Rubio Warns Iran’s Oil Blackmail a Preview of How it Would Wield Nuclear Power
“The straits [are] basically the equivalent of an economic nuclear weapon that they’re trying to use against the world, and they’re bragging about it. … Imagine if those same people had access to a nuclear weapon.”
Secretary of State Marco Rubio sounded the alarm on Monday, arguing that Iran’s effort to hold the world hostage through its control of the Strait of Hormuz offers a preview of how it would wield power if armed with a nuclear weapon.
During an interview with Fox News reporter Trey Yingst, Rubio warned that Iran hopes to do to the world “with a nuclear weapon what they are doing now with oil.”
“The straits [are] basically the equivalent of an economic nuclear weapon that they’re trying to use against the world, and they’re bragging about it,” he said.
“They’re putting up billboards in Tehran bragging about how they can hold 25 percent or 20 percent of the world’s energy hostage. Imagine if those same people had access to a nuclear weapon. They would hold the whole region hostage.”
The U.S. would be powerless over their actions “because they’d be sitting there with a nuclear weapon saying we are untouchable.”
There’s no doubt in my mind that at some point in the future if this radical clerical regime remains in charge in Iran, they will decide they want a nuclear weapon. And what they were trying to do, before the President took action, is to hide behind this conventional shield of drums and missiles and a large navy, hide behind that, an impenetrable conventional shield, so they can do whatever they wanted with their nuclear program. That fundamental issue still has to be confronted. That still remains the core issue here.
Rubio is right. At its core, the Iranian regime functions as a terrorist group. Its leadership doesn’t even pretend to care about the welfare of its people. For them, it’s all about power. [Sounds a little like today’s Democratic Party, but I digress.]
Asked what he sees as the main obstacle to a peace deal with Iran, Rubio replied, “Well, other than the fact that the country’s run by radical Shia clerics – that’s a pretty big impediment. The other is that they’re deeply fractured internally and that – I think that’s always been the case but I think it’s far more pronounced now.”
He provided a detailed description of Iran’s current political situation, which I would recommend reading in its entirety. While “they’re all hardliners in Iran,” he said, there are some “who understand they have to run a country and an economy, and there are hardliners that are completely motivated by theology.” And, unfortunately, it’s the latter group that’s in charge.
A major issue with the negotiations is that it’s unclear to Americans whether the individuals they are interacting with actually have decision-making authority. In many cases, it appears they do not.
Further complicating negotiations is the mystery over the condition of Iran’s new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei. Asked if he’s even alive, Rubio said they “have indications that he is. … We don’t have evidence that he’s not.”
While Rubio declined to disclose the details of Iran’s latest proposal, he emphasized there was a key gap between Tehran’s definition of reopening the Strait of Hormuz and that of the broader international community.
Rather than allowing free international navigation of the strait, Iran is still trying to control access and impose conditions.
Rubio explained:
If what they mean by opening the straits is, “Yes, the straits are open as long as you coordinate with Iran, get our permission or we’ll blow you up, and you pay us,” that’s not opening the straits. Those are international waterways. They cannot normalize nor can we tolerate them trying to normalize a system in which the Iranians decide who gets to use an international waterway and how much you have to pay them to use it. This is not the Suez Canal, this is not the Panama Canal, these are international waters. And if that’s normalized, not only does that set a precedent in the Middle East, it sets a precedent all over the world. Countries all over the world can now decide, well, this international waterway is close to our shores, we’re going to take control of it, we’re going to create a tolling system.
So that’s an example of how detail matters here.
Yingst asked if the Iranians’ proposal “to delay conversations about their nuclear program,” would be “acceptable to the Trump Administration.”
While he wouldn’t speculate about Trump’s feelings on this, he offered an obvious clue: “Suffice it to say that the nuclear question is the reason why we’re in this in the first place.”
If Iran was just a radical country run by radical people but – it would still be a problem, but they are revolutionary. In essence, they seek to expand and export their revolution, not just what they do in Iran – that’s why they’re with Hizballah in Lebanon and that’s why they supported Hamas, that’s why they supported the militias in Iraq. They don’t just seek to dominate Iran, they seek to dominate the region. And imagine that with a nuclear weapon.
Asked if he thinks the Iranians are serious about making a deal, Rubio replied:
I think the Iranians are serious about getting themselves out of the mess that they’re in.
…
So yeah, I think they’re serious about figuring out how can they buy themselves more time.
