Introduction
On October 12, the comprehensive American strategy regarding the Islamic Republic of Iran was announced in the form of the White House fact sheet and through a speech made by the President of the United States. This paper first examines the objectives of this strategy and then discusses the tools and mechanisms of implementing it.
a) The Goals of Trump’s Strategy on Iran
An examination of Trump’s remarks and the White House fact sheet reveals a variety of goals, which are either internal or external addressing the Islamic Republic of Iran. These goals can be summarized as follows:
1) Destroying Obama’s Legacy: Trump’s approach and actions show that he sees Obama as his “other,” and so his policies and actions are often in line with denying Obama’s actions and legacy. Trump has shown that he does not know Iran and the content of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), but in his view, because this agreement has been finalized by the Obama administration, it must be eliminated. Removing the tracks of the actions of Obama has become one of Trump’s most important goals in American politics, and practically there is no rationality behind it. The denial of the past has played an important role in electing Trump as president of the United States, and influences shaping his government’s domestic and foreign policy strategies regarding other actors, including Iran.
2) Low-Cost Exit from the JCPOA: Trump has called the JCPOA the worst and the most shameful deal for the United States, but because of the mechanisms envisioned in the deal, unilateral withdrawal from it would be very costly.
International isolation, diplomatic discredit, escalation of conflict in various parts of the world, and increasing internal opposition to Trump are among the costs. In order to destroy the JCPOA, Trump has pursued a strategy of inflicting multiple wounds on the deal and preventing Iran from taking advantage of its gains. To do so, he seeks to create a negative psychological atmosphere against the Islamic Republic of Iran and the JCPOA. Sending the JCPOA to Congress and imposing new sanctions under various pretexts are the steps Trump has taken to violate the JCPOA and deprive Iran of the benefits of the nuclear deal so that individuals and groups in Iran can take the lead, take harsher measures and in practice pull out of the JCPOA. In this case, the JCPOA will be destroyed because of Iran’s actions, and Trump will get rid of it, and practically the relations between Tehran and Washington will return to the period before the JCPOA, and once again the world will unite against the danger of Iran’s nuclear activities.
3) Preventing From Making an Investment in Iran and Weakening the Islamic Republic’s Regional Position: Trump assesses that previous sanctions were very successful. He believes that while the Iranian government was about to fall because of sanctions, by accepting to negotiate and reaching a nuclear deal, Obama saved Iran from certain defeat. In this regard, Trump’s goal is to return to the pre-JCPOA period and weaken Iran’s national strength and power by imposing comprehensive sanctions. Trump administration believes that the United States has made all concessions to Iran from the very beginning, and by delivering large sums of money and releasing Iran’s frozen funds, it has strengthened the Islamic Republic of Iran and thus paved the way for Iran’s extensive activities in the Middle East. In such a situation, the threat of sanctions must be returned in practice, and if the JCPOA prevents it, it is necessary to prevent others from making any investment in Iran and having normal relations with it by making numerous claims against this country and increasing the risk of the returning of sanctions. Also, by promoting Iranophobia and trying to re-securitize Iran, as well as confronting the Islamic Republic of Iran in the region in various possible ways, the Trump administration is trying to weaken and limit Iran’s position and influence in the region.
4) Supporting Regional Allies and Getting Money from the Wealthy Kingdoms of the Persian Gulf: In Trump’s view, Iran is a major threat to the security of the Israeli and American regional allies. Trump and Netanyahu have the same negative attitude towards the Islamic Republic of Iran. Netanyahu was eagerly expecting the end of the Obama administration. His inclination to Trump was very clear. Shortly after Trump’s speech, Netanyahu spoke out in support of the American strategy toward the Islamic Republic of Iran, fully endorsing Trump’s remarks. The Israeli lobby has played an important role in pushing Trump to confront Iran, and this has led Trump to look at the region more from an Israeli perspective. Israel has an important role to play in shaping the new American strategy. In the second step, traditional American allies in the region, such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, supported this American strategy. By fomenting Iranophobia, Trump is selling his weapons to the Persian Gulf oil kingdoms at exorbitant prices, providing a reasonable and justifiable ground for his country’s continued military presence in the region.
5) Regime Change in Iran: Evidence suggests that the United States under Trump has returned to the policy of controlling and changing the system of governance in Iran. Republicans, especially the Trump administration, see Iran as the main issue of the Middle East. They view Iran as Daesh and a major threat to the United States. The views of ideologues around Trump on Iran, such as Nicki Haley, John Bolton, and even Mike Pompei, are very negative. Of course, Trump himself is not familiar with ideology and has repeatedly spoken of the need to prioritize strategy over ideology, and also some members of the government, such as James Mattis, Rex Tillerson, John Kelly, and McMaster, are more pragmatic than ideological. However, the Trump administration’s current policy is to change the government of Iran. Of course, this does not mean that the United States intends to carry out this project by the use of force or military action. In this regard, the Trump administration appears to be pursuing a policy similar to Reagan’s policy toward the Soviet Union. Some people in the Trump administration believe that the Iranian government is in a similar situation to the Soviet Union in the 1980s and that taking Reagan’s approach would lead to its fall. Now a major obstacle to this policy is the JCPOA. Trump believes that before the JCPOA Iran was in the worst situation due to sanctions and was practically taken to the corner of the wall, but Obama made a mistake and instead of grabbing Iran’s throat and suffocating it, he grabbed its hand and helped Iran and saved it from certain destruction.
