The German philosophical concept of Gelassenheit—usually translated as “releasement,” “letting-be,” or simply “letting things be”—provides a surprisingly powerful framework for understanding geopolitical strategy.
Associated historically with Meister Eckhart and developed philosophically by Martin Heidegger, Gelassenheit represents an alternative to the human impulse to control every circumstance through immediate action. It does not necessarily mean weakness, surrender, or inactivity. Rather, it can mean possessing sufficient confidence to allow underlying realities to produce the desired result.
For Heidegger, modern humanity had become obsessed with calculation, technological control, and the constant manipulation of circumstances. Gelassenheit suggested something different: act where necessary, but also recognize when circumstances themselves are more powerful than intervention.
Viewed through this lens, President Donald Trump’s strategy toward Iran can be interpreted as a geopolitical form of Gelassenheit combined with the ancient strategic insights of Sun Tzu’s Art of War.
The essential idea is remarkably simple: America does not necessarily have to solve the Iranian problem alone. Geography, economics, energy, and the interests of Eurasia may ultimately exert greater pressure upon Iran than American military force ever could.
This is where the geopolitical theories of Sir Halford Mackinder become especially relevant.
Mackinder understood Eurasia as the great geographical center of world power. In The Geographical Pivot of History, he specifically identified the Iranian plateau as a strategic geographical position connecting different civilizations and theaters of power.
Persia stood between the Mediterranean world and India and China and provided what Mackinder described as forward positions from which power could move toward India, the Middle East, and Europe. In his later writings, Mackinder expressly included Persia within his expanded strategic conception of the Heartland .
In modern terminology, we might therefore describe Iran as one of the great gateways and crossroads of Eurasian commerce .
That geography is simultaneously Iran’s great strategic advantage and its potential weakness.
The Strait of Hormuz illustrates the problem dramatically. Before the present disruption, roughly 20 million barrels per day of oil—about one-quarter of the world’s seaborne oil trade—passed through Hormuz, with approximately 80 percent destined for Asia . China and India alone received approximately 44 percent of the crude oil exports passing through the Strait in 2025. The Strait is also crucial to global LNG commerce.
Consequently, an extended disruption is not merely an American-Iranian problem. It becomes a Eurasian problem.
The more than 100 nations comprising or economically connected to the vast Eurasian system cannot indefinitely tolerate the obstruction of the free movement of energy, goods, products, shipping, investment, and ultimately people. China, India, Japan, Korea, the Gulf economies, Central Asia, and Europe all possess enormous interests in functioning commercial corridors.
Indeed, current events are already demonstrating this pressure. Gulf governments have looked to China to use its influence with Tehran to secure vital trade routes, while Indian refiners and other Asian energy interests are adjusting their behavior because of the risks surrounding Hormuz.
This is where Trump’s strategy begins to resemble Sun Tzu.
The greatest strategist does not unnecessarily expend his own army when circumstances can compel the opponent. Rather than America bearing the entire economic and military cost of forcing Iran into compliance, Washington can maintain deterrence and economic pressure while allowing the enormous economic weight of Eurasia gradually to bear upon Tehran.
In effect, Trump can let geography do the work.
America enters this contest from an unusually strong structural position. The United States possesses immense domestic oil and natural-gas resources, extraordinary agricultural capacity, sophisticated transportation infrastructure, and the ability to expand or redirect domestic production.
America remains exposed to world commodity prices, but its vulnerability is fundamentally different from that of Asian economies heavily dependent upon imported Gulf energy.
The strategic asymmetry is therefore striking. Iran can disrupt Hormuz, but doing so does not merely pressure Washington. It pressures billions of people across Eurasia—particularly the economic giants of China and India.
At some point, their interests and the economic strain may overwhelm their ideological differences with Washington. That is the potential geopolitical checkmate.
Trump does not necessarily need China, India, Europe, or the Gulf states to agree with American foreign policy. The President merely needs them to pursue their own national interests. Their factories require energy. Their populations require food and fertilizer. All transportation networks require fuel.
All corporations require predictable shipping and insurance. All governments require economic growth. Further, excessive energy costs created by Iran actually increases the costs of exports of cheap goods; thus, domestic manufacturers in the USA and Europe may actually have greater success while Iran shuts down fuel exports.
A prolonged Iranian obstruction of Eurasian commerce therefore creates its own coalition—not necessarily a formal military alliance, but an increasingly powerful coalition of necessity demanding freedom of commerce and navigation.
The United States also retains substantial emergency economic authorities that could be employed during a severe national energy emergency, although major nationwide price controls or new windfall-profit taxes would ordinarily require congressional authorization.
Congress and the President together could nevertheless devise temporary taxes, rebates, incentives, allocation measures, or other mechanisms designed to protect American consumers. However, the dirty secret is that the President can limit oil and gas exports without Congress under emergency circumstances.
Thus, Gelassenheit becomes more than an existential philosophy. It becomes a power move of strategic patience where the USA looks like a global peacemaker while other nations become angry with Iran.
Do not attack unnecessarily. Do not expend resources merely to demonstrate power. Preserve your options. Strengthen your own position. Allow geography, economics, time, and the survivalist mood of other surrounding nations to exert this extreme pressure while you “Let it Be”.
Mackinder supplied the geography. Heidegger supplied Gelassenheit. Sun Tzu supplied the strategic economic and typographical logic. And Trump’s wager is that the immense populations and economic powers surrounding Iran will eventually recognize something geography has already determined: Iran may occupy a gateway of Eurasia, but no single state can indefinitely hold the commerce, food, inflation, and the energy security of Eurasia hostage.
Much like a quiet seige, “the Gelassenheit “Let It Be”, Art of War strategy does not require America to conquer Iran. It requires America to wait while Iran confronts the economic weight of its 3 billion angry Eurasia neighbors.”
And if that pressure ultimately compels diplomatic accommodation, then the strategy has already established the conditions for victory.
_______________
Commissioner Dr. Jur. George Mentz JD MBA CILS CWM® holds a Doctor of Jurisprudence (JD) and an MBA from ABA- and AACSB-accredited programs. Mentz has been recognized as a Top 50 Influencer and Thought Leader in management, fintech, wealth management, education, and business leadership by organizations including Onalytica and Thinkers360. He is a Chartered Wealth Manager® (CWM), global speaker, educator, tax economist, international lawyer, and CEO of the GAFM Global Academy of Finance & Management®.
© 2026 Mentzinger Media Ltd
