DUBAI, April 8 (Reuters) – Nearly six weeks of war in Iran have ended, for now, with President Donald Trump claiming victory, but the U.S.-Iran ceasefire locks in a harsh reality: an entrenched, radical government with control over the Strait of Hormuz and a powerful lever over global energy markets and Gulf rivals, analysts say.
The shockwaves have rippled outward, contributing to global economic strains and bringing conflict to Gulf neighbours whose economies depend on stability.
The Reuters Iran Briefing newsletter keeps you informed with the latest developments and analysis of the Iran war. Sign up here.
“This war will be remembered as Trump’s grave strategic miscalculation. One whose consequences reshaped the region in unintended ways,” Middle East scholar Fawaz Gerges told Reuters.
Before the war, the Strait – a narrow passage carrying around a fifth of the world’s oil and gas – was formally treated as an international waterway. Iran monitored it, harassed shipping and intermittently intercepted vessels, but it stopped short of asserting outright control.
In the new reality, Tehran has moved from shadowing tankers to effectively dictating terms. It currently functions as the de facto gatekeeper of the shipping route, selectively deciding on passage and on what terms. Iran wants to charge ships for safe passage.
Additionally, Iran has demonstrated resilience under sustained attack and retained the capacity to escalate further, projecting influence across multiple fronts and strategic choke points. Its reach extends through Lebanon and Iraq via Hezbollah and Shi’ite militias, and into the Bab el-Mandeb in the Red Sea, leveraging the sphere of influence of its Houthi allies.
At home, Iran’s leadership remains firmly in control – even though the country’s economy is in tatters and great swathes of infrastructure in ruins from American and Israeli bombs.
“What did the U.S.–Israeli war actually achieve?” asked Gerges. “Regime change in Tehran? No. The surrender of the Islamic Republic? No. Containment of Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium? No. An end to Tehran’s support for its regional allies? No.”
Iran has absorbed the blows while retaining – and in some cases strengthening – its core instruments of power, said four analysts and three Gulf government sources who spoke to Reuters for this story.
As well as Iran’s control of Hormuz, the political picture now, they noted, is of a more brutal, empowered establishment, unaccounted nuclear material, continued missile and drone production, and ongoing support for regional militias.
Echoing Trump, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday said Washington had won a decisive military victory, and that Iran’s missile programme had been functionally destroyed. Iran was still able to launch missiles prior to the ceasefire.
In response to requests for comment, the State Department and White House referred Reuters to a press briefing in which White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said Trump’s priority was reopening Hormuz without limitations, but she did not rule out a future in which Iran and the United States shared toll revenue.
The United States, Israel and Iran on Tuesday agreed to the two-week ceasefire and U.S. and Iranian officials are expected to hold talks from Friday to discuss a long-term settlement.
While the ceasefire may halt the fighting, the Gulf officials said its durability hinges on addressing the deeper conflicts shaping the region’s security and energy landscape.
Any deal that falls short of a comprehensive settlement risks entrenching Iranian leverage rather than constraining it, they add.
Ebtesam Al‑Ketbi, president of the Emirates Policy Center described the truce as a fragile pause – one likely to institutionalize new forms of instability unless it expands well beyond a narrow cessation of hostilities.
“This ceasefire is not a solution; it is a test of intentions,” Ketbi told Reuters. “If it does not evolve into a broader agreement redefining the rules of engagement – in Hormuz and across proxy theatres – it will amount to little more than a tactical pause before a more dangerous and complex escalation.”
