MARK ALMOND: Tehran is suffering and the mullahs may run out of money, but time is not on the president’s side

Does President Trump have a real chance of reopening the Strait of Hormuz as he has promised? Is it, as some claim, an exercise doomed to failure?

On Sunday, Trump threw down another gauntlet to Iran, announcing that the US Navy, backed by 100 aircraft, would free the 2,000 ships and 20,000 crew members trapped in the Persian Gulf.

The grandly named ‘Operation Freedom’, which was due to start yesterday morning, was intended to end Iran’s stranglehold on the world’s energy and fertilizer supplies. So far we’ve seen little sign of that.

Maybe that’s no surprise. The risk to Washington is all too clear: A direct Iranian attack on a U.S. ship — let alone a sinking one — could be enough to inflame public opinion at home and force the U.S. Navy into a humiliating retreat.

But that does not mean that the endeavor is completely hopeless, not least because, despite all the mullahs’ triumphant rhetoric, Iran and its people are suffering greatly.

The longer this war continues, the greater the economic hardship they will face. And that in turn means that popular discontent could resurface, just as it did in January before it was brutally suppressed.

Iran’s sanctions-hit economy was already ravaged by inflation and shortages; both are now significantly worse.

Thanks to America’s tit-for-tat blockade of Iranian shipping, Tehran – its oil exports dramatically reduced – is facing a currency crisis. Indeed, the regime has resorted to desperate DIY measures. Fleets of small tankers cross the border into Pakistan, delivering at least a trickle of oil to the outside world. Tanker trains rumble through Central Asia to China.

The grandly named ‘Operation Freedom’, which supposedly started yesterday morning, was supposed to end Iran’s stranglehold – but we haven’t seen many signs of that yet

Ships are anchored in the Strait of Hormuz near Bandar Abbas in southern Iran

But unless Iran can export a normal volume of oil through its shipping terminal on Kharg Island within a few weeks, the country will run out of storage capacity. Wells will be plugged and may never reopen – because once the flow of oil stops, there is a risk of water rushing in and destroying them forever.

Although Iran appears to have ample ammunition, the country could well run out of cash, and unpaid soldiers have been known to lay down their arms or even revolt.

The fact that Tehran’s negotiating demands consistently include the lifting of US sanctions shows how sensitive the country is to economic pressure. For its part, however, Tehran clearly thinks it can resist the US blockade – and maintain its grip on the strait despite the attention of the US fleet.

Trump is also under pressure. The mullahs are sure that a few dollars on US fuel prices will hurt American voters, even if the Iranians suffer too. So if it turns out that the US military cannot reopen the strait after all, the president faces a difficult choice.

He can launch a renewed air campaign to bomb Iran into compliance. To that end, he has moved a third aircraft carrier, the USS George HW Bush, to the Red Sea, and a mix of smaller aircraft carriers carrying as many as 15,000 Marines and missile destroyers off Iran’s southern coast.

He will, of course, know that several weeks of heavy airstrikes have so far failed to drive out the mullahs or their Gulf blockade.

Trump has moved a third aircraft carrier, the USS George HW Bush (pictured), to the Red Sea

And it could take many more weeks of destruction before Iran succumbs – if it succumbs – by which time global energy supplies will be in real crisis and the global recession will force America’s allies to make a decision: Do they stand with Trump and hope his military medicine works, or do they cut their own deals with Iran and hope to face Washington’s wrath?

It is ironic that a major row with European allies could give Trump the excuse he needs to withdraw from the Gulf.

He would undoubtedly blame America’s allies for thwarting his campaign just as it was about to succeed. He could – once again – declare “victory” and leave it to others to pick up the pieces, hoping to mislead voters in classic Trump style, although that would be a hard sell, even to his own Republicans.

Indeed, such a retreat would be comparable to Britain’s humiliation in 1956, when we joined the French and Israelis invading Egypt in a failed attempt to take control of the Suez Canal.

Winston Churchill – not one of nature’s appeasers – remarked after the fiasco (launched by his successor Anthony Eden): ‘I should never have started [the Suez operation]but I should never have stopped.’

The 47th president proudly keeps Churchill’s bust on display in the Oval Office. Will he walk away from a potential quagmire or will he plow on?

Time will tell, but time is not on his side. The November midterm elections and the recession are getting closer. What Trump initially described as an “excursion” to Iran could, like Suez, prove an epoch-making failure.

• Mark Almond is director of the Crisis Research Institute, Oxford.