Iran, the US: War or a Return to Understanding?
WANA (Aug 29) – The fundamental problem with the US is that its president lacks any independent political or military insight, fails to grasp strategy, and relies solely on data fed by advisors who mostly take their marching orders from the Israelis.
Much like what transpired in the military confrontation with Iran, this time around they have sold Trump the illusion of victory in an economic war.
They have promised him that through a series of economic measures, media operations, and by exploiting existing fissures among forces loyal to the Iranian establishment, the Islamic Republic will soon—at the latest by late autumn or early winter—face widespread popular unrest. Trump has bought into this promise and tailored his policies accordingly.
Gharibabadi Challenges US Treasury Secretary Over Sanctions Strategy
WANA (Aug 22) – Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi directly addressed US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on social media, questioning Washington’s conflicting narrative regarding Iran’s defensive and nuclear capabilities. “Mr. Bessent! Your math doesn’t add up,” Gharibabadi wrote. “You claim Iran’s military capability has been ‘dismantled,’ 100% of military factories have been ‘destroyed,’ […]
Therefore, until the failure of this new iteration of “Maximum Pressure” or the enforcement of the “Mother of All Sanctions” against the Islamic Republic, it is highly unlikely that America will make any meaningful move toward reviving the Islamabad Agreement.
Yet one thing is certain: even if enemy-provoked protests do break out, America will still yield no leverage and will ultimately be forced to return, empty-handed, to pursue negotiations with Iran once more!
The trajectory Trump has embarked upon is fundamentally flawed. Given that time is not on America’s side, this path will only exacerbate internal economic and social distress within the U.S. and the broader West.
As I have noted previously, Iran is content with Trump pursuing this course; in fact, I view certain stances taken by Iranian officials as deliberate feints designed to disrupt the decision-making apparatus of American leadership!
Separating Protest from Riots: Iran’s Security–Judicial Strategy in Responding to Recent Unrest
WANA (Jan 07) – Amid Iran’s recent security developments, parallel statements by the country’s top law-enforcement commander and the head of the judiciary offer a clear picture of the state’s approach to distinguishing “protest” from “riot” and managing the latest unrest—an approach that emphasizes a combination of judicial firmness, targeted security measures, and social engagement. […]
I maintain that America’s focus on the economic front and its gamble on domestic turmoil in Iran is far preferable for Iran than a return to direct military conflict and the destruction of the nation’s critical infrastructure—even if Iran were to lay waste to the infrastructure of America and its regional allies in response!
Iran possesses nearly 47 years of experience under sanctions, robust mechanisms for circumvention are already operational, and it can be confidently asserted that Iran is home to the most resilient population in the world.
Consequently, persisting with a “blockade against blockade” strategy serves Iran’s interests far more than America’s. Provided the public gains a clearer grasp of the circumstances and backs the state [as they will], we will navigate this phase successfully as well.
Rezaei: We Will Break Maritime Blockade via Talks or Direct Action
WANA (May 29) – Former Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commander Mohsen Rezaei has warned that Iran will shatter the current maritime blockade targeting the country, forcing the United States to end its economic siege either through diplomatic channels or via direct military intervention. “We will compel the U.S. to end the naval blockade—either […]
Trump is unwilling to offer concessions to Iran, while Iran demands nothing less than Trump’s absolute surrender and total defeat. Therefore, my assessment is that an American return to an understanding and acceptance of Iran’s maximum demands remains improbable for at least the next two to three months.
Meanwhile, based on observable facts, the likelihood of America initiating military hostilities against Iran at this juncture has diminished significantly—unless Iran itself chooses to initiate a degree of confrontation based on evolving dynamics!
Ultimately, an economic siege—especially against a potent and resilient nation like Iran—is a protracted process. It is simply unrealistic for America to leverage it for short-term objectives spanning two or three months.
Thus, whether the country experiences unrest orchestrated by enemy provocation or not, the strategy of dismantling the Islamic Republic through economic protests will never bear fruit, and America is merely squandering time!
