Iran may close Strait of Hormuz if US decides to join war on Israeli side but does President Donald Trump have constitutional power to make a decision?
Strait of Hormuz
. The warning came amid growing tensions between Iran and Israel. The statement suggests Iran may act if the United States gets involved in the conflict.
Iran Signals Possibility of Strait Closure
Iranian Member of Parliament Ali Yazdikhah said that Iran has the right to close the Strait of Hormuz. He made this statement on Thursday. Yazdikhah explained this would happen only if the United States enters the conflict alongside Israel. The Strait of Hormuz is a key route for global oil shipments.
Iran-Allied Group Issues Warning
Abu Ali al-Askari, a spokesperson of a group allied with Iran, issued a warning. He said that if the United States supports Israel militarily, US assets in the region will face attacks. He mentioned US bases could come under fire and shipping routes like the Strait of Hormuz and Bab al-Mandeb might close. He also said that oil ports in the Red Sea would shut down. He warned of potential damage to US aircraft.
Also Read:
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 Rivals Event: How to earn rewards? See start date, time, rewards and when is next scheduled event
US Presidential Decision
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt spoke about the US stance. She said President Donald Trump will make a decision in the next two weeks. The decision will depend on possible future negotiations with Iran. Trump shared that there is a chance for talks, but no clear plan has been made yet.
Live Events
Oil Market Reacts to Conflict
Oil prices have increased due to rising tensions. Israel and Iran have continued to exchange missile strikes. On Thursday,
Brent crude futures
rose by $1.60 to reach $78.29 a barrel. US West Texas Intermediate crude also rose to $78.34. Oil prices had already peaked at $78.50 on June 13 when Israel launched attacks.
Also Read:
Iran Israel Conflict: Does Israel have a nuclear arsenal? All you may want to know
If Strait of Hormuz Closes
The Strait of Hormuz handles about 20 percent of the world's oil supply. If the strait is closed, oil supply may drop. That could raise the cost of goods and fuel. Trade, shipping, and travel might also slow down.
What is US War Powers Act?
The US Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war, while the president is commander in chief. Presidents can respond to threats but need congressional approval for extended military action. A federal law limits presidential war powers, requiring Congress to be notified within 48 hours and consulted before troops are deployed, unless war is formally declared.
FAQs
Why is the Strait of Hormuz important?
It carries 20 percent of global oil, so any disruption can affect prices and supply across the world.
When will the US decide on involvement?
President Trump is expected to decide within two weeks, based on whether talks with Iran may happen.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
10 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
From Fatwa to Fallout: War Between Israel and Iran
On 13 June 2025, Israel launched a targeted military attack named Operation Rising Lion against Iran's nuclear infrastructure and to the ballistic missile sites, setting West Asia a stage for another series of wars that can determine the regional order and beyond. The sudden escalation of the missile attacks and US-led 30,000-pound bunker-busters on Iranian underground nuclear facilities and the retaliation by Iran against each attack have resonated with deep-rooted two competing ideologies having duelled national interests—Zionism and political Islam. In a way, both Nations experienced a win-win outcome: Israel aimed to bring the United States into the sphere of conflict, and Iran's response registered a remarkable reference in history against America's interests. Yet, the US soon initiated a ceasefire, indicating its desire to limit the escalation. Official Iran in opposition to nuclear weapons, underscored by the context of the religious fatwa proposed by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Iran's administration executed this declaration by becoming a Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) member and which has ratified on 2 February 1970. The development of nuclear weapons is a forbidden act under Islamic law. However, the existence of antagonistic scenarios in the region, continuing wars like the Syrian civil war, Yemeni civil war, and Israel–Hezbollah conflicts. Moreover, the US military presence in countries such as Qatar, Bahrain, and the UAE has turned this region into a dreadful zone. However, Iran has extensively approached the international community and agencies for developing their nuclear pursuits for peaceful purposes and has strived for global recognition for its nuclear ambitions. However, Israel and the United States perceive these ambitions as a grave threat to regional stability and security and beyond, leading to the twelve-day war we have witnessed in recent days. The escalation uncovered the tags of elliptical encounters, secret operations, and proxy conflicts between Israel and Iran. For Instance, Israel's 1 April 2024 airstrike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus, Syria, resulted in the death of key Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps commanders, including General Mohammad Reza Zahedi. The contemporary crisis is observed not only by military manoeuvres but also by highly charged rhetoric role in diplomacy from Israel, the United States and Iran. This situation reinforces the relevance of the state, its national interest, and the role of the political leadership, which remains the centre of global politics. In contrast, humans and human rights violations are being subjected to justified by the state-led pre-emptive measures, raising rigorous ethical and legal concerns. Israel, despite maintaining a policy of amimut (nuclear opacity), widely known as the sole nuclear armed country in West Asia. In contrast, Iran's increasing influence in West Asia and outspoken against the Zionist regime and Netanyahu's interventions and policies—particularly regarding Palestine—have propelled its portrayal as a destabilizing force in the region by Western powers.