Rubio pointed out that “the level of sanctions on Iran are extraordinary.” He hopes that “in the aftermath of this conflict the whole world’s eyes have been opened to the threat Iran poses.”
He called for the so-called “international community” to “come together and say what’s happening in Iran is a threat to global peace, a threat to global stability – not just a threat to the Gulf kingdoms, not just a threat to Israel, a threat to the world, and it has to be addressed comprehensively.”
Given the risks a nuclear armed Iran would pose to the world, forging a unified international front against the regime should be a no brainer. Instead, it has proven to be our greatest challenge.
During a Monday school visit in Marsberg, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said the U.S. is being humiliated by Iran. He also proposed easing sanctions on the rogue nation so that energy flows could be restored.
German media outlet DW reported on his reckless remarks:
The Iranians are clearly stronger than expected and the Americans clearly have no truly convincing strategy in the negotiations either.
…
The problem with conflicts like this is always: You don’t just have to get in, you have to get out again. We saw that very painfully in Afghanistan for 20 years. We saw it in Iraq.
At the moment, I do not see what strategic exit the Americans will choose, especially since the Iranians are clearly negotiating very skillfully — or very skillfully not negotiating.
An entire nation is being humiliated by the Iranian leadership, particularly by the so-called Revolutionary Guards.
🚨 BREAKING:
🇩🇪🇺🇸🇮🇷 German chancellor Merz says U.S. is being humiliated by the Iranian leadership. pic.twitter.com/FZqWQgaLBM
— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) April 27, 2026
To her credit, during a Monday visit to Berlin, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said it was too soon to lift sanctions on Iran. In remarks European media outlet Euractiv called a direct rebuke to Merz, she argued, “We think the dropping of sanctions would be too early. There is a reason why the sanctions are imposed on Iran, [because of] their behaviour towards their own population.”
Elizabeth writes commentary for Legal Insurrection and The Washington Examiner. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Please follow Elizabeth on X or LinkedIn.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
I thought the blockade was ours
it is but there are always leftists out there willing to sacrifice themselves for the cause
The blockade, my ignorant little woke, friend is a brilliant counter the Iranian piracy. And it’s breaking the economic back of the Iranians. Now, we could resume Obama’s modified Munich plan and fund the Iranian’s terrorism and nuclear ambitions., but that wouldn’t be too smart now would it?
Good article and Rubio is spot on. A nuclear Iran will favor its main allies being China and North Korea. Don’t let the Iranians stall for time as that is always their game. Iran wants to see elections in America and just how lucky they might get.
Ahh…I;m done commenting on this topic after this. As I;ve said at least a dozen times without major regime change nothing else is going to change. To get regime change you have to kill the leadership and as many of the other true believers as you can until someone else is in a position to take over. This can be done through bombs and drones or it can be done with boots on the ground.
I’m against boots on the ground. What I’m for is blowing the hell out of Iran by targeting the mullahs in Qom, the leadership in Tehran, and the revolutionary guard no matter their rank or where they are. Kill the frigging people standing in the way of regime change and hope there is a “reasonable” faction in the country able to take control.
agree with the premise
but to do it right boots on the ground to help rebuild would be a plus for the usa >>under the maga leadership
Israel has boots.
Though their effectiveness with sneakers more than triples.
No! They would be sitting ducks
rubio nails it
And he’s honest, we didn’t get all their missiles, that’s pretty obvious
What the F is Trump doing? There are no time outs in a war! He is just giving Iran time to resupply, and for all we know maybe enrich some more Uranium and get a nuke built. Trump needs to eliminate any Iranian that is not agreeable to a complete surrender under the terms of the United States.
The blockade will force the Iranians to the table.
And there’s little remaining worth bombing.
Read the news today: Iran is out of storage for their oil production, taking extreme measures to find places to store it. That means they have to make a deal or start capping their wells – which does extreme damage to the wells and reducing the recoverable oil/gas.
Iran is interested only in its sovereignty. Everything else is secondary.
No, interest is world domination with Islam
And all your money
What a turn. Germany has gone from 20th century ruthless to 21st century feckless. As with the rest of the NATO alliance not even passively assisting the U.S. in reining in Iran, the #1 global terror threat – no air space, use of bases we help fund, etc., now Fred Merz dare says Iran is humiliating the U.S. We’ll finish this, then NATO is dust in the wind.
Much of the European leadership has fallen under the sway of those who wish to destroy them, and until that changes we can no longer trust them as allies.
Leave a Comment