Middle East Forum chief strategist Jim Hanson joined Fox News to warn that Iran is attempting to assert control over the Strait of Hormuz by restricting maritime access and acting as a gatekeeper for global energy flows. Hanson argued that Tehran is using selective passage and pressure tactics to maintain leverage over the conflict, effectively testing whether it can dictate movement through one of the world’s most critical trade routes. He emphasized that the United States must prevent Iran from “collecting tolls” or controlling access, while pursuing a dual-track strategy of military pressure and negotiations aimed at eliminating Iran’s nuclear capability and ensuring freedom of navigation.
FOX: For more on this, we bring in Army Special Forces veteran and WorldStrat president Jim Hanson. Jim, thank you for joining us. We’re in this 10-day pause the president announced on potential strikes against Iran’s energy infrastructure to allow more time for talks. At the same time, we’re seeing Iran allow limited shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. Is that a sign they want a deal?
HANSON: We’ll take baby steps, but overall this is Iran trying to maintain control over the conflict by deciding what gets through the Strait. We knew this would become an issue. We have to stop them from acting like they can collect tolls or dictate access.
FOX: The president is negotiating while also building up forces in the region. We’ve seen additional naval deployments and signals that ground options could be considered. Is that just leverage, or something more?
HANSON: With President Trump, part of the strategy is uncertainty. The other side doesn’t know if it’s a negotiating tactic or a real option. Ground troops are a last resort—they’re vulnerable—but the goal is clear: remove Iran’s nuclear capability and ensure trade continues to flow.
FOX: Reports suggest the Pentagon is preparing for potential ground operations. What might those actually look like?
HANSON: There are limited missions—seizing key islands, clearing missile positions, or even securing enriched uranium. None of those are ideal, but they’re options. In most cases, it’s better as a threat, but if needed, they’re on the table.
FOX: Some officials say this can be resolved without troops on the ground. Do you agree?
HANSON: There are other tools—international pressure, economic measures, and allied coordination. More countries now recognize the risk, especially as Iranian capabilities threaten beyond the region. That combined pressure could achieve the objective without escalation.
FOX: There are also concerns about the pace of U.S. strikes and munitions usage. Does that worry you?
HANSON: Early strikes cleared out Iran’s air defenses, which changes the equation. Now we have more flexibility and more options. It’s a concern, but Iran’s capabilities aren’t unlimited either.
FOX: Final question—what about the broader picture? We’re seeing Houthi attacks, and reports of Russian and Chinese support for Iran. How serious is that?
HANSON: It’s a major geostrategic problem. You’ve got other powers getting involved, which raises the stakes significantly. The U.S. has to use all available pressure—diplomatic and otherwise—to prevent that from undermining the mission and destabilizing the region further.
FOX: Jim Hanson, thank you for your time.