The US administration and president Donald Trump himself are trapped in the strategic dead end in Iran.

They were doomed to this by making initial strategic mistake at the very start of the war — counting on swift annihilation and collapse of Iranian regime and thus dismissing the warnings, that Iran could close the strait of Hormuz and even gain upper hand in this fight.

This is how prominent Ukrainian analyst and orientalist, director of the Center of Middle East Studies Ihor Semyvolos assesses the situation in the region.

Iranian regime won't grant US any kind of deal, which could be sold to American citizens as the "victory" before US midterms, told the expert in the conversation with "Arch Frontline".

According to him, the main option from all the bad ones that US could have is the most risky one — major military escalation against Iran, leading to its retaliation against all the states of the region. This, of course, would ignite major crisis of the global economy, which nobody wants.

Yes, situation is in the strategic dead end and nobody sees any way out. Everything came to this point not today or yesterday, but, actually, at the beginning of April.

Lets take a look at the positions of the sides and the main reasons, why those sides cannot approach any kind of deal or compromise.

Absolutely needless to say that key word here's "Hormuz". Before the US attack on Iran in February, there was the free passage and Iran had no influence on this here. Was the closure of Hormuz in the strategic planning of Iranians, when they were outlining the possibilities of the response to the possible attack? Of course. And that was obvious even from outside.

My answer — they, most probably, thought, that Iran won't be able to do this, because all the leadership will be eliminated. Main people in Washington thought, that this would be enough to destabilize situation in Iran to the core.

That didn't happen and that was the first and absolutely the main strategic mistake, that spawned into all the others. Exactly because of this mistake everybody found themselves where they're in now.

Ok, but what's next? Iranians see and understand that control of the strait gives them such strategic advance, which they have not had until now. It is absolutely clear, that they not only want to "sell" this advantage at the price as high as possible, but, essentially, to preserve it in the future.

The leadership of the Iranian regime don't trust Americans. Of course, they have enough reasons for that. One of the last reasons — the American promises to stop the war in Lebanon, which weren't kept.

So, Iranians keep holding on their strategic culture, strategic "depth of defence" — using proxies in the region, trying to limit Israeli influence in the region, confronting and trying to neutralize the states of the Persian gulf.

And the main goal, which regime is seeking — withdrawal of American forces from the region.

Of course, Iranians can't achieve this in full, in one hundred percent, so to say. But on the other hand, they understand that Americans won't go for the ultimate measure — all out war and ground operation.

Current aerial and missile strikes campaign is the pain Iranian regime can take on, even use this for propaganda in the countries of so called Third World and Global South .

Also regime knows that this war is deeply unpopular not only in the West in general, but particularly in the USA. It is the source of big political tension there, this tension puts growing pressure on president Donald Trump.

So, Iranians are calculating, that they have to hold on for several upcoming months, till the beginning of the elections campaign in US.

And then, if Trump loses these midterms, there is another political situation for Iran.

That is why Iranian regime won't agree to any consents and compromises, they will just do everything to survive under the growing kinetic, military pressure.

American threats to annihilate all of the regime leadership stopped working long ago. Of course, Americans can kill more out there, but who will be left to take part in the negotiations? So, they are more or less secure, because of this aspect — at least for now.

Well, they can just keep pushing forward the same things on the tactical level, which they are already trying to push further. There's nothing much else or better they can do — again, at least for now.

Americans already in NATO Ankara summit tried to check out the possibilities of having at least some NATO countries on board for the operation of opening of the Hormuz strait. Also, US are trying to fixtand to develop further their partnership with Saudis. We remember that president Trump once bragged, that the leader of Saudi Arabia Mohammad bin Salman is ,,kissing his ass", right?

But, as I've just mentioned, all of this are merely tactical lives. The core problem is that US cannot define their strategy, their main strategical trajectory. They are constantly swaying from putting pressure on Iran and negotiating.

Iranians are mirroring this and doing the same.

Seeing this I do not have the feeling, that such swaying may lead to some kind of compromise, not to mention the capitulation of Iran.

On the contrary — Iranians see their victory in the mere fact, that they manage to sustain their regime. From their perspective, they've already won.

Of course, that is far from being the end of the story. They have internal divisions and conflicts, which immediately emerged, when the ceasefire was proclaimed and the talks about possibility of investments in Iran started.

Different groups started the standoff, who would control these money and resources. No less important conflict is over the overall dealing with US and this conflict is boiling up not only among ,,reformists" and ,,conservatives'', but even among ,,conservatives" themselves.

We saw these conflicts coming out into public even during the funeral of Supreme leader Khamenei, which was absolutely extraordinary deviation from Iranian traditions. Many saw this as dangerous sign for Iranian regime.

