Freedom Project in Hormuz: what Donald Trump is looking for and the risk of breaking the truce with Iran

The president of the United States, donald trumpannounced that its military forces will help “guide” ships that have been trapped in the Strait of Hormuz due to the blockade of Iran. The deployment that began on Monday opens a new front of tension in one of the most sensitive maritime passages in the world. Under the name of Freedom ProjectWashington’s initiative seeks to guarantee navigation amid threats and warnings of Tehranbut it does so in a context marked by a fragile truce and for the constant risk of a miscalculation leading to a return to open war.

The presence of warships, aircraft, drones and surveillance systems in a corridor of just tens of kilometers Not only does it increase military pressure, but it also raises key questions: whether this operation will function as a deterrence mechanism or if, on the contrary, it could become the trigger that reactivates a large-scale conflict in the Middle East.

LOOK: Iran’s proposal to end the war: what does the 14-point plan include and what does the nuclear program look like?

On Tuesday, the United States Secretary of War, Pete Hegsethmade an evaluation of the operation and said that despite Iranian attacks on US ships on Monday, truce holds because these incidents do not exceed the “threshold” that would justify a restart of the war.

The war between the United States and Israel against Iran began on February 28. Since April 8, a cease-firewhich was recently extended by Trump indefinitely.

Hegseth remarked that “US forces will not need to enter Iranian waters or airspace” because “it is not necessary.”

While from the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States, Dan Caine He specified that “Since the ceasefire was announced, Iran has fired on commercial vessels nine times and seized two container ships.”.

“They have attacked US forces more than 10 times, although all of these incidents have remained, up to this point, below the threshold that would justify the resumption of large-scale combat operations,” Caine said.

For his part, the influential speaker of the Iranian Parliament, Mohamad Baqer Qalibafwarned on Tuesday that The United States endangers security in the Strait of Hormuz by “violating the ceasefire” with the operation.

He stated that his country “has not even” begun its fight with the United States. “We know that continuing with the current situation is unsustainable for the United States, although we have not even started,” he wrote in X.

It is estimated that there are 20,000 sailors stranded in the vicinity of the Strait of Hormuz due to the naval blockade.

What is known about Project Libertad?

He Strait of Hormuz It is a narrow maritime passage that connects the Persian Gulf with the gulf of oman and the open ocean, located between Iran (to the north) and Oman —with also the presence of United Arab Emirates— to the south. It is one of the most important strategic points in the world because About a fifth of global oil passes through there.making it a key artery for the global economy.

Although there are two shipping channels, many oil tankers prefer to use routes close to the Iranian side because they are more direct to exit the Persian Gulf and are better established for energy traffic, but this also leaves them more exposed to Tehran’s control and surveillance.

A question that now arises after the operation launched by trump is if the military forces of USA whether or not they are entering the Strait of Hormuz, especially on the Iranian side, to escort ships that want to leave.

Specifically, There is a US military presence in the area (ships, planes, drones), but that does not mean that the US is freely crossing the Iranian part of the strait.. In fact, the design of Trump’s operation attempts avoid precisely that scenario.

According to the United States, the Operation Project Freedom seeks guarantee the passage of commercial ships trapped by the Iranian blockade. For that, it has deployed destroyers, aircraft, drones and thousands of soldiers in the area.

This deployment serves to protect, monitor and deter attacksrather than to occupy or cross Iranian territory.

So the American plan does not seek to navigate the northern corridor (close to Iran)which is the one that Tehran controls.

Instead, it promotes a alternative route to the south (close to Oman) to avoid direct confrontation.

In some cases, vessels are “guided” or protected from a distancenot necessarily escorted by warships.

Iran has warned that Any foreign force that enters the strait without coordination will be attacked.

There have already been incidents with missiles, drones and warning shots at US ships.

This makes the risk of direct collision between Iranian and American forces be very high.

Trump seeks to appear as the winner without returning to war

The ambassador Juan Alvarez Vita considers that the Freedom Project responds to a strategy of trump with multiple dimensions, beyond maritime security.

In his opinion, the initiative combines a humanitarian component—aimed at assisting thousands of crew members stranded in the Strait of Hormuz—with an internal political calculation, in a context in which Trump faces legal limitations and little room in the United States Congress to escalate the conflict. Thus, he maintains that The Republican would seek to project an image of control and eventual victory without the need to resume the war.

Álvarez Vita also warns that US military deployment is perceived by Iran as a direct threatwhich has contributed to suspending the talks and deepening mistrust between both parties.

“There has not been a clean way to negotiate, because while talks were being held in Geneva, the United States attacked Iran,” points out.

The analyst considers that the risk of escalation exists, although he relativizes the idea of ​​a “point of no return” if there is a direct attack against the United States in Hormuz, or if US military forces enter the Iranian Sea. Rather aim at a progressive deterioration of the situation that would eventually force us to return to minimum levels of understanding.

For Álvarez Vita, the operation also takes place in a less favorable international scenario for the United States, with signs of wear and tear in its foreign relations and questions about its leadership.

Nevertheless, rules out that, if the truce is broken, a large-scale war will immediately take placedue to the internal restrictions that Trump faces.

In his summary, he considers Project Libertad above all a “provocative maneuver under a humanitarian cloak.”

The risk of escalation is real

The international analyst Francisco Belaunde Matossian maintains that the Libertad Project responds more to a political gesture than to an effective solution to guarantee navigation.

He explains that Trump’s initiative seeks to show capacity for action in the face of a problem that Washington has not been able to solve, in the midst of economic and strategic pressure that is beginning to weigh on the United States.

“It is a way of saying that it can free the Strait of Hormuz, but it also reflects a certain desperation to get out of a complex situation without being weakened”he remarks.

Belaunde warns that although recent incidents – such as warning shots fired at US ships – have not escalated into direct confrontations, they show a latent tension and a delicate balance of calculation between Washington and Tehran.

In this pulse, he points out, both parties measure how far they can advance without provoking a major reaction, although the risk of miscalculation is still present. “Anything can happen,” he summarizes.

The analyst emphasizes that Iran perceives itself in a position of relative strength by taking advantage of the economic, logistical and political costs that the crisis imposes on the United States.

Should the truce collapse, Belaunde warns of a rapid escalation scenariowith massive attacks from the United States—and eventually from Israel—and an Iranian response that could extend to neighboring countries and the US fleet in the region.

“That would generate a global economic and energy catastrophe,” he says. However, it considers that neither party has incentives to sustain a situation of maximum tension indefinitely, due to the high cost of maintaining a prolonged military deployment, especially for the United States, which suggests that, sooner or later, a negotiated solution to the war will be sought, even if it is precarious.