WASHINGTON (Realist English). U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Washington may need to escalate military action against Iran in order to bring the conflict to an end, as the Trump administration continues to send mixed signals about its strategy in the ongoing war.
Speaking to NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday, Bessent said escalation and de-escalation are not contradictory approaches. “Sometimes you have to escalate to de-escalate,” he said, adding that pressure is “the only language the Iranians understand.”
His comments came a day after U.S. President Donald Trump threatened to “obliterate” Iran’s energy infrastructure if Tehran fails to reopen the Strait of Hormuz within 48 hours. The ultimatum followed earlier statements suggesting U.S. objectives were “very close” to being achieved and that the war could be wound down.
The conflict, which began on February 28 with a joint U.S.-Israeli campaign targeting Iran’s nuclear and missile capabilities, has since expanded into a broader regional confrontation. Iran has responded with missile and drone strikes and threats to maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz — a critical chokepoint handling roughly 20% of global oil and liquefied natural gas flows.
Disruptions in the strait have triggered a sharp rise in global energy prices, with knock-on effects for inflation and fuel costs. In the United States, rising gasoline prices have emerged as a political risk ahead of midterm elections.
As part of efforts to stabilize markets, Bessent confirmed that the U.S. temporarily eased sanctions on Iranian and Russian oil shipments already in transit. The move was aimed at increasing supply and limiting price spikes, though it has drawn criticism for potentially boosting revenues for Iran during active hostilities.
Bessent defended the decision by arguing that the oil would have reached global markets regardless, primarily via China, and that allowing additional supply helps cap prices. “Which is better? If oil prices spiked to $150… or oil prices below $100?” he said.
The Treasury secretary declined to provide a timeline for when energy prices might stabilize, suggesting the duration of disruption could range from weeks to several months. He argued that the long-term goal — reducing Iran’s military capabilities — would justify short-term economic costs.
On funding, Bessent said the U.S. government has sufficient resources to sustain the war effort but is seeking supplemental financing from Congress to ensure continued military readiness. A proposed request of up to $200 billion faces resistance from lawmakers in both parties, reflecting growing concern over the scale and duration of the conflict.
Analytically, the administration’s dual-track messaging — combining threats of escalation with signals of de-escalation — reflects an attempt to maintain strategic flexibility while managing domestic and international pressure.
The key uncertainty is whether increased military pressure will compel Iran to alter its behavior or instead trigger a broader escalation cycle, particularly given the central role of energy infrastructure and global supply routes in the conflict.
