Trump asserts US dominance over Strait of Hormuz as midterm rhetoric intensifies

In a brief but pointed press briefing captured in Al Jazeera English’s latest video report, former President Donald Trump declared that the United States “controls” the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway that funnels a substantial share of the world’s oil. Speaking to reporters, Trump praised the U.S. Navy’s presence in the channel, claimed that oil flow through the strait had increased since the onset of the Iran‑related conflict, and used the moment to launch a series of political attacks aimed at Democrats ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. The remarks, while focused on a Middle Eastern flashpoint, reverberate across Latin America, where oil markets, trade negotiations, and geopolitical alignments are tightly linked to the fortunes of the Hormuz corridor.

Trump’s claim of “total control” over the Hormuz waterway

During the interview, Trump asserted that the United States could “take Iran’s oil” and that the Strait of Hormuz was “entirely under US control.” He framed the U.S. Navy’s operations as a demonstration of American power, suggesting that the presence of warships and aircraft carriers guarantees the free flow of petroleum. The former president’s language echoed his earlier rhetoric about “America First” and a willingness to intervene directly in oil markets to protect U.S. interests.

The claim of total control is significant because the strait remains a chokepoint through which a large portion of global oil passes. While Trump did not provide specific figures, his statement that “more oil is passing through it than before the war” implies an uptick in shipments despite heightened tensions. For Latin American oil‑exporting nations such as Brazil, Mexico, and Venezuela, any disruption in Hormuz can reverberate through global price signals, affecting export revenues and domestic fuel costs.

Latin American governments watch U.S. naval deployments with a mixture of caution and strategic calculation. Brazil’s Ministry of Mines and Energy, for example, monitors the strait as part of its broader assessment of energy security. While the country does not rely directly on Hormuz oil, fluctuations in global crude prices influence Brazil’s own refining sector and the cost of imported gasoline. The Trump assertion, therefore, feeds into a broader narrative of U.S. dominance that Latin American policymakers must contend with when formulating energy strategies.

Political theater ahead of the 2026 U.S. midterms

Trump’s briefing was not solely about geopolitics; it was also a platform to rally his political base. He predicted that Republicans would win the upcoming midterm elections and used the moment to defend his recent campaign rallies, which have drawn both fervent supporters and fierce critics. By linking foreign policy triumphs—such as the claimed control of Hormuz—to domestic political victories, Trump sought to portray a strong, decisive leadership style that he believes will resonate with voters.

In the same breath, Trump launched attacks on Democratic figures, including a criticism of a political advertisement targeting Ohio gubernatorial candidate Amy Acton. He also singled out a Michigan Senate candidate, though the video does not specify the nature of the criticism. These partisan remarks illustrate how foreign policy narratives are being weaponized in the U.S. electoral arena, a tactic that has implications for Latin America.

Latin American political observers note that U.S. election cycles often shape the tone of American foreign policy toward the region. A Republican‑leaning Congress, for instance, may prioritize security cooperation and trade deals that align with a more hawkish stance, while a Democratic majority might push for climate‑focused diplomacy. Trump’s confident prediction of a Republican victory suggests that he anticipates a continuation of policies that favor strong military presence abroad, which could affect how Latin American countries negotiate security and trade with Washington.

Trade talks with Mexico and Canada: a regional backdrop

Amid the geopolitical posturing, Trump mentioned that the United States was “close to reaching an agreement” with Mexico on trade matters, and that Canada was also “seeking a deal.” While the video does not detail the content of these negotiations, the reference signals ongoing efforts to reshape North American trade frameworks. For Latin America, any shift in U.S. trade policy with its northern neighbors can alter competitive dynamics, especially in sectors such as agriculture, automotive, and energy.

Mexico, as a key partner in the United States‑Mexico‑Canada Agreement (USMCA), plays a pivotal role in regional supply chains. A new trade accord between the United States and Mexico could recalibrate tariff structures and rules of origin, potentially affecting Latin American exporters who compete in the same markets. For instance, Brazilian soy producers already face competition from Mexican agricultural products in the U.S. market; a revised trade deal could either open new avenues or tighten barriers, depending on its provisions.

