If Iran attacks a commercial vessel in the Strait of Hormuz, the U.S will retaliate by hitting an Iranian tanker, and Washington has already done it.
Two Iranian government tankers were struck in port this week, the first time the U.S has targeted Iranian vessels specifically in retaliation for attacks on shipping rather than to enforce its blockade.
On the surface, this looks like escalation, but something stranger is happening.
The enormous exchanges earlier in the war have gradually diminished into a much more limited fight centred almost entirely on Hormuz.
No massive bombing campaign, and no immediate push toward regime change.
Instead, both sides appear to be developing rules for an open-ended war neither is willing to end.
And the underlying problem hasn't changed: Washington needs Hormuz reliably open, but Tehran only needs to prove it can still make it dangerous.
Shipping traffic remains far below normal, and the IRGC responded to the latest U.S strikes by warning they would only “tighten the lock” on the Strait.
So this war may actually be de-escalating in intensity while becoming more permanent in structure.
That's the danger of a tanker for a tanker.
It doesn't provide a way out of the war; instead, it creates rules for staying in it.
@WeTheBrandon
