MADRID – After the recent release of the leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollahs made Ali Khamenei ay. There, at least as long as Washington maintains its “maximum pressure” policy on Tehranan, it eliminates the possibility of new negotiations with the United States. -Uncertainty delves into the future of bilateral relations. The question many people are asking: What are you now?
Since Donald Trump returned to the White House, Iranian authorities have made it clear that their policies towards the United States will be adjusted according to the actions of the new administration. This approach reflects Tehran’s attention in the face of US politics volatility. This takes into account scenarios ranging from renegotiating a new core agreement to tightening sanctions through the “Maximum Pressure 2.0” campaign, which was ultimately embodied. Not even the possibility of direct conflict between the two countries was ruled out.
In this scenario, Iran is evaluating a variety of response strategies, taking into account several important factors. Most importantly, a reassessment of regional policies. Iranian political elites recognize the need for a practical reassessment of their position in West Asia and are adapting to new geostrategic realities. This includes strengthening partnerships with neighboring countries and regional authority, aiming to create a more stable environment in favor of their interests.
At the same time, internal economic priorities occupy a central location on the Iranian government’s agenda. Faced with sustainable economic challenges, Tehran is seeking to diversify its economy to mitigate the impact of Western sanctions, boost domestic production and reduce dependence on external stakeholders. Searching for new commercial opportunities and adapting to changes in global markets is essential to maintaining internal stability.
Strengthening military capabilities is another pillar of Iran’s strategy. Tensions between Israel and the US, exacerbated by the mutual attacks last year, have made Tehran prioritized deterrence and defense. Regional circumstances underscore the need to strengthen military weapons to protect national sovereignty as well as preserve it.
In this context, the Islamic Republic maintains important negotiation power. That nuclear program has progressed considerably, with Israelis pending political decisions, claiming Iran is capable of developing nuclear weapons. Furthermore, its missile arsenal is in regional occupied areas and US bases, as was the practice of True Promise I and II against Israel, as was done during the 2020 attack on Iraqi bases in 2020. It has been proven to be able to attack strategic targets.
To counter Washington’s “maximum pressure,” Iran has two approaches to choose from. Surveying alternative routes and active pre-designed plans. As the US is likely to try to block traditional paths, Tehran will try to avoid sanctions through more cautious methods, such as informal oil sales, secret remittances, and acquisition of goods through third parties .
But a key aspect is the resilience of Iranian society in the face of this new economic pressure. “Max pressure” not only aims to force governments to the negotiation table, but also aims to create social dissatisfaction and drain the economy from within. The ultimate goal of this policy is to weaken Iran’s internal cohesion and pressure both leadership and population to make concessions in the diplomatic field.
The United States will continue its multifaceted pressure strategy aimed at enforcing negotiations where the very framework of conversation is designed to support American interests, even before the dialogue begins. Among Washington’s objectives is unprecedented economic sanctions aimed at reducing Iran’s oil revenue to zero, even in the face of opposition from China. Trump has issued an order that eliminates Iranian oil sales to China, blocks supply routes of goods, and restricts the use of Iraq’s banking network. It is still unclear whether he will succeed in pursuing those new plans.
Additionally, the Trump administration has created an international campaign aimed at segregating Iran at a global stage. The Secretary of State will lead the initiative through travel and consultation with key US partners in the region and European allies. This strategy is complemented by an indirect military threat. During his meeting with Netanyahu, Trump emphasized “the US right to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities.” In this context, Israel has called for the purchase of $7 billion worth of advanced weapons, and Washington has prioritized the delivery of these supplies.
However, analysts agree that direct attacks on Iran are unlikely to entail because they “have high regional costs.” Furthermore, it is not clear whether key regional provinces that have moved further into China’s orbit and have revised their ties with Tehran in recent years could be persuaded to change Iran’s policies meaningfully.
Over the coming weeks and months, Iranian officials will continue to assess the threats and opportunities presented by the US. For now, what is clear is that Tehran’s political decision makers have shown no indication of their willingness to compromise on potential negotiations.