Tehran questions Washington’s motives as energy crisis deepens

Iran’s president has publicly challenged the United States over its role in the escalating Middle East conflict, questioning whether the ongoing war aligns with Washington’s stated “America First” priorities as global energy markets come under increasing strain.

In an open message addressed to the American public, President Masoud Pezeshkian criticised US military actions, arguing that strikes on Iran’s infrastructure — including energy and industrial assets — were harming civilians and risked triggering wider instability beyond the region. He framed the conflict as economically and politically costly, not only for Iran but also for the United States and its allies, at a time when global markets are already under pressure.

The remarks come more than a month after the conflict began, following coordinated US and Israeli military operations against Iranian targets. Since then, hostilities have spread across multiple fronts, with retaliatory strikes, regional security incidents and disruptions to key trade routes intensifying the crisis.

At the centre of the economic fallout is the Strait of Hormuz, a vital artery for global oil and liquefied natural gas shipments. Iran’s effective restriction of the passage has significantly reduced shipping activity, contributing to rising energy prices and heightened volatility in international markets. The disruption has had ripple effects across energy-importing economies, particularly in Asia, and has prompted calls for urgent efforts to restore safe navigation.

Pezeshkian questioned the strategic rationale behind the conflict, suggesting that Washington’s involvement may be influenced by its alignment with Israel rather than direct national interests. He also emphasised that ordinary Americans were not adversaries of Iran, attempting to draw a distinction between political leadership and public sentiment.

His intervention came shortly before a scheduled address by US President Donald Trump, who has indicated that any consideration of a ceasefire would be contingent on the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. The condition underscores the central role of energy security in shaping the trajectory of the conflict, with control over the waterway emerging as both a strategic and economic lever.

The exchange highlights the increasingly complex intersection of geopolitics and energy markets, where military actions are closely tied to supply risks and economic outcomes. Analysts note that targeting infrastructure linked to energy production and transport raises the stakes significantly, as it not only affects immediate supply but also undermines longer-term investment confidence in the region.

As the war continues, the broader implications for global energy systems are becoming more pronounced. The combination of physical disruption, market uncertainty and political tension is reinforcing concerns about the vulnerability of concentrated supply routes such as the Strait of Hormuz. For policymakers and industry alike, the crisis is a reminder of how quickly regional conflicts can evolve into global economic challenges.