"The War Will End Quite Soon": The Background of Trump's Remarks—The Exit from the Iran War and the "Hormuz Issue" Directly Hitting Japan

U.S. President Donald Trump once again expressed his view that the long-standing war with Iran is "nearing an end."

On August 6, 2026, Trump responded to questions from reporters in the Oval Office of the White House, stating, "I think the war with Iran will end quite soon." He further commented on Iran, saying, "I don't think they can continue much longer," and explained that he is also involved in the negotiations.

An article from the German financial information site AktienCheck also briefly reported this statement. However, behind these few lines of news lies a complex situation that cannot be dismissed as merely "progress in peace negotiations."

The war has already lasted more than five months. And is it really only Iran that is "becoming unable to continue the war"?

In fact, at the same time Trump expressed his expectations for an end to the war, it was revealed that the U.S. military had consumed a large number of important missiles, putting a severe strain on its weapons stockpile. Trump himself admitted that the situation with some ammunition is "a bit tight."

Thus, the statement "end quite soon" may not only be a bold assertion indicating Iran's weakening but also suggest that the U.S. has its own reasons to want to end the war early.

The "Short War" That Didn't End in Five Months

The current war between the U.S., Israel, and Iran intensified on February 28, 2026.

Initially, the Trump administration showed a stance that Iran could be subdued relatively quickly through military pressure. However, in reality, the conflict prolonged, developing into a regional crisis involving maritime traffic centered around the Strait of Hormuz and even Gulf countries.

In June, the U.S. and Iran once signed a memorandum towards a ceasefire.

On June 18, the Japanese government welcomed this agreement as a result of diplomatic efforts, emphasizing the extreme importance of resuming "free and safe navigation" in the Strait of Hormuz and ensuring that ships, including those from Japan, can pass without additional costs.

However, those expectations did not last long.

On July 8, Trump himself declared that the initial ceasefire agreement between the U.S. and Iran was "over," warning of new attacks as Iran was not adhering to the agreement. This led to a cycle of military tensions and diplomatic negotiations.

Therefore, when understanding the words "the end of the war is near," one must not forget the fact that "the war had once neared an end but collapsed."

Why is Trump Emphasizing "End of War" Again Now?

One reason is domestic public opinion in the U.S.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll published on August 6 showed that only 35% of Americans supported the war against Iran.

Furthermore, 50% of respondents predicted that U.S. military actions against Iran would make the Middle East "more unstable" in the coming year. Only 17% believed it would "stabilize."

There is also pessimism about gasoline prices, with 58% expecting them to worsen, while only 15% thought they would improve.

Upon returning to power in 2025, Trump emphasized a stance of not involving the U.S. in unnecessary overseas wars. The fact that the Trump administration has been unable to extricate itself from the war with Iran for nearly six months is a political issue that cannot be ignored by the Republican Party ahead of the November midterm elections.

The longer the war drags on, the more Americans will see the reality of rising gasoline prices, financial burdens, the sacrifice of U.S. soldiers, and further chaos in the Middle East, rather than a "military victory."

According to Reuters, the financial burden of the war on the U.S. has reached at least $37.5 billion, with 18 U.S. soldiers killed and thousands of casualties on the Iranian side.

Trump's statement that the war will "end quite soon" carries not only military but also strong domestic political necessity.

Another Reason—The U.S. Military's Rapid Consumption of Missiles

A particularly noteworthy point in this statement is Trump's simultaneous mention of the weapons stockpile.

According to Reuters, based on interviews with U.S. government officials, the U.S. military has consumed a large number of long-range precision attack missiles, such as ATACMS and next-generation PrSM, to the extent described as "virtually all" during the five-month Iran war.

Furthermore, there is information that nearly half of the Tomahawk cruise missiles held globally have been used since the start of the war.

Defensive weapons are no exception.

Estimates by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) suggest that about 65% of Patriot intercept missiles were consumed from February to July, and THAAD intercept missile stockpiles have decreased by at least 38% since before the war began.

The White House and the Department of Defense emphasize that the U.S. military still retains necessary capabilities and that defense companies are increasing production.

However, weapons cannot be mass-produced like automobiles, increasing several times from the next month.

Advanced missiles require complex components, specialized manufacturing facilities, skilled workers, and long testing processes. Announcing factory expansions does not mean depleted stockpiles will be restored in a short time.

This issue is extremely important for Japan.

Missiles Used in the Middle East Are Also "Missiles That Can't Be Used in East Asia"

From Japan's perspective, the Iran war is an event thousands of kilometers away in the Middle East.

However, from the viewpoint of the U.S. military's weapons stockpile, the story changes.

According to Reuters, there are concerns within the U.S. government that the depletion of weapons stockpiles could limit deterrence against other adversaries such as Russia and China.

Long-range precision missiles, Patriots, THAAD, and Tomahawks are not special weapons used only in the Middle East.

They are extremely important weapons in the Indo-Pacific, in case of heightened military tensions with China, a Taiwan contingency, or a crisis on the Korean Peninsula.

Japan is currently strengthening its defense capabilities with China, North Korea, and Russia in mind. As long as the Japan-U.S. alliance is a pillar of security, the global weapons stockpile of the U.S. military is not a matter of indifference to Japan.

In extreme terms, the longer the Iran war drags on, the more "time is needed to prepare U.S. military forces consumed in the Middle East for East Asia again."

Therefore, for Japan, the ceasefire and end of the war issue has a security implication of "how much U.S. military resources are tied up in the Middle East," separate from crude oil.

