Iran war – Misryoum maps four phases of the Iran conflict, from early strikes to Strait of Hormuz pressure and Project Freedom.
A widening conflict around Iran has now moved through distinct phases, each one sharpening the stakes for shipping and global energy markets.
According to Misryoum, the first phase began late Feb.. 28, 2026, when President Donald Trump announced that “major combat operations” were underway after joint U.S.. and Israeli strikes.. The administration framed the campaign as a response to what it described as imminent threats and as part of a broader effort to prevent Iran from advancing a nuclear weapons capability.. Officials described early strikes as targeting key Iranian leadership and command functions. and Iran responded with missile attacks aimed at multiple Gulf locations. expanding the crisis beyond Iran’s borders.
What matters here is how quickly the conflict shifted from airstrikes into a wider regional pattern of retaliation and counter-retaliation, raising the risk of escalation at each step.
As Misryoum reports. the second phase centered on the Strait of Hormuz. a crucial chokepoint connecting the Persian Gulf to the wider shipping routes of the region.. After the death of Iran’s top leader. the succession was followed closely as messages attributed to the new supreme leader directed the IRGC to restrict traffic through the strait.. Iran’s claims of attacks on commercial shipping and the U.S.. warnings issued in increasingly forceful terms turned the waterway into the war’s focal point. with diplomats and shipping operators effectively caught in the middle.
This phase matters because control of a single maritime corridor can ripple into transport, insurance, and pricing far beyond the region, making the conflict a national and economic issue even for Americans far from the gulf.
Misryoum notes that the third phase shifted toward maritime pressure paired with intermittent efforts at diplomacy.. The U.S.. signaled discussions about ending the war, while also offering a structured proposal through intermediaries.. After periods of threat escalation and announcements of temporary pauses. a ceasefire was announced that included reopening the Strait of Hormuz. but it was soon contested after Israel’s operations in Lebanon prompted Iran to claim the agreement was broken and that the strait was closed again.
Meanwhile, as Misryoum describes, the U.S.. increased leverage through naval actions, later expanding to a blockade of Iranian ports along the strait.. The administration said it could not allow what it characterized as coercion tied to global shipping access. while also extending ceasefire arrangements at Pakistan’s request.
The end of this phase matters because it illustrates how, in modern conflicts, diplomacy can coexist with military tools like blockades, keeping pressure high while negotiations proceed slowly.
The final phase, Misryoum reports, is where the conflict’s maritime strategy took a more explicit escort-based form.. In early May, the U.S.. unveiled “Project Freedom. ” intended to support safe passage for commercial vessels through the Strait of Hormuz by pairing them with U.S.. forces.. The launch triggered fresh security warnings and confrontations in the surrounding waters, as the U.S.. said it confronted missile, drone, and small-boat threats aimed at protected ships.
Misryoum also reports that the U.S.. later paused Project Freedom at Pakistan’s request. while keeping the naval blockade in place—an outcome that underscores how even changes in posture may not translate into immediate relief for shipping risk.. Ultimately. what happens next will depend on whether the parties can move from short pauses and partial corridors toward a durable. verifiable reduction in threat.