sea, the Treasury Department opened a second front on Wednesday. It announced sanctions against more than two dozen people, companies, and vessels tied to an alleged oil smuggling network run by Mohammad Hossein Shamkhani, the son of a now-deceased senior Iranian security official who served as an advisor to former Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Three companies linked to an alleged money laundering operation involving the sale of Iranian oil in exchange for Venezuelan gold under former leader Nicolás Maduro were also targeted. The department said all property and interests held by designated persons in the United States or controlled by U.S. persons are now blocked and must be reported to the Office of Foreign Assets Control.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent framed the action in personal terms, as some Democrats have broken with their own party to support a harder line on Tehran:
“Treasury is moving aggressively with Economic Fury by targeting regime elites like the Shamkhani family that attempt to profit at the expense of the Iranian people.”
State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott said the sanctions fit a broader strategy to limit Iran’s ability to generate revenue, describing “complex schemes involving illicit Iranian oil, gold, and terrorist financing” that “demonstrate the lengths to which Iran and its partners will go to evade sanctions and fund malign activities.”
Bessent also confirmed the administration will not renew general licenses on Russian or Iranian oil. He said any oil that had been on the water before March 11 under those licenses “has been used.” The sanctions relief on Russian oil alone could have benefitted Moscow to the tune of roughly $2 billion, Bessent said, though he added that figure is not confirmed.
The administration knows the blockade and sanctions carry a domestic price tag. Gas costs are already climbing. The U.S. Energy Information Administration had projected national gas prices would average $2.95 per gallon in 2027 before the war began. That forecast has since risen to $3.46 per gallon.
Bessent and White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt used a joint briefing to make the case that the pain is temporary. Leavitt stated it directly:
“The president’s been very clear, again, as the secretary just said, this is short-term disruption for the long-term strategic goal of the United States to ensure that the world’s leading state sponsor of terror cannot obtain a nuclear weapon.”
Bessent offered a more specific timeline. He said he had been meeting with Middle Eastern finance ministers during “bank week” in Washington, and that they all told him once the straits reopen, they can resume pumping within one week. He predicted Americans could see gas with a “3” in front of it “sometime between June 20 and Sept. 20.”
That is a bold promise. Whether it holds will depend on how quickly any deal materializes, and whether Iran cooperates or stalls.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Wednesday that American officials are “constantly updating us on the talks with Iran.” He added a line that left no room for ambiguity about Israel’s posture:
“Our goals are the same. In anticipation of the possibility that fighting will resume, we are prepared for any scenario.”
IDF spokesperson Effie Defrin reinforced the message. He said the Israeli military has been observing a ceasefire with Iran “for several days, in accordance with the directives of the political echelon,” but emphasized readiness. The administration’s willingness to take unprecedented steps on multiple fronts appears to have kept Israel’s confidence intact.
“I want to emphasize that the IDF is well prepared in defense, we are prepared to attack again in a powerful manner quickly if necessary.”
That kind of language from both Washington and Jerusalem sends a clear signal to Tehran: the ceasefire is an opportunity, not a reprieve.
Iran’s first vice president, Mohammad Reza Aref, took a different approach Wednesday. He posted on X, thanking Pope Leo for condemning the war and casting Iran as a martyr for justice.
“Iran, for years, has been subjected to sanctions for the crime of defending justice, humanity, and freedom. It is now also the target of direct and unjust aggression by the United States and Israel.”
Aref called on the world for “collective action for justice and compassion” and praised the pope’s “principled positions in condemning this brutality.” Pope Leo had previously called Trump’s threat to wipe out Iranian civilization “truly unacceptable” and encouraged people to contact political leaders to ask them to work for peace.
Trump did not mince words about the pope’s intervention. He told Fox News the pope was “wrong on the issues” and added bluntly: “I don’t think he should be getting into politics. I think he probably learned that from this.” The exchange is the latest instance of critics targeting the president’s foreign policy and finding that he does not absorb the criticism quietly.
U.N. Relief Chief Tom Fletcher said Wednesday he had allocated $12 million from the United Nations’ Global Emergency Fund for humanitarian response in Iran, posting on X that “thousands of civilians” had been killed, infrastructure destroyed, and essential services disrupted. The humanitarian toll is real. But Iran’s regime has spent decades funding proxy wars, building a nuclear program in defiance of international agreements, and holding the Strait of Hormuz hostage. The sympathy campaign rings hollow when the regime’s own choices created the conditions for this conflict.
Even the 2026 World Cup has become a front in the standoff. FIFA President Gianni Infantino said Wednesday at CNBC’s Invest in America Forum that Iran’s team “is coming for sure.” Two of Iran’s group games are scheduled for SoFi Stadium outside Los Angeles, with another in Seattle. The tournament is co-hosted by the U.S., Canada, and Mexico.
But the president of the Iranian Football Federation, identified as Taj, said last month the team would not travel to America. He cited Trump’s own words:
“When [President] Trump has explicitly stated that he cannot ensure the security of the Iranian national team, we will certainly not travel to America.”
Iran had been negotiating with FIFA to play its matches in Mexico instead. Trump himself appeared to send mixed signals, at a mid-March White House meeting he told FIFA representatives Iran was welcome to play, but more recently seemed to waver on whether the team should participate at all. The spectacle of a regime that funds terrorism demanding security guarantees from the country it threatens is a fitting symbol of the broader standoff.
Not all criticism of the administration’s approach comes from the left. John Bolton, the former Trump national security adviser and former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, told CBS News he agreed with undertaking the current war but would have handled it differently. His core complaint: he cannot identify the president’s objective.
“I don’t sense the president has a plan. I think he’s made clear in many, many different ways he wants out. He’s looking for a way to declare victory. And I think if we leave at least without reopening the Strait of Hormuz militarily to… Arab oil, then I think it’s a very hollow victory, if that’s what he does.”
Bolton also floated the harder option: “If you can’t change a regime’s behavior, the only other alternative is change the regime.” He said he did not know if that was Trump’s intention and noted the president had “certainly not done things that are necessary if that was his objective.”
Bolton’s hawkish skepticism is worth noting, but it also reflects a Washington instinct to demand a detailed roadmap before results arrive. The blockade is holding. The sanctions are expanding. The ceasefire is intact. Pakistan is offering to mediate. Those are facts on the ground, not talking points. Meanwhile, Trump has shown repeatedly he is willing to draw hard lines and enforce them.
In southern Lebanon, the consequences of Iran’s proxy network continued to play out. Lebanon’s health ministry reported that attacks in Mayfadoun killed three paramedics, wounded six others, and left a fourth medic missing. The ministry called the strikes “a flagrant crime” and said “paramedics have become direct targets.” The violence is a reminder that Iran’s destabilizing influence stretches far beyond its own borders, and that any deal must account for the full scope of Tehran’s malign behavior.
The administration says the conflict is nearly over. Iran says it is the victim. The Navy says zero ships have broken through. Somewhere between those claims lies the outcome that will define this chapter of American foreign policy. What matters now is whether Washington holds the line long enough to make the deal stick, because short-term resolve is the only thing that produces long-term peace.
By signing up, you agree to receive our newsletters and promotional content and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You may unsubscribe at any time.