WANA (Dec 23) – Following the helicopter incident involving Ebrahim Raisi, the late Iranian president, American analysts predicted his replacement by a more radical figure, potentially leading to internal fractures and diminished stability within the Islamic Republic. However, these forecasts quickly proved incorrect. The Islamic Republic demonstrated its resilience by restructuring its systems and achieving internal political balance, proving it could maintain coherence even in the absence of prominent leaders.

 

Figures such as Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Masoud Pezeshkian, and Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei played pivotal roles in creating a more balanced power structure. This shift not only prevented social and political rifts but also enabled Iran to respond more cohesively and transparently to external pressures. The outcome was a flexible and enduring system, with Iran now led by a reformist president who adopts principled rhetoric when addressing adversaries.

 

Regionally, the wars in Gaza and Lebanon showcased the resilience of groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. Despite losing key commanders, these groups, inspired by Iran, continue their resistance against Israel, maintaining their positions. This persistence sent a clear message to the U.S. and its allies: targeting influential figures cannot dismantle the resistance framework.

 

 

Donald Trump, whose policies have centered on exerting pressure on Iran and its allies, now faces the reality that eliminating resistance leaders only yields tactical successes without neutralizing the resistance front in the long term. Despite sustained pressures, the resistance has evolved into a major threat to U.S. and Israeli interests, continuously rebuilding and strengthening itself.

 

Trump’s relationship with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, once deemed strategic, has been strained due to internal Israeli dynamics and political maneuvers. Nevertheless, U.S.-Israeli cooperation remains focused on reshaping regional dynamics in Syria and Lebanon and intensifying economic sanctions against Iran.

 

Iran’s nuclear policies further complicate the equation. Recent signals from Iran about potential shifts in its nuclear doctrine have introduced uncertainties for the U.S. On one hand, this could open avenues for new negotiations and de-escalation; on the other hand, it might bolster Iran’s deterrent capabilities.

 

 

Another significant challenge for Trump is managing Middle East policy in the context of Chinese and Russian involvement. Iran’s economic and political collaborations with these global powers could shift the regional balance. China’s investments in Iranian infrastructure and Russia’s military and diplomatic support have strengthened Iran’s position.

 

Ultimately, Trump’s approach towards Iran hinges on economic pressure and extensive sanctions. However, these measures alone are unlikely to bring about the desired changes. While such policies may compel Iran to make tactical adjustments, in the long run, the Islamic Republic’s internal cohesion and the resistance front’s strength could redefine the strategic landscape in unexpected ways.