Trump Faces Stark Choices in Iran: Escalation or Humiliation, Expert Warns

This is a lightly edited transcript of the April 20 edition of Right Now With Perry Bacon. You can watch the video here or follow the show on YouTube or Substack.

Perry Bacon Introduces the Discussion

Perry Bacon: I am Perry Bacon, from The New Republic’s show Right Now. I’m joined today by Elizabeth Saunders, a professor of political science at Columbia University. Her work focuses on international relations and U.S. foreign policy decisions. Elizabeth, thank you for being here.

We were discussing earlier when we encountered a technical issue, but we’re back now. You recently posted on Bluesky that Trump’s choices in Iran are essentially humiliation or escalation. Can you explain what you mean by that?

Saunders Explains the Strait of Hormuz Dilemma

Elizabeth Saunders: I think of this as a problem with a giant immovable object in the middle of it: the Strait of Hormuz. We could talk about the nuclear problem—it had been solved diplomatically, but Trump undid it. One could imagine a world where he bombs Iran repeatedly until they feel enough pain to come to the table. But when you bring the Strait of Hormuz into the equation, you change the game entirely.

The Iranians have leverage here that no other country can match. Just look at a map—it’s clear. From this perspective, Trump has expended military power to inflict pain, as he threatened in his Truth Social posts. But that’s not a good option, and it may not even work. In fact, it could destroy Iran as a country, which doesn’t seem like a viable path.

So that’s the escalatory path. But then there’s the humiliation path—it’s hard to imagine either side accepting that. Both sides want a deal. Iran has suffered greatly, and Trump just wants out. That’s good. But the nuclear deal isn’t on the table in the same way anymore. The Iranians would need something substantial to agree to a new deal, and they’re not going to give up their leverage.

The Strait of Hormuz: A Lever of Leverage

Saunders emphasized that the Strait of Hormuz is Iran’s most powerful tool. She noted that world leaders recently misinterpreted Iran’s vague statement about the Strait being "open" as a sign of de-escalation. In reality, Iran’s message was conditional: the Strait is open subject to the conditions of the Iranian Navy.

Saunders explained:

Everybody was just like, ‘Yay, the Strait is open.’ It’s not—it wasn’t. And it’s somehow even more closed again now.

What Would It Take to Reach a Deal?

To secure a new agreement, Saunders argued that the U.S. would need to make significant concessions. This likely means accepting the ongoing threat posed by Iran’s control over the Strait of Hormuz. Addressing this threat would require a long-term U.S. military presence in the region.

Saunders concluded:

What’s probably going to happen is Trump is going to sign a piece of paper and walk away.

Key Takeaways

• Trump’s options in Iran are limited by the Strait of Hormuz, Iran’s most powerful lever of influence.
• Escalation—through military strikes—risks destroying Iran or failing to achieve U.S. goals.
• Humiliation—forcing Iran to back down—is unlikely, as Iran will not surrender its leverage.
• A new nuclear deal would require U.S. concessions, including accepting Iran’s control over the Strait of Hormuz.
• Long-term U.S. military presence may be necessary to address the threat, but this is politically unpopular.