Mike Baker

has been looking for, more direct regional buy-in, not just quiet support behind the scenes, but visible participation in the fight.

And that would change the optics of the war in a significant way.

But as we've been saying here on the PDB, reopening the Strait of Hormuz by force is far easier said than done.

This isn't just about sending ships through and declaring the problem solved.

The strait is narrow, heavily surveilled, and sits right along Iran's coastline.

Tehran has spent years preparing for exactly this scenario, stockpiling mines and deploying anti-ship missiles and building out fleets of fast attack boats and drones.

So even if a coalition clears the waterway once, Iran doesn't need to shut it down permanently.

It just needs one successful hit at some point to prove that it can shut it down.

One successful strike, a tanker, a naval escort, even a near miss, and the entire flow of shipping could grind to a halt again.

Insurance markets react, shipping companies pull back, and suddenly the strait is effectively closed, even if no formal blockade exists.

That's the reality that the Gulf states are facing.

For the UAE and other regional actors, the strain of Hormuz is their economic lifeline.

Energy exports, shipping routes, food imports all depend on it remaining open.

Living without hostile Iran controlling that choke point isn't seen as a viable long-term option.

And it's doing so at a moment when the U.S.

hasn't fully decided how this war ends.

On one hand, there are signals that President Trump may be willing to declare victory without reopening the strait, leaving that problem for regional actors and possibly the EU to handle.

On the other hand, the Pentagon continues to develop options for escalation, including sustained bombing campaigns and the possible use of ground forces.

All right, coming up next, a major cyber attack linked to North Korea could give hackers access to thousands of US companies and untold millions in digital assets.

I'll be right back.