Good morning! Today is Thursday, August 27th 2026, and this is The American Conservative's Morning Brief. With the Iran war now in its 180th day, Iran and Oman appear close to a deal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, even as the White House launches Operation Economic Outcast to squeeze Tehran's trading partners into compliance. Doug Bandow argues that Russian and Chinese support for Iran is a predictable response to Washington's overreach, and that piling on more sanctions and Ukraine aid will only deepen the hole—the real fix is ending a war he calls obvious and disastrous. Rob York examines why South Korea's President Lee Jae-myung is openly branding Netanyahu a war criminal, and what his push for greater autonomy from Washington means for the U.S.–Korea alliance. and now for the details. We begin with the war in Iran, now in its 180th day. Iran and Oman appear close to a deal that would reopen the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world's most vital energy chokepoints. The two Gulf nations announced Tuesday they had discussed a joint temporary navigational corridor and a joint project to clear the Strait of mines. Global oil prices responded overnight, with Brent Crude falling below ninety dollars a barrel. Iran effectively closed the Strait after the U.S. and Israel launched the current war in late February. A framework peace deal signed in June envisioned an Iranian-Omani partnership to administer the waterway, but that framework collapsed after the U.S. worked to create a transit corridor near the Omani coastline, outside Iranian control. Tehran says it won't open the sea passage until Washington lifts its own naval blockade of Iranian ports. Only five commodity vessels transited the Strait on Tuesday, well below the ten-day average of fifteen. As Andrew Day reports, the White House is leaning on economic pressure to force the Strait open on terms favorable to Washington. On Monday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced Operation Economic Outcast, aimed at isolating Iran by punishing its trading partners. China, which buys roughly eighty percent of Iran's oil exports, has objected, with its Foreign Ministry insisting bilateral cooperation with Tehran falls within international law. Staying with the Iran war, hawks in Washington are increasingly alarmed by Russian and Chinese support for Tehran, and are calling for a tougher American response, including expanded intelligence and munitions support to Ukraine, sanctions on Beijing, and interdiction of Chinese shipments tied to Iran's missile program. Doug Bandow pushes back hard on that prescription. He argues that Russian and Chinese assistance to Iran is a predictable response to Washington's attempt to run the world, not a shocking act of effrontery. Bandow points out that the United States has done far more for Ukraine against Russia than Moscow is now doing for Iran, and that ratcheting up support for Kiev would only invite more Russian aid to Tehran. As for China, Bandow writes that Beijing sees a weakened president and appears willing to dare further economic escalation, with rare earths and a hoped-for trade deal both at risk. The better response, he argues, is to end the war. Bandow calls the February attack on Iran, launched during negotiations, a mistake both obvious and disastrous, waged without a coherent strategy and premised on the fantasy of unconditional Iranian surrender. Forbearance, he concludes, would reduce openings for Moscow and Beijing to harm American interests, and would let Washington finally put America first in practice, not just in slogan. Turning to East Asia, South Korea's progressive President Lee Jae-myung has been openly denouncing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, labeling him a war criminal, comparing Israel's conduct in Gaza to Nazi massacres and to Japan's wartime comfort women system, and suggesting Netanyahu could be arrested if he set foot on South Korean soil. This from a country that, like Israel, was founded in 1948, signed a free trade agreement with Jerusalem in 2019, and long shared a Cold War alignment with the United States. As Rob York reports, Lee's posture reflects both the damage to Israel's standing since October 2023 and a broader shift in Seoul's relationship with Washington. Lee is not, York writes, the pro-Beijing sellout his domestic critics claim. He has kept ties with Japan warm and wants the U.S. engaged on the peninsula. But he is pushing for greater South Korean autonomy, including transferring wartime operational control of Korean troops to Seoul and accelerating a landmark nuclear submarine deal with the Trump administration. When President Trump scaled down U.S.–South Korea military exercises, Lee praised the move and used it to press his case for self-reliance. York argues that this drive toward greater autonomy among American partners is likely to outlast Lee's term, and is something Washington should welcome, though he suggests it be handled with more tact than has been sh