Negotiations between Washington and Tehran have edged toward a tentative agreement, but Iran’s military leaders are warning that any renewed clash would be far more expansive than the 2020‑21 conflict.. the United States announced Thursday that a provisional deal awaits President Donald Trump’s sign‑off, even as U.S . strikes continue and skirmishes flare in the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard vows “crushing blows” beyond the Gulf

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) told reporters that a future war would extend far beyond the Persian Gulf, striking targets “opponents cannot even imagine.” According to the source, IRGC officials used the diplomatic lull to rebuild capabilities and signal that they retain “significant military options should diplomacy fail.”Experts say the rhetoric is meant to deter further attacks , but it also signals Tehran’s willingness to widen the battlefield.

Potential new blockades: Hormuz and Bab al‑Mandeb at risk

Iran has previously leveraged a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz to inflict global economic pain, and officials now hint at expanding that strategy to the Bab al‑Mandeb Strait.. In 2023, more than 10 % of the world’s seaborne oil passed through Bab al‑Mandeb, and a simultaneous crisis there and in Hormuz could spike oil prices and freight rates worldwide, according to energy strategist Umud Shokri of George Mason University.

While the Houthis in Yemen, Iran’s regional proxy , have shown they can disrupt traffic near Bab al‑Mandeb, a full closure would likely provoke a strong international naval response. Shokri warned that a prolonged security crisis, rather than a literal blockage, could make commercial shipping “too risky or expensive,” achieving many of Tehran’s economic objectives without a direct seal‑off.

Escalation to oil‑well attacks if U.S. hits Iranian refineries

Ahmad Bakhshayesh Ardestani, a member of Iran’s national security committee, told Iranian media that a U.S. strike on Iranian oil refineries would prompt Tehran to hit Gulf Arab oil wells, not just pipelines or refineries as in the 40‑day war. He warned, “If they intend to do something so that we have no oil, we will not attack their pipelines, we will attack the wells so that they also have no oil and fuel becomes expensive for the world.”

This threat marks a stark ecsalation : targeting wells could cripple production at the source, driving global fuel prices higher and amplifying inflationary pressure. As the source notes, such a move would be “significant” compared with Iran’s previous focus on refineries and pipelines.

Who will decide if the tentative deal survives?

The tentative agreement remains pending Trump’s approval, leaving the United States’ executive decision as the final hurdle. According to the source,U.S. officials confirmed the deal on Thursday but did not disclose its exact terms. The uncertainty surrounding Trump’s response fuels Tehran’s aggressive posturing, as Iranian negotiators like Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf argue that the cease‑fire period has been used to rebuild military strength.

What are the missing pieces in Tehran’s threat calculus?

  • Whether Iran can realistically coordinate a sustained Bab al‑Mandeb disruption without provoking a massive naval coalition.
  • The credibility of the claim that Iran could strike oil wells across the Gulf Arab states without triggering immediate retaliation.
  • How Trump’s final decision on the deal will reshape the balance between diplomatic progress and military escalation.

    • As the world watches, the interplay of diplomacy and posturing will determine whether the region faces a renewed, wider war or a fragile peace.