Robert Pape said control over the Strait of Hormuz and Iran's nuclear capabilities are zero-sum issues preventing a U.S.–Iran peace deal [1].
These specific points of contention are critical because they represent fundamental security interests. When both nations view any gain for the other as an automatic loss for themselves, the traditional framework of diplomatic compromise becomes nearly impossible to apply.
Pape is a professor at the University of Chicago and the founding director of the Chicago Project on Security and Threats [1]. He said the current deadlock is not merely a result of political posturing but is rooted in these strategic imperatives.
"Control over the Strait of Hormuz and Iran's nuclear capabilities remain zero‑sum issues standing in the way of progress toward a peace deal," Pape said [1].
The Strait of Hormuz serves as a vital artery for global energy supplies. For Iran, maintaining influence over this waterway is a matter of national sovereignty and leverage, and for the U.S., ensuring the free flow of commerce is a non-negotiable security requirement.
Similarly, the nuclear issue creates a binary conflict. The U.S. seeks to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons to maintain regional stability, while Iran views its nuclear program as a tool for deterrence and technological advancement.
Pape said that as long as these two issues are framed as zero-sum, the prospects for a comprehensive agreement remain slim. This dynamic forces both parties into a cycle of escalation rather than a path toward a sustainable peace [1].
“Control over the Strait of Hormuz and Iran's nuclear capabilities remain zero‑sum issues”
The identification of these 'zero-sum' issues suggests that standard diplomatic incentives—such as sanctions relief—may be insufficient. If the core obstacles are existential security concerns rather than economic ones, a breakthrough would require a fundamental shift in how both the U.S. and Iran perceive their strategic survival in the Persian Gulf.