Hans India
14 minutes ago
- Hans India
AICC meeting with MLAs is not about leadership change: DKS
Bengaluru: KPCC President and Deputy Chief Minister DK Shivakumar on Tuesday clarified that the meeting between MLAs and AICC General Secretary Randeep Singh Surjewala was about party organisation and not about leadership change. Speaking to reporters at the KPCC office, he said, 'The meeting is to discuss party organisation and receive MLA's pleas. There has been no discussion about change of CM or expansion of the Cabinet. The Congress party has changed the district and block level leaders across the country and this meeting is in that backdrop.' 'AICC President has declared this year as the year of organisation and has asked us to empower district party presidents. Rahul Gandhi and AICC General Secretaries held a meeting of district presidents in Delhi,' he added. 'Randeep Singh Surjewala is here to receive pleas from MLAs and also give guidance on party organisation. He is trying to bring in discipline in the party amidst public statements by some of the MLAs. Neither the Cabinet expansion or the leadership change was discussed. We are not in a hurry for that and our only focus is 2028,' he said. Asked about Iqbal Hussain's statement that DK Shivakumar would become the CM, he said, 'I will serve him a notice. No one should make public statements on this. Siddaramaiah is the CM and we all should strengthen his hand.' Asked about B R Patil expressing dissatisfaction over grants, he said, 'The state budget has allocated Rs 1 lakh crore for development. Rs 54,000 crore is ear-marked for guarantee schemes. Rs 19,000 crore is spent on providing electricity to farmers. Isn't this development?' Asked about Malur MLA Nanjegowda's statement that he was promised to be made accommodated in KMF, he said, 'Political developments are different and cooperative sector is different. I will not comment on that now.'
New Indian Express
16 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
India, China in US crosshairs as Trump backs bill pushing 500% tariffs on Russia's trade partners
Strategic gamble or bargaining chip? If enacted, the proposed tariffs would mark a significant escalation in the US economic campaign against Russia, with wide-ranging global implications. The bill targets not only Russian goods, but also imports from countries that maintain substantial trade relations with Moscow, particularly in the energy sector. India and China, the two largest buyers of discounted Russian crude, are directly in the firing line. Their purchases have provided a critical economic lifeline to Russia, helping fund military operations in Ukraine even as Western sanctions have tightened. The economic consequences could be far-reaching. A 500% tariff on goods from China, which accounts for a major share of US consumer imports, could trigger price spikes, further strain fragile global supply chains, and risk inflationary surges and job losses in the US. Similarly, India, a key US partner in pharmaceuticals, IT and textiles, could face reduced trade access just as it seeks to diversify and grow its export sectors. Yet, the US itself remains dependent on enriched uranium imports from Russia to fuel its nuclear reactors — a reliance that could put its energy interests at odds with the very sanctions it aims to enforce. The bill, first introduced in March, initially encountered resistance from the Trump-aligned administration. According to The Wall Street Journal, the White House had sought to soften the draft by changing enforcement from mandatory ('shall') to discretionary ('may'), thereby preserving executive flexibility. Graham appears to have accommodated those concerns. In recent weeks, he offered a carve-out for countries actively supporting Ukraine, likely to address European apprehensions and secure broader international support. 'We are going to give President Trump a tool in the toolbox,' Graham said, referring to the bill's latest version. 'For the first time yesterday, the president told me … 'It's time to move your bill.'' Trump's direct intervention, reportedly during a golf game with Graham, could accelerate legislative momentum. However, how the bill evolves through Congress remains to be seen, and more critically, whether Trump would ultimately enforce it or use it as a strategic bargaining chip with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The legislation could also serve as leverage in potential negotiations with Russia. Trump could, for instance, use the threat of punitive tariffs against India, China or even European partners to extract concessions from Putin on Ukraine. To a degree, this duality — rhetorical toughness paired with tactical flexibility — has long characterised Trump's approach to foreign policy. India, which maintains that its Russian oil purchases are legal and aligned with national energy security interests, could find itself in an increasingly precarious position if the bill passes. It may be forced to intensify diplomatic engagement with Washington. Although still making its way through legislative channels, the Sanctioning Russia Act signals an escalation in US sanctions policy. With broad bipartisan support and Trump's personal endorsement, its passage appears increasingly likely. Whether it is used as an enforcement tool or a diplomatic lever, however, remains uncertain — as does the possibility of Trump changing course midway.
