U.S.-Israel Attack on Iran Is Tied to $1 Trillion Debt Pressure and Oil Control
Updated
Updated · CounterPunch · May 12
U.S.-Israel Attack on Iran Is Tied to $1 Trillion Debt Pressure and Oil Control
6 articles · Updated · CounterPunch · May 12
June 2025 strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities are framed in the report as driven less by nonproliferation than by U.S. efforts to control oil and gas flows and preserve geopolitical leverage.
37.7% of Persian Gulf oil moving through the Strait of Hormuz goes to China, while China buys about 90% of Iran’s exported oil, making any disruption a direct pressure point on Beijing and other Asian economies.
The report argues that pressure also comes from the petrodollar system: Gulf oil has long been priced in dollars, supporting demand for U.S. debt, while more energy trade is now shifting to yuan and other currencies.
$1.0 trillion in U.S. interest payments due in FY2026 is cited as a reason Washington would resist any weakening of dollar-based oil trade that could raise borrowing costs and erode financial power.
Economists cited in the piece say the Iran conflict reflects a broader strategy of using energy chokepoints and the dollar-centered financial system to sustain U.S. influence as its economic dominance weakens.
Did the war to control oil chokepoints inadvertently accelerate the dollar's decline and China's green transition?
As global stagflation deepens, can any nation win a war that severs the world’s most critical energy and trade arteries?
With the conflict stalled and goals unmet, what new global order is emerging from the economic and political fallout?
War in 2026: U.S.-Iran Conflict, Global Oil Shock, and the Unraveling of the Petrodollar System
Overview
On February 28, 2026, the United States and Israel launched military strikes on Iran, aiming to prevent its nuclear weapons development. This action, justified by the Trump administration, quickly drew international scrutiny, with Russia formally challenging the legality of the attacks. Concerns grew as the U.S. removed safeguards meant to protect civilians and relied heavily on AI-driven targeting, raising ethical and legal questions. The conflict escalated with Iranian retaliation, widespread civilian harm, and global economic shocks, highlighting the risks of weakened oversight and the far-reaching consequences of military decisions in a volatile region.