U.S. economic pressure on Iran has reached one of its most powerful points in decades, but inconsistent enforcement has prevented sanctions from achieving their full impact, according to a former Treasury sanctions expert.

Miad Maleki, who played a central role in Treasury Department sanctions campaigns against Iran and its network of proxy groups, said in an on-camera interview the current moment reflects a rare convergence of economic, political and diplomatic leverage against Tehran.

“We’ve never had the level of leverage that we have today with Iran in the history of our conflict … since 1979,” Maleki said. 

His assessment comes as President Donald Trump signaled escalating pressure Thursday, writing on Truth Social that the United States has “total control over the Strait of Hormuz” and that it is effectively “sealed up tight” until Iran agrees to a deal.

IRAN PRESIDENT VOWS DEFIANCE AS PROTESTS BUILD AGAINST REGIME AMID US MILITARY BUILD UP

Maleki argues the current moment marks a turning point because multiple pressure tools — sanctions, a U.S. naval blockade, and tighter enforcement — are being applied simultaneously for the first time in years. Unlike previous cycles, he said, the strategy is now directly targeting Iran’s oil exports and the networks that help move them, raising the risk of a rapid economic squeeze.

He said Iran may run out of oil storage in as little as two to three weeks, forcing production cuts, while gasoline shortages could hit on a similar timeline due to heavy reliance on imports. Combined with an estimated $435 million in daily economic losses, the pressure could spill into the financial system, leaving the regime struggling to pay salaries and raising the risk of renewed unrest.

Maleki said the real leverage lies in sustained economic pressure and enforcement.

At the core of that pressure is an Iranian economy he describes as “on the verge of collapse,” driven by years of sanctions and compounded by recent disruptions.

He pointed to triple-digit food inflation, a sharply devalued currency and a roughly 90% collapse in purchasing power, along with potential long-term oil revenue losses of up to $14 billion annually.

Maleki, who is currently a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, estimated that current conditions are costing Iran “about $435 million a day in combined economic damage … with the blockade and closure of the Strait of Hormuz.”

A key driver of that pressure is the Strait of Hormuz, long viewed as one of Iran’s primary tools of leverage in global energy markets. Maleki said the dynamic has shifted.

IRAN IS ‘TRYING TO GIVE THE GLOBAL ECONOMY A HEART ATTACK’ BY CLOSING STRAIT OF HORMUZ, UAE MINISTER SAYS

“Iran’s economy relies on the Strait of Hormuz more than any other economy,” he said, calling its closure a form of “economic self-sabotage.”

While countries in Asia — including Japan, South Korea, India and China — are most exposed to disruptions, many have built up reserves. “Japan’s oil reserve is pretty significant. Same with China,” Maleki said.

Still, the region remains heavily dependent on the waterway, with roughly 75% of liquefied natural gas supplies for countries including India, China and South Korea flowing through the strait.

Inside Iran, however, vulnerabilities are more immediate. Despite vast oil reserves, the country imports between 30 million to 60 million liters of gasoline per day to cover a domestic shortfall of up to 35 million liters.

“If they run out of gasoline… they’re going to have a major crisis domestically,” Maleki said, noting that past shortages and price hikes have triggered widespread protests.

NUCLEAR EXPERTS WARN IRAN’S URANIUM ‘RIGHT’ IS A MYTH, SAY TRUMP IS RIGHT TO HOLD FIRM

The economic pressure is being reinforced by a U.S. naval blockade targeting Iran’s oil exports, the regime’s primary source of revenue.

A senior administration official said the Treasury Department is intensifying enforcement under what it describes as an “Economic Fury” campaign, using financial and maritime tools in tandem to squeeze Iran’s revenue streams.

The official said the strategy focuses on “systematically degrading Iran’s ability to generate, move, and repatriate funds,” including by constraining maritime trade through the naval blockade, which targets Iran’s primary source of revenue from oil exports.

Financial pressure is also expanding globally. The official said Treasury has warned banks in China, Hong Kong, the United Arab Emirates and Oman that facilitating Iranian trade could expose them to secondary sanctions, signaling a more aggressive approach to enforcement beyond Iran’s borders.

Treasury has issued sanctions on more than 1,000 targets since 2025 under the current maximum pressure campaign, the official said, aimed at disrupting Iran’s oil trade and financial networks.

The official added that Iran is facing immediate logistical constraints, warning that storage capacity at Kharg Island — the country’s main oil export terminal — could be filled within days if exports remain blocked, potentially forcing production shut-ins.

“Treasury will continue to freeze the funds stolen by the corrupt leadership on behalf of the people of Iran,” the official warned.

A new analysis from United Against Nuclear Iran said the blockade is already deterring high-value shipments, even as some Iran-linked vessels continue to transit the region.

TRUMP CLAIMS IRAN ‘STARVING FOR CASH,’ ‘COLLAPSING FINANCIALLY’ AFTER EXTENDING CEASEFIRE

“Effectiveness should not be measured by the total number of Iran-linked vessels at sea,” the group said in an April 22 statement. “But by whether the U.S. is disrupting high-value Iranian oil exports… and deterring large-scale illicit shipments.”

