U.S. officials have informed Israeli counterparts that preparations for potential military action against Iran are expected to be completed within roughly two weeks, while warning that suitable "windows" for action could open over the coming months. Washington has framed the movement and build-up as precautionary deterrence, but has not ruled out a more immediate operation if ordered by the U.S. president.
President Donald Trump said a naval force was steaming toward Iran during a speech in Iowa, offering little operational detail. The U.S. Navy has deployed the Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group to the Middle East and announced short-term air combat readiness exercises; additional F-15E squadrons and missile-defence assets have also been sent to the region, increasing U.S. conventional strike and defensive options.
The New York Times reported, citing an anonymous U.S. official, that the carrier strike group could in theory launch an operation within a day or two if ordered from the White House. U.S. messaging emphasizes flexibility: preparatory work might take about two weeks, but a presidential order could accelerate timelines, making the window for escalation unpredictable for regional actors and markets alike.
Iran responded publicly through a senior Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps naval commander, who said Tehran monitors all maritime activity in real time and asserts control over passage through the Strait of Hormuz. The commander warned that any use of neighbouring countries' land, airspace or waters against Iran would be treated as hostile — a thinly veiled caution to Gulf states and outside partners about the risks of facilitating strikes.
The geography involved matters. The Strait of Hormuz, a narrow chokepoint between Oman and Iran that connects the Persian Gulf to the Arabian Sea, handles about one-third of the worlds seaborne oil trade. Any disruption there — from mine-laying to interdiction of tankers or direct naval confrontation — would immediately reverberate through global energy markets and shipping insurance premiums.
This episode is a layering of signals: U.S. forward posture aimed at deterrence, Israeli consultation reflecting shared security concerns about Iran's nuclear and regional activities, and Iranian declarations of control and surveillance designed to deter or to prepare public rationale for countermeasures. The mix ups the odds of miscalculation by states, proxies or commercial actors operating in congested waters.
Beyond the immediate maritime risk, the deployment underscores deeper strategic dynamics. The U.S. faces a trade-off between demonstrating credibility to deter Iran and minimizing escalation that could embroil regional partners and global markets. Iran, possessing asymmetric options including mine warfare, small-boat harassment, missiles and proxy networks, can impose costs without matching U.S. conventional firepower.
For international audiences, the practical consequence is elevated risk to shipping and energy markets and the prospect of a rapid, messy flare-up that could pull in Gulf states, Israel and U.S. forces. Diplomacy and de-escalatory channels will be tested in the coming weeks; absent clear signaling and restraint, the military preparations described could become a self-fulfilling path to confrontation.