Iran, Trump’s threats and the Brics security test

United States President Donald Trump has turned Iran-US negotiations into a test of Brics power after threatening to destroy Iran’s bridges and power plants unless Tehran accepts Washington’s terms and reopens the Strait of Hormuz.

The warning places China and Russia before a defining question. Can the multipolar order protect one of its strategic members when the United States and Israel use bombing, blockade and ship seizure to dictate terms?

The world economy now stands near a dangerous tipping point. American militarisation of Hormuz threatens energy flows, shipping, insurance markets, food prices, fertiliser movement and the trade routes that sustain economies across Asia, Africa, Europe and the Gulf. Reuters reported that traffic through the strait reached near standstill after US shots and the seizure of an Iranian vessel, while the passage normally carries a major share of global oil and gas movement. 

Trump stated the threat with the crudity of a president who treats Iranian civilisation as a military object. Time reported that he threatened every major Iranian bridge and power plant if Tehran refused his terms, including the reopening of Hormuz, the end of ballistic missile development and the shutdown of its nuclear programme. Reuters reported his further warning that “a whole civilization will die tonight” if Iran failed to make a deal. 

Jeffrey Sachs succinctly sums up this political moment. Speaking at the China Development Forum in Beijing, Sachs called the war “a blatant, terrible aggression by the US and Israel” and urged countries to tell both states: “Stop, go home.” Sachs has also described US foreign policy as “gangsterism” and argued that Brics can help rescue the UN Charter from American unilateralism. 

The present talks carry the violence of their origin. Reuters reported that Trump extended the ceasefire while the United States kept its naval blockade in force, and Iran resisted negotiations conducted under threat. Trump therefore demands that Iran surrender to the American-Israeli war and accept that surrender as diplomacy. 

The seizure of the Iranian-flagged cargo ship Touska gives the crisis its maritime centre. AP reported that the United States forcibly seized the vessel near the Strait of Hormuz after claiming that the ship tried to pass the US naval blockade. Trump said a US destroyer stopped the vessel by blowing a hole in its engine room, while US Marines took custody of the ship. Iran’s joint military command called the boarding piracy and warned of a response. 

Washington has extended the maritime campaign beyond Hormuz. AP reported that US forces boarded the M/T Tifani in the Bay of Bengal and that the Pentagon announced broader maritime enforcement against vessels linked to Iran. American forces now present international waters as a hunting ground for ships tied to Tehran. 

Iran identifies the process as an untenable demand. The United States ties talks to blockade, ship seizure, Israeli bombardment and threats against civilian infrastructure. A state with Iran’s history of revolution, sanctions, assassination, sabotage and Western intervention understands the meaning of an American president who threatens its bridges, power plants and national survival.

China now enters the crisis through more than diplomatic concern. Beijing has condemned the US blockade as dangerous and irresponsible, and Reuters reported Chinese concern over the US seizure of the Iranian cargo ship. Chinese-linked vessels have also tested the blockade environment, including sanctioned tankers moving through or near Hormuz despite American pressure. 

Chinese warship movement towards the region now signals a larger recognition inside Beijing’s strategic world. China already placed naval power alongside Russia and Iran through the Maritime Security Belt 2026 exercises in the Strait of Hormuz. Russian officials linked those drills to a wider Brics maritime dimension, and that earlier military presence now acquires sharper meaning under Trump’s blockade. 

Russia has placed the same crisis inside international law. Maria Zakharova said American measures to intercept vessels and block Iranian ports violate the UN Charter and international maritime law. She also said a naval blockade requires a UN Security Council decision as a collective measure for international peace and security. 

China and Russia now confront the limits of condemnation. The scale of the crisis pushes Brics towards a security question that its own history has made unavoidable. A Brics-Plus emergency security council now emerges as one possible political form for that question.

Such a council could place Hormuz, Israeli bombing, US blockade power, Iranian sovereignty and global energy security inside one framework. It could also challenge Washington’s command over a process in which the United States acts as bomber, naval enforcer, mediator and judge.

Iran holds a central position in the new multipolar order. It sits at the junction of the Gulf, the Caspian region, West Asia, Central Asia and the Indian Ocean routes. It carries strategic weight across energy markets, maritime corridors, anti-sanctions economies and resistance to US regional domination. Iran joined Brics on 1 January 2024, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation completed Iran’s admission as a member state in July 2023. 

A US-Israeli victory over Iran would damage more than Tehran. It would weaken Brics, weaken the SCO, strengthen American command over Hormuz and tell every state seeking a way out of dollar discipline and NATO pressure that multipolarity collapses when Washington brings aircraft carriers, sanctions and Israeli missiles into the room.

A Brics-Plus security council could place the crisis before the world in concrete terms. Washington lifts the blockade on Iranian ports. The United States releases the Touska and accounts for all maritime seizures through a lawful international process. Israel halts its bombing campaign against Iran. A multilateral maritime arrangement keeps Hormuz open through collective oversight, regional participation and legal authority.

The world has endured enough American bullying. Washington bombs, blockades, seizes ships, threatens civilian infrastructure and then demands respect as a peace broker. Israel bombs with the confidence of a state protected from consequence. Across the Global South, many now look to Brics with real hope because the old order has become unbearable.

Trump has answered the central question through his own words. A president who threatens Iranian civilisation and names civilian systems as targets has forfeited any credible claim to control the peace process. China, Russia and other Brics states now face a test of multipolarity itself. The crisis may push them from diplomatic statements towards security-level involvement, because Washington and Tel Aviv have turned negotiation into a war demand, Hormuz into a pressure point, and Iran into a test case for the entire post-Western order.