Keeping energy and gas prices under control remains the priority. And on this issue, European governments should be decisive in pursuing the common interest. But if Mr. President, just before the truce with Iran expires, could threaten to declare the Strait of Hormuz "US territory" once the enemy is defeated, then perhaps there's reason to be uneasy.

Also because Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi responded immediately that "the Strait of Hormuz cannot be conquered with a tweet, nor with an aircraft carrier, nor with an order, nor with an election speech," and added that "Iran does not fear threats, nor does it bow to demonstrations of force." In short, a more than direct way of responding that "there's a world of difference between words and deeds."

But it's not Donald Trump's almost childish statement in itself that's causing concern, but rather the underlying implication it reflects, given the immediate response. To be clear, after months of fluctuating and exhausting negotiations with Iran, Donald Trump could find himself, now as then (February 28, 2026), in a perfect dead end. Indeed. Announcing an agreement doesn't take much, but implementing it isn't quite so easy. And meanwhile, as they say, "it's the paycheck," given that the Strait of Hormuz has continued to be a strategic transit point and a key hub for global oil and gas trade (it connects the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea), the cost of which has skyrocketed, significantly increasing the cost for Italian and European citizens.

The European Union suddenly found itself completely unprepared for the uncertainties of energy security and trade routes, and is still struggling to find a common path. President Emmanuel Macron did not hesitate to define the armed intervention as outside international law from the outset, but the fact remains that Washington and Tehran are undeniably two opposing forces, now in conflict due to a sudden Israeli-American initiative, almost without fully communicating the whys and wherefores, given that the Tycoon has changed his stance "every now" between negotiations, nuclear threat, and regime change.

These objectives, however, appear to have been missed after nearly six months of conflict, demonstrating the dual reality that the use of military force cannot be the "club" with which to transform a society, an extremely complex and delicate regime such as Iran's, and that the much-vaunted US military supremacy has likely been overestimated. Contrary to Donald Trump's initial plan, no "unconditional surrender" has occurred, and the negotiations (which would be interpreted as a defeat for the Tycoon) still appear difficult to finalize, especially given their potential political consequences in view of the upcoming midterm elections.

Furthermore, this very conflict between the US and Iran, beyond its grave strategic and economic consequences, risks increasing migration flows to European shores, with all the attendant problems attributable to the country of first arrival. Therefore, the attention and initiatives of European states, Italy first and foremost, must be directed towards the consequences of the conflict. This is the priority. The European Union, of which Italy is a fundamental part, must unanimously assert its opposition to the Israeli-US/Iranian conflict, in order to act as a diplomatic mediator capable of reestablishing the violated international order and returning the situation, as far as possible, to the status quo ante. Priorities must be reassessed, because any further protracted blockade could have unmanageable consequences for crude oil prices and the security of international supplies.

Giuseppina Di Salvatore

Lawyer, Nuoro

© Riproduzione riservata