• Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian reiterates that Iran's military power is purely defensive, aiming to deter foreign attacks amid heightened tensions with the U.S. and Israel.
  • The statement comes as maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz plummets, with only 17 commodity vessels transiting in a recent weekend compared to 37 the week before, threatening global energy flows.
  • Diplomacy continues behind the scenes, but the IAEA's referral of Iran to the UN Security Council over nuclear safeguards noncompliance adds pressure.

Defensive Posture or Deterrence?

Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian said in recent remarks that Iran's military power is "defensive," signaling that Tehran's missile, armed forces, and defense-industrial programs aim to prevent foreign aggression and protect sovereignty, not to initiate conflict. The statement, made amid an exceptionally acute confrontation with the United States and Israel, underscores Tehran's dual strategy: pairing a willingness to negotiate with a categorical refusal to dismantle its defensive capabilities.

Pezeshkian's government has emphasized force readiness, logistics, and modernization, but the message is also a deterrence signal. "Iran's capabilities exist to deter violations of its sovereignty, not to threaten other countries," Pezeshkian said in February 2025 during a visit to a defense aerospace complex. That doctrine, rooted in the 1980–88 Iran–Iraq war, remains unchanged, even as the geopolitical landscape shifts.

Strait of Hormuz Traffic Plummets

The immediate security backdrop is an ongoing U.S.–Iran conflict that has spilled into maritime security. Over the September 19–20 weekend, only 17 commodity vessels transited the Strait of Hormuz, down from 37 a week earlier, according to Reuters. Before the war, the strait handled roughly one-fifth of global oil and liquefied-natural-gas flows. The sharp decline threatens crude oil, refined products, LNG, fertilizer, and bulk commodity shipments, potentially pushing up energy and freight costs even before any formal closure.

Some vessels have reportedly switched off transponders in the conflict zone, making visible traffic data incomplete and increasing navigational and insurance uncertainty. On September 9, Iran said it struck 10 ships after the U.S. sank five Iranian tankers, illustrating how quickly maritime activity can become part of direct retaliation.

Nuclear Watchdog Refers Iran to Security Council

The crisis is tightly linked to Iran's nuclear program. In September, the UN nuclear watchdog's Board of Governors referred Iran to the UN Security Council over safeguards noncompliance—the first such referral in 20 years, according to Reuters. The IAEA has been unable to verify the status of Iranian nuclear sites and stocks of enriched uranium after attacks on facilities and Iran's continued denial of access. Before access was lost, the IAEA estimated Iran had 440.9 kilograms of uranium enriched up to 60% purity; the agency says it cannot determine the current status of relevant material and sites.

In the September IAEA debate, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States said the agency had received no information on the status of declared facilities and nuclear material and had no access to declared facilities since June. The referral increases diplomatic pressure, but recovery of verification would require Iranian access arrangements and sufficient security for inspectors.

Economic Strain and Regional Risks

Iran's economy is reeling from war, sanctions, and damage to energy-export capacity. One report citing official Iranian data put 12-month inflation at 69.9% in August, while the IMF's July outlook forecasted a 5.4% contraction in Iran's real GDP in 2026. Military spending and currency pressure are worsening already severe economic stresses.

The broader implications for energy markets are significant. Gulf producers, Asian energy buyers, tanker operators, insurers, and seafarers are all exposed to heightened risk. Reduced Hormuz traffic threatens not only oil and gas flows but also fertilizer and bulk commodities, with physical disruption, risk premia, insurance costs, rerouting, and delays all adding to upward pressure on prices.

Diplomatic Efforts Continue

Amid the escalating tensions, diplomacy has not completely broken down. Reuters reported on September 22 that Washington and Tehran were still in contact and that President Donald Trump believed a settlement could eventually be reached. Mediated discussions reportedly continued alongside the UN General Assembly, where Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi traveled to New York.

A limited de-escalation package could focus on shipping safety, port access, pauses in attacks, or humanitarian arrangements before more difficult nuclear and defense issues. However, Pezeshkian must balance advocates of negotiations with hardliners who oppose concessions on missiles, armed forces, or nuclear leverage. His public framing allows him to support talks without appearing to concede on national defense.

Contested Narrative

Internationally, Iran's "defensive" description is contested. Western governments and the IAEA focus not only on declared military doctrine but also on missile development, regional military activity, and the nuclear program's verification gap. Tehran's insistence on retaining its military capabilities makes any comprehensive settlement harder, particularly if negotiations seek limits on missiles, force posture, nuclear activity, or access for inspectors.

Conversely, continued military modernization, opaque nuclear verification, and disrupted Gulf shipping risk entrenching a cycle in which each side treats the other's defensive measures as offensive preparation. A durable agreement, if one emerges, would more likely pursue restraint, transparency, non-attack commitments, or regional security arrangements—not Iranian unilateral disarmament.

Correction: An earlier version of this article misstated the date of the IAEA referral. It was in September, not August.