But as for now, when everything returned to the renewed military action, these internal, systemic problems are at least postponed for the better times.

So, from this perspective, the renewed conflict is positive for the regime, because it helps to contain its internal rifts. Of course, we have to add, that this might be positive only for the meantime, not in the long strategic perspective.

There are little chances for popular uprising or serious protests against the government during the war. It is true almost always and everywhere. I think, we can see this in Iran, too, were the potential of the protest is, so to say, reduced by war.

The Corps of The Guardians of Islamic Revolution also understands that.

Of course, economic situation is bad and getting worse. On the other hand, we have no verified data and information to assume, what the real situation is now. The information we're are getting from official state sources or opposition sources is more of the propaganda.

Well, at least a part of the society now are getting basic things by officially issued cards. This also can be a sign, that government more or less controls the situation.

Anyway, the protests against the regime in Iran could renew only with some pause in the war, period of ceasefire or peace.

One of the key factors in this context is the political dynamics inside the US. Trump needs the victory in the midterms, so he needs some kind of "victory" to sell it to the people. So, Americans are now more desperate to stop the war, they need some kind of deal more, not the Iranians.

But again we are bumping into Hormuz problem, which is unsolved. All these frameworks of possible deal we see and hear in public, from undisclosed sources or open discussions merely show, how deeply complicated the issue is. People, including Trump, are just shooting them out in order to check out the reaction, or just showing, that they are doing something, or just out of the desperation.

And I don't see any possibilities or the ways "out" of this situation, except kinetic, military ones. But, ironically, these ways, basically meaning the ground operation of capturing the Iranian sea shore, are so risky, that I wouldn't advise the Americans to take that way.

Everything will depend on the kind, on the nature of further escalation. Up to now we still have, so to say, more or less controlled escalation, but the risk of losing this control is huge.

We can face the eruption of big uncontrolled escalation. Then Iranian regime can fulfill the threat, which it issued just recently — "either everybody is trading oil here, or nobody's doing this".

That means massive strikes not only to ships, which are crossing Hormuz, or to American military infrastrucure, but to all countries of Middle East and Persian gulf.

Such kind of escalation surely will lead straight to the global economic crisis.

Who is ready for such scenario? As I understand, Americans are not the ones who what this and are ready for this. They are simply afraid of such developments.

So, again, I don't see any good or viable options for them at all.

On the one hand, that means the war will continue and Iran won't grant Trump any kind of "victory".

On the other hand, if there's no such wave of escalation we were talking about, oil prices could stabilize not on the, so to say, radically high level.

But if US are striking to all gas, oil and other critical infrastructure of Iran and Iran in retaliation is hitting all Persian gulf, that's all. Fasten your seat belts, were are going down to the abyss.

Well, actually they started and initiated all this. Benjamin Netanyahu pushed Trump into this war, but at the same time Israel is something of a younger brother in this partnership and US now are not taking Israeli positions into account very much. After all the common plans collapsed, Americans are playing their own game, blind siding Israelis.

One of the most recent examples — Trump approved the old deal with Saudi Arabia allowing enrichment of uranium in this country. As far as I can remember, the possibility of that deal was bound by Americans to the normalization of relations between Israel and Saudis. But, it appears, that bond is no longer there. And Israelis were absolutely not happy with that.

In addition, we have parliament elections in Israel in autumn. So, Israel most probably will return to seeking some ideas and ways out only after these elections. Plus, problem of Gaza and overall Palestinian situation is still unresolved.

First of all, a lot of will depend personally on Trump and that is the factor, that is very hard to analyze and predict.

But here's another thing — paradox of Hormuz dependency on Iran. Look, we can say that Iran is no less dependent on Hormuz. I mean, if you are putting all your cards into one basket, if you make just one thing your main argument and power, you're are essentially trapped.

Everybody is seeing, that it is enough to deprive you of that argument and you're done. So, their opponents want just to kick Iranians out of the strait.

But what does it mean? How? It is obvious, that there are no viable ways to do this in sight.

Yes, but we can see that Americans are trying to do this, are seeking for the ways towards this goal. They want to block Iran from Hormuz. And I think, this escalation we're in, was motivated by the understanding of Americans, that Iran is totally dependent on the control of Hormuz.

But, again, we're returning to the same point — how can Iran be denied the control of Hormuz, if it is enough for him scattered and loose bunches of fighters with drones and rockets, which they can randomly shoot at any moving target in the strait?

We know that those people, who are now in charge of Department of War, are counting on absolute US domination in terms of conventional kinetic power, on military power as such. But also we can see that this sometimes isn't working, to put it mildly.