Sources interviewed by Reuters also expressed concerns that prolonged depletion could limit deterrence against Russia and China.

The Most Critical Issue for Japan is the Strait of Hormuz

A more direct issue is energy.

Japan is extremely dependent on the Middle East region for crude oil procurement.

In March 2026, the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry decided to release national reserve oil, as the worsening situation in the Middle East made it virtually impossible for oil tankers to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, significantly reducing crude oil imports from the Middle East to Japan.

The first release alone was about 8.5 million kiloliters, equivalent to about one month's supply.

In April, a second release of about 5.8 million kiloliters, equivalent to about 20 days' supply, was decided. The government simultaneously advanced alternative procurement routes that do not pass through the Strait of Hormuz.

This means that Japan has been pushed to the stage where it must actually tap into its national reserves due to the war in the Middle East.

For Japanese people, the most immediate impact of the Iran war is not images of fighter jets or missiles.

It is the "energy-driven price increase" that spreads to gasoline prices, kerosene, airfares, electricity bills, logistics costs, and ultimately to food and daily necessities.

The Strait of Hormuz is the faucet, so to speak.

"End of War Expectations" Alone Won't Stabilize Oil Prices

The market is already in a state where it moves significantly with just one statement from Trump.

At the beginning of August, when Trump held off on a new attack on Iran and expectations for a diplomatic resolution rose, oil prices fell sharply.

However, they rose again on August 7.

The reason is the plan being considered by Iran and Oman to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

On the Iranian side, there is a plan to prohibit the passage of ships deemed "hostile," such as those from the U.S. and Israel, and to impose fines equivalent to up to 20% of the cargo value on ships that violate the regulations.

Furthermore, according to Reuters, Iran is said to be demanding a fee of about 5-7% of the cargo price for passage, while Oman is considering about 3%, and the U.S. insists on free passage.

Even if the war stops, there is no guarantee that the Strait of Hormuz will return to its previous state.

As of August 7, North Sea Brent crude futures rose to the $83 per barrel range.

This is extremely important for Japan.

"Ceasefire = Resolution of Japan's Energy Issues" is not the case.

True normalization requires multiple conditions, including safe navigation, recovery of insurance, normal tanker operations, resolution of passage fee issues, and alignment with sanctions.

Iran's Cold Reaction to Trump's "End of War is Near"

Naturally, Iran's perspective is significantly different.

Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Speaker of the Iranian Parliament and also responsible for negotiations, criticized the Trump administration's approach as "a repetition of show diplomacy" on social media.

From Iran's perspective, even if the U.S. unilaterally announces "negotiations are going well" and "the war will end soon," there is no reason to recognize this as progress in peace.

In fact, even at the beginning of August, while Trump explained that "talks are progressing," there was a scene where Iran denied the talks themselves.

This "discrepancy between U.S. announcements and Iranian announcements" is the biggest point of caution when judging the current peace expectations.

It is necessary to see whether tankers actually start passing through the Strait of Hormuz, military attacks stop, or both sides announce the same agreement content, rather than relying on Trump's words.

On Social Media: "Is It 'Ending Soon' Again?" Skepticism

On social media, rather than reactions that take Trump's end-of-war outlook at face value, there are more sarcastic and skeptical reactions to the fact that similar statements have been repeated many times in the past.

On the overseas forum Reddit, in response to news that Trump halted a new attack at the beginning of August and hinted at peace negotiations,

"Again?"

"Wasn't the war over last week?"

"Didn't he say two months ago that an agreement was rapidly progressing?"

Comments of this nature followed one after another.

Even in April, when Trump stated that the war would "end quite soon," there were posts sarcastically referencing past statements, saying "another two weeks?"

Of course, Reddit posts do not represent the entirety of U.S. public opinion. However, considering that support for the war has dropped to 35% according to the Reuters/Ipsos survey, it cannot be said that the strong skepticism online is an isolated phenomenon.

Rather, it is natural to see that there is both a hope for "the war to end" and a distrust of "will it really end this time?"

In Japanese-Language Social Media, the Impact on Daily Life Stands Out More Than "The War Itself"

Discussions on Middle Eastern affairs seen on Japanese-language social media have somewhat different characteristics from those overseas.

Of course, there are pros and cons regarding the U.S. military actions themselves, but what stands out is the reaction linking the Strait of Hormuz to the Japanese economy.

Regarding the passage conditions and fees of the Strait of Hormuz, discussions have arisen such as "Why should Japan bear the burden?" and "Shouldn't Japan strengthen direct diplomacy with Iran?"

Meanwhile, there are also discussions about how much military role Japan should play, given the background of the U.S. asking for cooperation in ensuring the safety of the Strait of Hormuz.

There is a conflict between the security-focused stance of "the role of the Maritime Self-Defense Force should be expanded to protect energy" and the cautious view that "Japan should not be dragged into a war started by the U.S."

Social media varies in the accuracy of information and is prone to conspiracy-like explanations. Therefore, individual posts cannot be equated with public opinion.

Nevertheless, considering Japan's energy structure, it is natural that Japanese people's interest leans more towards "how much will gasoline cost," "can Japanese tankers pass," and "will the Self-Defense Forces be involved," rather than "who will win in the Middle East."

"End of War" and "Problem Solving" Are Different Things

As Trump predicts, there is a possibility that large-scale combat will cease in the near future.

The U.S. has domestic political reasons to want to end the war, and there is a burden