In the second month of the escalating US-Israel war with Iran, President Donald Trump has made one of his most provocative statements yet. In a recent interview with the Financial Times, he declared that his “favorite thing is to take the oil in Iran” and floated the idea of seizing Kharg Island, the Islamic Republic’s primary oil export terminal. Comparing the move to earlier US actions in Venezuela, Trump has also threatened to “obliterate” Iran’s oil wells, power plants, and possibly desalination facilities unless Tehran reopens the Strait of Hormuz and accepts a US-brokered deal.
The remarks come as US forces have already conducted targeted airstrikes on military sites on Kharg Island while deliberately sparing its oil infrastructure for now. Iran has allowed limited tanker traffic through the strait in recent days, but the standoff continues, with global oil markets on edge.
The Prize: Kharg Island and Iran’s Oil Lifeline
Kharg Island is a small coral outcrop—roughly 22 square kilometres—lying 20 to 30 miles off Iran’s coast in the Persian Gulf. Despite its modest size, it is the choke point for nearly 90-94 percent of Iran’s oil exports, handling about 1.5 million barrels per day out of the country’s current production of roughly 3.3 million barrels. Iran sits on the world’s third-largest proven oil reserves, estimated at 157 billion barrels. Controlling or disrupting Kharg would therefore deliver a crippling economic blow.
Military Reality: Seize, But Can He Hold?
From a purely tactical standpoint, US forces could probably capture the island. Pentagon planners have pre-positioned assets in the region, and shaping airstrikes have already degraded Iranian defences. A limited operation involving Marines, special forces, or airborne troops—perhaps 800 to 7,500 personnel—could secure the facility relatively quickly.
Holding it, however, is another matter. The island lies well within range of Iranian missiles, drones, rockets, and coastal artillery launched from the mainland. Tehran has reinforced its positions with mines, booby traps, and additional troops, ready to harass any occupying force. Logistics, air and missile defence, and casualty evacuation would be difficult and expensive. Military analysts describe the island as a potential “trap”: easy to take in the short term, but vulnerable to prolonged guerrilla-style attacks that could inflict steady US casualties and render the facility inoperable without a full-scale counter-offensive.
Moreover, seizing Kharg would not give Washington control over Iran’s onshore oil fields and production facilities, which lie deep inside the country. True dominance over Iran’s petroleum sector would require either regime change or a far larger occupation—options with catastrophic historical precedents.
Legal and Practical Barriers
Legally, outright seizure of sovereign territory or resources is prohibited under the UN Charter and the Hague and Geneva Conventions, which ban the acquisition of land by force and the pillage of occupied territories. Even framing the action as self-defence in an ongoing war would invite widespread international condemnation, isolate allies, and open the door to legal challenges at the International Criminal Court and elsewhere. Trump has previously brushed aside such constraints in the Venezuelan context, but the global backlash would be far more severe.
Practically, Iran would not sit idle. It has already threatened to mine the Strait of Hormuz—through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil passes—attack Gulf oil infrastructure, and escalate asymmetrically through proxies. Any attempt to “take the oil” risks a broader energy crisis that could drive already elevated Brent crude prices (currently above $116 per barrel) even higher, at least in the short term.
The Broader Consequences
If Trump were to follow through, even partially, the effects would ripple far beyond the Persian Gulf:
- For Iran: Oil revenues, which account for about 12 percent of GDP and tens of billions of dollars annually, would be slashed. The regime could face accelerated economic collapse and domestic unrest, but the move might also rally nationalist sentiment and harden its resolve to fight on.
- Global energy markets: Short-term chaos is guaranteed. Longer term, if US-controlled oil from Kharg were to flow (as happened in the Venezuelan precedent), it could eventually ease prices by adding supply to the market. Iran has managed to keep some exports alive despite sanctions by selling discounted crude to China and other buyers; that lifeline would be severed.
- Geopolitics and escalation: The risk of wider war is real. Iran could strike Gulf states, draw indirect support from Russia and China, or launch attacks on US allies’ own energy facilities. European partners have already shown reluctance to grant airspace rights for certain operations, signalling limits to allied enthusiasm.
In essence, Trump’s rhetoric fits his long-standing “maximum pressure” playbook—using sanctions, threats, and targeted strikes to force concessions. Yet experts across the board view a sustained seizure of Kharg Island as a high-risk gamble with uncertain strategic payoff. It could backfire by prolonging the conflict, inflaming regional tensions, and sparking the very energy crisis Washington seeks to avoid.
Negotiations or a calibrated de-escalation, which Trump has also hinted at, remain the lower-cost path. Whether the president’s oil ambitions are serious policy or calculated brinkmanship will become clearer in the coming weeks. For now, the world is watching—and the oil markets are pricing in the uncertainty.
About The Author
