A Heated Debate Between John Kennedy and the Barrel (Nasser Kandil)
– Republican Senator John Kennedy is neither an opponent of Donald Trump nor part of the hesitant wing of those supporting him. He has represented Louisiana in the Senate since 2017 and previously served as State Treasurer. He is known for his Southern accent, sarcastic expressions, and ability to turn complex positions into sharp folk sayings. He is a supporter of the war on Iran and a defender of Trump’s options; for this reason, his recent warning carried doubled significance. Kennedy said the options available to Trump are “all hellish,” but added, “For now, I will maintain the status quo.” He warned that expanding the war would raise energy prices and cause “a lot of inflation for Americans,” and proposed tightening sanctions, continuing pressure, and limiting any new targeting to the nuclear program.
– Kennedy ignored what would happen, under the options he proposed, to oil markets and the price of the barrel—while the price of the barrel asks Kennedy: What is the “status quo”? Is it not another name for a war of attrition? Tightening sanctions is economic attrition; blockade is naval attrition; limited strikes are military attrition; and negotiating under fire is political attrition. If major war is ruled out because of its cost and the uncertainty of its outcome, and Washington does not return to the memorandum of understanding, then all the alternatives Kennedy presents remain a war of attrition that escalates and subsides. The barrel asks: Who will open Hormuz, and who can bear its remaining closed?
– Trump said the U.S. Navy controls the strait, but ship traffic belies the meaning of control he intends. Before the war, Hormuz saw more than 100 transits per day. On Friday, 19 cargo vessels passed through; the number fell to 10 on Saturday and only nine on Sunday. Over the course of the week, at least six tanker transits could be confirmed by name, including four giant oil tankers and two gas carriers. This represents 1.4% of the traditional pre-war transit level, since warships cannot force shipping and insurance companies to take risks. Reopening the strait requires guarantees acceptable to Iran and Oman, as well as a settlement defining the authority that will manage the passage. Therefore, Trump’s declaration of “full control” cannot substitute for a political agreement.
– When Kennedy replies, “We can continue the strikes and the pressure,” the ammunition depot interrupts him: Where will you get the missiles? The Wall Street Journal revealed, citing U.S. officials, that Washington has fired more than 1,000 Tomahawk missiles since the start of the war and has expended between 1,500 and 2,000 air-defense missiles of the THAAD, Patriot, and Standard types. The officials said that fully replenishing the consumed stockpile could take six years, and that the shortage has begun to raise debate over America’s ability to carry out plans to defend Taiwan if a crisis erupts with China. According to an estimate published by the Center for Strategic and International Studies on July 27, Patriot stockpiles have fallen to fewer than 1,000 missiles, and THAAD stockpiles to around 250. The Department of Defense announced a contract worth more than $3 billion to triple production of Patriot components and quadruple production of THAAD. But increased production capacity does not mean ready missiles in storage; it does not address today’s gap, but rather one that will be filled years from now.
– Then the oil reserve intervenes: And how will you reconstitute me? The Strategic Petroleum Reserve has reached 311.4 million barrels, its lowest level since 1983, after the administration withdrew more than 104 million barrels since the start of the war. Trump can use the reserve to calm prices, but if he buys oil to refill it, he will raise demand and prices; and if he continues drawing it down, he will reduce America’s ability to face the next shock.
– The stock market enters the debate with its numbers. On July 29, when oil rose 7.3% to $88.09, the Dow Jones lost 1,153 points, or 2.2%, while the S&P 500 fell 1.5% and the Nasdaq 1.7%. When Trump canceled the strike, Brent fell 4.7% to $83.52, and the S&P 500 rose 1.5%, the Dow Jones 1.3%, and the Nasdaq 2.1%. Stocks did not rise because tankers returned to Hormuz, but because the market bought the possibility of their return. The barrel asks Kennedy: What happens if the market becomes certain that the strait will remain closed? Oil will climb again, inflation expectations and bond yields will rise, the chances of rate cuts will recede, and a downturn will begin. So who possesses the stock market’s morphine? The Federal Reserve cannot easily cut interest rates in the face of an inflationary shock; Trump cannot endlessly drain the oil reserve; factories cannot replenish missiles quickly; and the U.S. Navy cannot open the strait by force without igniting a larger war.
– Therefore, there are not five options, but three: all-out war, a return to the memorandum of understanding, or open-ended attrition. What Kennedy called “maintaining the status quo” is not a solution, but a postponement of the choice, while three counters are ticking against Washington: the missiles in the stockpiles, the barrels in the reserve, and the stock market’s clock. The barrel concludes the dialogue: You can change the names of the war of attrition, but you cannot change its question: Who will open Hormuz, and who can bear its remaining closed?