At least 29 vessels have been turned around or forced back to port, including several very large crude carriers, according to the report.

The blockade, announced April 12 and enforced by U.S. Central Command, is designed to cut off Iranian crude exports, particularly shipments to China, while prioritizing high-impact targets.

While sanctions are clearly biting, Maleki said their impact has been limited by inconsistent enforcement across successive U.S. administrations.

U.S. sanctions on Iran have been in place in various forms for years, targeting the country’s oil exports, banking sector and access to global financial systems.

Under the Obama administration, sanctions pressure was partially lifted under the nuclear deal. The first Trump administration reimposed “maximum pressure,” but enforcement ramped up gradually and lasted only a limited period. The Biden administration later eased enforcement in pursuit of diplomacy.

He argued that cycles of tightening and relief — including sanctions rollback under the Iran nuclear deal and pauses in enforcement — have allowed Tehran to adapt.

“What’s different now,” Maleki said, is the combination of sustained sanctions with real-time enforcement measures that directly restrict Iran’s ability to export oil — a step that was largely absent in earlier phases.

To maximize pressure, Maleki said Washington must sustain enforcement, particularly through secondary sanctions targeting foreign banks and companies facilitating Iranian trade.

Crucially, he downplayed the likelihood that outside powers could offset the pressure.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“I can’t really point to any other nation… that is going to jump in and give the Iranian regime a lifeline,” he said.

“At some point in the next few weeks to a few months, they’re going to face not just gasoline shortages and oil production disruptions, but also a major banking problem to pay salaries of government employees and IRGC personnel,” he said. “Iranians run out of patience again, as they did before, and they’re back on the street. I’m not quite sure if you’re going to have unpaid IRGC forces willing to go back on the street and kill their fellow Iranians who have the same grievances that they have now, which is a collapsed economy.”

The instrumentalisation of vetoes undermines the democratic principles of the European Union as it hijacks the interests of 26 in the name of one single holdout, High Representative Kaja Kallas told Euronews in an exclusive interview.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Kallas was reflecting on the end of Viktor Orbán’s 16 years in uninterrupted power, during which the Hungarian prime minister frequently frustrated his fellow leaders with his near-constant, overlapping vetoes.

“We have to be clear that, actually, the EU treaties do not foresee the veto. The treaties are based on unanimity — that everybody agrees,” Kallas told Euronews in an interview recorded on the sidelines of an informal summit of EU leaders in Cyprus.

“We have seen recently that when 26 countries want something, and one does not, then we end up doing what that one country wants, not what the 26 want. So it is not really democracy.”

EU treaties provide a legal pathway to move from unanimity to qualified majority voting. However, in a significant Catch-22, such a shift itself requires unanimous consent.

“We definitely also have to look at our working methods to be more effective, because in this geopolitical world we need to be credible — and for that we need to be united and able to take decisions,” she added.

As the EU’s foreign policy chief — an area where unanimity is required — Kallas has dealt first-hand with many of Orbán’s vetoes. At times, she had to issue statements in her own name after joint communiqués proved impossible.

Following this difficult period, the High Representative said she was “very hopeful” about having “good cooperation” with the incoming government of Péter Magyar, who won Hungary’s elections on a pledge to restore ties between Budapest and Brussels, currently at an all-time low.

Magyar has said the veto remains a “valid option”, provided it is used constructively.

“We cannot run ahead of events. First, we need to have the new Hungarian government in place, which will probably happen in mid-May,” Kallas said.

“Then we will see whether we can revisit the decisions that have been blocked before.”

‘A geopolitical choice’

This week saw the lifting of two Hungarian vetoes: one on the €90 billion loan to Ukraine and another on the 20th package of sanctions against Russia.

Orbán, though, seems intent on leaving his veto on Ukraine’s accession process, in place for almost two years, as an inheritance for Magyar. As a result, Kyiv has yet to open a single cluster of negotiations.

The incoming prime minister has expressed opposition to fast-tracking talks with Kyiv, a view shared by other member states, who worry any shortcuts will undermine the credibility and integrity of the enlargement policy.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, meanwhile, keeps pushing for a “clear date” for his country’s admission under an accelerated timetable. He has also rejected overtures for half-baked membership as an alternative to fully-fledged rights.

“Ukraine does not need symbolic membership in the EU. Ukraine is defending itself — and it is also defending Europe. And it is not doing so symbolically — people are really dying,” Volodymyr Zelenskyy said this week before joining EU leaders in Cyprus.

“We are defending shared European values. I believe we deserve full membership.”

Kaja Kallas, who has been a strong supporter of Kyiv’s ambitions, said it was important to “work on both sides” — public opinion in member states and legal reforms in Ukraine — and to shift the narrative around candidate countries to highlight their potential contributions to the bloc.

“We need to talk about what we gain from these countries joining,” she said.

“A bigger Europe, a stronger Europe in terms of defence, and also a larger single market that benefits our companies — all of this makes us a more credible geopolitical power in the world,” she added. “It is always a geopolitical choice.”

Ukraine, Kallas noted, has by far the largest army in Europe, meaning that “Europe would be stronger if Ukraine were with us.”