Canada’s involvement, while less directly tied to Latin America, still matters. Canadian energy companies are active in the region, particularly in offshore oil projects and renewable energy ventures. A U.S.‑Canada trade agreement that emphasizes energy cooperation could influence investment flows into Latin America, either by encouraging joint ventures or by shifting focus toward North American markets. Trump’s brief nod to these negotiations underscores how U.S. foreign policy statements, even when centered on the Middle East, are intertwined with broader economic agendas that reach into Latin America.

Energy diplomacy with the United Kingdom

Trump also touched on “North Sea oil development” in conversation with the British prime minister. While the video offers no specifics, the mention reflects ongoing U.S. interest in collaborating with traditional allies on energy security. The North Sea remains a significant source of European oil and gas, and any joint initiatives could have indirect effects on Latin American energy exporters.

Latin American nations, especially those with large offshore oil sectors like Brazil and Guyana, watch European energy policies closely. European demand for crude oil can influence global price trends, and partnerships between the United States and the United Kingdom on North Sea projects may signal a coordinated approach to securing supply lines. This could translate into a more assertive stance on protecting maritime routes such as the Strait of Hormuz, reinforcing the narrative Trump presented.

Moreover, the United Kingdom’s own post‑Brexit trade strategy includes seeking new markets in Latin America. Energy cooperation agreements between the UK and Brazil have been discussed in recent years, focusing on technology transfer and joint exploration. Trump’s reference to North Sea development, therefore, hints at a broader alignment of Western powers seeking to maintain dominance over global energy flows—a dynamic that Latin American policymakers must navigate as they balance relationships with both traditional powers and emerging partners.

Brief nods to Ukraine, Russia, and broader geopolitical tensions

When asked about the ongoing war in Ukraine, Trump offered only a brief comment, acknowledging the conflict without elaborating on U.S. policy. He also mentioned Russia in passing. While the video does not elaborate, the cursory treatment suggests that the former president prefers to keep the focus on the Middle East and domestic politics during this briefing.

The Ukraine war has indirect consequences for Latin America, particularly in terms of grain exports. As Russia and Ukraine are major wheat exporters, disruptions have prompted Latin American grain producers to fill gaps in global markets. Brazil’s soybean and corn surpluses have become more valuable, and any shift in U.S. foreign policy toward Russia could affect sanctions regimes that influence trade flows.

Trump’s emphasis on the Strait of Hormuz, rather than the Ukraine front, may also reflect a strategic choice to prioritize issues that have immediate relevance to oil markets—a sector that directly impacts Latin American economies. By framing the Hormuz waterway as a theater of American control, he underscores the importance of maritime security for global energy supplies, a concern that resonates with coastal nations across the continent that depend on shipping lanes for both imports and exports.

Implications for Latin American environmental and social justice movements

The rhetoric of “control” over a vital oil conduit raises questions about the environmental costs of maintaining such strategic dominance. Latin American environmental NGOs have long warned that increased naval activity and heightened oil flow through chokepoints elevate the risk of spills and marine pollution. While the video does not address ecological concerns, the emphasis on expanding oil passage through Hormuz aligns with a broader pattern of prioritizing fossil fuel extraction over climate mitigation.

Indigenous and coastal communities throughout Latin America watch these developments with apprehension. In Brazil’s Amazon basin, for example, the push for new oil infrastructure has sparked protests over land rights and ecological damage. The same logic that underpins Trump’s claim of control—leveraging military power to secure oil routes—can be mirrored in domestic policies that favor extractive projects at the expense of vulnerable populations.

By linking U.S. strategic claims to the global oil market, Trump’s statements indirectly influence the calculus of Latin American governments that must balance economic growth with climate commitments under the Paris Agreement. The pressure to maintain oil exports to meet revenue targets may clash with growing domestic demand for renewable energy transitions. As the region grapples with these competing priorities, the narrative of American control over Hormuz serves as a reminder of how external geopolitical forces can shape internal debates over energy, environment, and social justice.

By Elena Vasquez, Staff Writer

This article was produced with AI-assisted research and editorial support. Reporting is based on the source material cited below. Sources: Al Jazeera English video report (23 October 2026); Al Jazeera English; Global1.News