By Fatemeh Khadem Shirazi
Researcher and University Lecturer
International Peace Studies Center – IPSC
Note
Donald Trump’s policies against Iran in the Middle East, particularly during his visit to Saudi Arabia, reflected a systematic effort to shift the balance of power in the region. Trump utilised tools such as economic pressure, psychological warfare, and direct and indirect humiliation of Iran to achieve his goals of curbing Iran’s regional influence. These policies closely resembled the “maximum pressure” strategy initiated at the start of his presidency. Withdrawing from the JCPOA and imposing extensive sanctions on Iran reinforced Trump’s belief that economic pressure and highlighting Iran’s domestic issues would eventually force Tehran to acquiesce to Washington’s demands.
Trump employed diplomatic platforms, such as his visit to Riyadh, and psychological tools, including media campaigns, to amplify Iran’s domestic challenges, managerial weaknesses, and public dissatisfaction, aiming to create a rift between the Iranian people and their government. However, his understanding of Iranian society lacked sufficient insight into national cohesion. Contrary to his expectations, external threats and hostile policies have historically strengthened Iran’s internal unity, fostering remarkable resilience against foreign pressures.
By emphasising Iran’s domestic problems, Trump sought to attribute the economic hardships directly to the Iranian government while presenting his diplomatic options as the only viable solution to alleviate these pressures. This approach was a form of soft warfare, reinforcing the message that only submission to the U.S. could bring prosperity to the Iranian people.
Trump believed that verbal attacks and humiliation could strengthen his negotiating position. At the same time, he was fully aware that Iran’s regional power was the primary reason for America’s presence at the negotiating table. Instead of direct military confrontation, he relied on a combination of economic pressure and diplomatic leverage to solidify his position as a representative of global power. He knew Iran had demonstrated over decades its ability to withstand extensive economic and diplomatic pressures, including its military strength and regional influence in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Yemen. This influence compelled the U.S. to opt for negotiation and pressure rather than direct military confrontation.
Trump assumed that imposing the harshest sanctions in history would collapse Iran’s economy. However, Iran demonstrated its ability to adapt to economic hardships, even finding ways to circumvent sanctions. Additionally, Iran’s control over a significant portion of the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz plays a vital role in global energy security, serving as a strategic deterrent against extreme U.S. policies.
Alongside economic sanctions, Trump focused heavily on psychological warfare, attempting to create divisions between the Iranian people and their leaders. He used media and every opportunity to humiliate Iran and provoke public sentiment, highlighting issues like inflation, power outages, corruption, and managerial inefficiencies to incite public complaints and dissatisfaction. He repeatedly reinforced images of inefficiency and corruption in the public mind to polarise Iranian society and weaken internal cohesion. Trump also tried to convey the message that opposing the U.S. would only exacerbate Iran’s problems. However, his policies largely backfired. His verbal attacks and humiliations, rather than reducing public support for the government, strengthened national unity.
Iran’s experience in facing hostile foreign policies has shown that external threats reinforce national unity. Despite sanctions and heavy pressures, Iran has maintained its strategic regional position and averted economic collapse. This reality demonstrated that Trump’s maximum pressure policy during his first term failed to bring Iran to its knees. The Iranian people also realised that Trump’s policies were primarily aimed at weakening Iran and strengthening its regional allies, not helping ordinary citizens. This awareness thwarted his efforts to create internal divisions.
Ultimately, during his presidency, Trump made extensive efforts to deprive Iran of progress, undermine the legitimacy of its leaders, and create divisions between the people and the government. Aware of Iran’s military and regional power, he sought to distort this reality through sanctions and psychological warfare to force Iran into submission. Yet, Iran resisted, proving its capability to withstand pressures. Trump’s policies largely strengthened Iran’s internal cohesion and failed to achieve their long-term objectives.
Trump’s Second-Term Policies in the Middle East
Trump’s second-term policies in the Middle East combined economic, military, and diplomatic objectives centred on strengthening U.S. allies, weakening Iran, and countering the influence of rivals like Russia and China. Arms deals with Saudi Arabia, involving astronomical sums, allowed Trump to bolster U.S. economic interests while solidifying relations with Riyadh, a key regional ally. These arms deals aimed to empower Saudi Arabia as a deterrent against Iran, which Trump labelled as the most destabilising force in the Middle East, seeking to isolate it economically and militarily.
The Abraham Accords, which normalised relations between Israel and some Arab states like the UAE and Bahrain, were a significant achievement of Trump’s administration in the Middle East. Trump sought to bring Saudi Arabia into the agreement, as its inclusion could create a broader anti-Iran coalition and further weaken Iran’s regional standing. The accords also enabled Israel to expand its economic and strategic ties with the Arab world, and alongside the U.S. and her allies foster a new regional order based on trade and cooperation rather than conflict. Additionally, the accords aimed to curb Turkey’s influence in the Arab world. Turkey, which sees itself as a leader of the Muslim world, found its role marginalised as Arab states normalised ties with Israel.
Sanctions against Syria under the Caesar Act were designed to reduce Iranian and Russian influence in the country, imposing financial and economic constraints on Bashar al-Assad’s government. These sanctions also positioned Saudi Arabia and other Arab states as key players in Syria’s reconstruction, provided Iran’s influence was curtailed. Meanwhile, the U.S. retained control of oil-rich areas in northeastern Syria, held by Kurdish forces, as part of Trump’s strategy to secure financial resources and strategic leverage. These policies also countered Türkiye’s influence in Kurdish-held regions and reinforced the Kurds as U.S. strategic partners.
Regarding negotiations with Iran, Trump continued his maximum pressure policy. Unprecedented sanctions were imposed to force Iran into a new agreement limiting its regional policies. Trump stated his readiness for a deal but conditioned it on Iran ending support for resistance groups in the region and guaranteeing Iran does not acquire nuclear weapons. He emphasised that Iran must never acquire nuclear weapons and vowed to take all necessary measures to prevent it. At the same time, Trump sought to redefine Iran as a potential partner for peace and development, contingent on changes in its regional and international policies.
Challenges and Prospects
Trump’s activities in the Middle East are designed to strengthen the U.S. and its allies while destabilising their main rivals. However, these policies face significant challenges, including complex relations with Turkey over Syria and the Kurds, potential Iranian retaliation through regional proxy groups, and efforts by Iran and Russia to maintain influence in Syria, which could complicate Trump’s regional strategies.
Ultimately, the success of Trump’s Middle East policies hinges on Arab support and maintaining strategic alliances. However, these policies also carry the risk of fuelling new instabilities in the region. Analysing the long-term balance of power among Iran, the U.S., and regional allies will reveal whether this new arrangement can achieve lasting stability.