President Donald Trump issued a profanity-laced ultimatum to the Iranian government on Sunday morning, demanding the immediate reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. The statement follows a high-stakes rescue operation of a U.S. airman whose fighter jet was downed in Iranian territory last week.
In a social media post that immediately garnered global attention, the President directly addressed Iranian leadership regarding the ongoing maritime blockade. "Open the Fuckin' Strait, you crazy bastards, or you'll be living in Hell," the President wrote, signaling a sharp escalation in the month-long conflict known as Operation Epic Fury.
The Strait of Hormuz, a vital chokepoint for nearly 20 percent of the world’s oil supply, has been largely restricted by Tehran since the outbreak of hostilities on February 28. President Trump has reportedly set a strict deadline for Monday for the passage to be restored to commercial traffic.
The White House indicated that failure to comply would lead to a significant expansion of military targets. The administration is currently considering strikes on Iran's civilian infrastructure, including power plants and bridges, if the blockade continues past the Tuesday morning deadline.
The rescue of the injured U.S. airman on Saturday night provided a brief diplomatic window, which the President appears to be using to exert further pressure. While the servicemember is in stable condition, the loss of the F-15E Strike Eagle has intensified calls for a decisive end to the standoff.
International oil markets reacted with immediate volatility following the President's remarks. Crude oil futures saw a sharp uptick as traders prepared for potential disruptions to global energy security and the possibility of a full-scale regional confrontation.
Oman and Pakistan have continued their efforts to broker a ceasefire between Washington and Tehran. However, Iranian military officials have rejected the President’s latest demands, describing the rhetoric as a nervous and unbalanced action that threatens regional stability.
Critics in Washington expressed concern that the use of explicit language complicates delicate back-channel negotiations. Conversely, supporters of the President argued that the aggressive stance is necessary to protect the free flow of energy and American interests.