Just prior to Donald Trump warning that he could lead to the downfall of a “whole civilization” if Iran did not permit passage through the Strait of Hormuz, an Iranian representative indicated that the shipping route would be reopened for a fortnight if the United States ceased its bombardment of Iran. Currently, the U.S. has halted its attacks on Iran.
This situation has reverted to the pre-war conditions that existed before Trump initiated hostilities. However, Iran is now in a position to credibly threaten to shut down the strait if its demands are not met, which could disrupt both the U.S. and global economies. As it stands, Trump’s primary leverage remains his threat of potential war crimes.
Tuesday’s confrontation clearly favored Iran and represented a setback for Trump, despite his likely attempts to portray it otherwise.
The situation with Iran is merely the latest instance highlighting strategies that have successfully countered Trump’s influence.
Similar tactics have been employed by countries such as China, Russia, Canada, Mexico, and Greenland. Within the United States, residents of Minneapolis, Harvard University, comedian Jimmy Kimmel, author E. Jean Carroll, and multiple law firms including Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, Susman Godfrey, and WilmerHale have all effectively resisted Trump.
What unites these diverse entities? They have all refused to yield to Trump, despite his apparent military or economic superiority.
Instead, they have utilized a strategic form of resistance, akin to jiujitsu, turning Trump’s power against him while allowing him the appearance of victory. For instance:
Iran, recognizing its military inferiority to the U.S. and Israel, resorted to deploying inexpensive drones and missiles to block the Strait of Hormuz and disrupt other oil facilities in the Gulf. This maneuver raised gas prices in the U.S., increasing political pressure on Trump just months before the midterm elections, compelling him to pause his military actions.
When Trump imposed significant tariffs on Chinese imports, China retaliated by restricting exports of seven types of critical rare earth metals, essential for U.S. defense and technology sectors. Beijing continues to employ these restrictions as strategic tools in ongoing trade negotiations, avoiding outright demands for Trump’s capitulation.
Russia has capitalized on its abundant oil and gas resources to exert influence over U.S. allies and has shown its capability to meddle in U.S. elections, as detailed in the Mueller report regarding its campaign to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.
Canada and Mexico have successfully navigated tariff disputes with Trump by emphasizing the U.S.’s significant reliance on them for materials and components while maintaining a low profile regarding their accomplishments.
Greenland has utilized global public sentiment—strongly opposed to any American invasion or occupation—to hinder Trump’s ambitions regarding the territory.
Within the U.S., Minneapolis and St. Paul residents have harnessed their collective power to resist Trump’s ICE and border patrol initiatives through organized, non-violent actions to protect immigrants in their communities.
Harvard University has sought to defend its academic freedom from Trump’s interventions by utilizing its influence within the federal court system in Boston, successfully obtaining rulings that counter Trump’s efforts, although he continues to challenge them.
Comedian Jimmy Kimmel transformed a political controversy into a ratings boon by leveraging public backlash against his temporary suspension from ABC, which is owned by Disney. After being reinstated, Kimmel has continued to critique Trump while extending his contract through 2027.
Author E. Jean Carroll won two civil cases against Trump involving sexual assault and defamation, resulting in over $88 million in damages—a verdict upheld by federal appellate courts. Carroll’s legal team utilized civil lawsuits, which require a lower burden of proof than criminal cases, presenting evidence including Trump’s infamous Access Hollywood tape and testimonies from other accusers, alongside recordings of Trump disparaging Carroll.
Law firms like Perkins Coie and others stood firm against Trump’s executive orders that targeted them for their representation of clients opposing him. They advanced constitutional arguments in federal courts, asserting that the orders violated their First Amendment rights and the constitutional separation of powers, ultimately leading the Justice Department to abandon its fight against these firms in March 2026 after federal appellate judges deemed Trump’s orders unconstitutional.
In contrast, organizations and countries that capitulated to Trump have only bolstered his leverage over them. Europe appears paralyzed, caught between fearing Trump’s possible withdrawal from NATO and struggling to establish firm boundaries with him.
ABC has seen a decline in viewership and remains vulnerable to Trump’s whims. CBS, now owned by Trump supporters Larry Ellison and his son David, is experiencing a talent exodus.
Columbia University faces significant internal dissent from both students and faculty, while the Trump administration continues to impose demands on the institution.
Law firms that complied with Trump’s executive orders have watched their lawyers leave, feeling that such compliance betrayed the firms’ principles. Microsoft opted to partner with Jenner & Block, a firm that opposed Trump, leaving behind Simpson Thacher. Reports indicate that students at prestigious law schools are increasingly avoiding firms that have engaged with the Trump administration.
In conclusion, a clear roadmap for effectively countering Trump has emerged, accessible to any group willing to adopt it.
