Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Speaker of Iran's Parliament, warned that the world is entering a new era of conflict following escalating tensions with the U.S.
These statements signal a potential shift in Tehran's military posture. The warnings come as the U.S. maintains a significant military presence in West Asia and implements restrictive naval measures against Iranian ports.
Speaking in late April 2026, Ghalibaf said the world is entering a new era, and Iran will not stand idle [1]. He said that Iran has developed new military options to counter U.S. aggression, describing them as "new cards" prepared during a ceasefire period [3].
These threats are specifically linked to U.S. naval activity in the Strait of Hormuz and a reported U.S. plan for a long-term port blockade [2]. Ghalibaf said that if the United States attacks Iran, the country will strike its bases in the region [4].
Economic instability is compounding the military tension. Reports indicate that oil prices could reach $140 per barrel [1] as the risk of conflict increases. This volatility coincides with the deployment of tens of thousands of U.S. soldiers in West Asia [5].
While Ghalibaf's rhetoric suggests an imminent threat, other reports offer a different perspective. President Trump said the war was very much under control and no immediate attack was planned [6]. However, the U.S. had previously issued warnings regarding a port blockade on April 29, 2026 [2].
Tehran's current strategy appears to focus on deterrence through the threat of asymmetric warfare. By targeting regional bases, Iran seeks to raise the cost of U.S. naval blockades, and military positioning in the Persian Gulf.
“"The world is entering a new era, and Iran will not stand idle."”
The escalation in rhetoric between Tehran and Washington suggests a transition from diplomatic friction to a state of high-readiness military deterrence. By linking potential base strikes to oil price spikes and naval blockades, Iran is signaling that it views the Strait of Hormuz as a critical leverage point. The contradiction between Ghalibaf's warnings and the U.S. administration's claims of control indicates a dangerous gap in perception that increases the risk of accidental escalation.