B) The Mechanisms of Trump’s Strategies Against Iran: The United States’ comprehensive strategy toward the Islamic Republic of Iran provides clear and hidden mechanisms for confronting the Islamic Republic. The most important of these tools and mechanisms are:
1) Introducing Iran as a Devil: Trump has so far made a very extensive effort to portray an evil face of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the world. In a speech delivered on October 12, announcing his government’s strategy for the Islamic Republic of Iran, he sought to show the Islamic Republic of Iran as the cause of all the damage and miseries in the region and even in the world. In this regard, Trump went even further than George W. Bush. He has also filed new false charges against Iran. In his speech, Trump reviewed the actions of the Islamic Republic of Iran over the past 40 years and tried to create a negative image of Iran in the international community. He constantly used words such as regime, or dictatorship instead of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and thus, in addition to showing that he did not recognize the Iranian government, he tried to portray Iran today as a vicious regime. Trump has levelled accusations such as having secret cooperation with North Korea, internal dictatorship, destabilizing the region, supporting terrorism, posing missile threats against others, seeking regional expansionism and carrying out cyber-attacks and making efforts to acquire nuclear weapons to achieve his goals.
2) Securitization of Iran: Securitizing an actor in the international system means that the actor is a threat to international peace and security, and all members of the international community must be united against it, using all their might. If the claim is upheld by the Security Council and passed under Chapter Seven of the Charter, the actor’s securitization will be recognized. In this case, everyone is free to put pressure on that actor. the JCPOA has pulled Iran out of the securitized situation, and the Trump team is seeking to restore the situation before the JCPOA and “re-securitize” Iran. Demonizing Iran and making extensive claims against it are in line with this purpose. According to the Trump administration, with the re-securitization of Iran, the fear of it will spread in the world and the foundations of making any investment in it will be destroyed, and also the foundations of its power will be gradually weakened and eventually destroyed.
3) Continuous and Extensive Pressure on Iran: The purpose of creating an evil image of Iran and re-securitizing it is to provide conditions for exerting extensive pressure on the Islamic Republic of Iran. In this regard, Trump needs to prevent Iran from benefiting from the accomplishment of the JCPOA, and of course, because he sees its unilateral withdrawal as costly, it will put constant, continuous and extensive pressure on Iran so that to prevent the creation of a suitable environment for investing in Iran. He believes that with the JCPOA, Iran’s economy has been revived, while it should not be allowed to rebuild its economic and communication power. Continuous and extensive pressure may eventually provoke a sharp reaction from Iran. In this case, the Trump administration could put the cost of leaving the JCPOA on Iran’s shoulders and easily return to the period before the JCPOA. Bob Corker and a significant number of Republican senators and the Trump administration support this view. In this case, the United States is taking a big step toward implementing a policy of regime change.
4) Numerous and Non-Nuclear Sanctions: from the first days of announcing this strategy, the Trump administration took steps that revealed its orientations. Under this strategy, Trump refused to confirm Iran’s commitment to the IAEA for the third time. They stated that Iran had violated the spirit of the JCPOA and had taken steps in the region that were inconsistent with it. For that reason, it is up to Congress to decide about this issue. Assigning Congress to make decisions regarding the JCPOA is because first, announcing Iran’s commitment to the nuclear deal is at variance with the image that the Trump administration intended to portray from Iran. Trump does not want to portray Iran as a supporter of terrorism and a destabilizing regime in the region every day, and three months later, declares that Iran has adhered to the terms of the JCPOA. Second, by doing so, Trump has placed an important part of the effort to dismantle the JCPOA on Congress. By imposing non-nuclear sanctions on Iran, Congress can play a role in fomenting insecurity and destabilizing Iran’s economy. The Treasury’s order to impose sanctions on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, along with the approval of imposing several sanctions on individuals and organizations by Congress under various pretexts, could increase pressures on Iran.
In this regard, we are likely to see the adoption and mispositioning of new sanctions under the pretext of testing missiles, human rights, terrorism and regional issue against Iran. Efforts to impose pressure and persuade allies to exert pressure and impose sanctions on Iran in these areas are also on the agenda of the Trump administration.
Conclusion
Trump’s strategy on Iran shows that the new American administration intends to put all-out pressure against the Islamic Republic of Iran. To counter this, Iran needs a coherent and calculated strategy that should be based on a consensus reached among the political elite. In fact, the fate of the American government’s strategy and the consequences of Trump’s efforts to deal with Iran largely depends on the type of steps taken by the Islamic Republic of Iran, both at the level of declared policy as well as the adopted policy. Such actions should not contribute to the fulfillment of the goals of Trump’s strategy. For example, sharp and frightening reactions can serve as evidence of the American-created identity of the Islamic Republic of Iran and lead to the formation of a strong consensus within the United States, the region and the world to put pressure on Iran.
Archive of The Enemies of the Islamic Revolution
leave your comments