US President Trump is waiting for Iran to cave to his economic pressure, but Tehran may be willing to wait even longer, reports Politico

Standoff reporting of this kind, where each side frames itself as able to outlast the other's economic pain, is a familiar feature of sanctions-driven confrontations and has historically preceded prolonged stalemate rather than quick resolution. The transmission channel for markets runs through crude: the durability of enforcement against Iranian exports, secondary-sanctions risk for buyers, and the freight, insurance and re-flagging workarounds that have tended to blunt formal restrictions over time, which is why headline-driven premia in oil have often faded unless physical flows are actually interrupted. The distinction worth drawing is between rhetorical maximalism and any change in enforcement posture or tanker movements, since it is the latter that has repriced the barrel in comparable episodes. The actors' prior form matters here: this administration has previously paired maximum-pressure language with abrupt pivots to negotiation, while Tehran has historically absorbed extended sanctions pressure without conceding on core demands. What bears watching is whether back-channel contacts, intermediary reporting or sanctions enforcement actions follow, and how Gulf producers posture around any supply gap. As a Politico-sourced account of intentions rather than a policy action, the signal is atmospheric.