Does Trump's Return Mean the Fall of the Islamic Republic?

Now that the U.S. presidential election has concluded and Donald Trump will be the next president of the United States, the question arises as to what his entry into the White House will mean for Iran and Washington's policy towards the Islamic Republic. Will he continue the policy of maximum pressure? Eight years ago, when Donald Trump was trying to enter the White House, few had a clear picture of his foreign policy, not only towards Iran but also regarding American diplomacy in general. However, the world now knows him and his ideas, and predicting the future of his foreign policy in a second Trump administration regarding Iran seems simpler. During his four years in office, he decided to withdraw from the 2015 nuclear agreement between Tehran and the world powers, reactivating U.S. sanctions against Iran and putting the Islamic Republic under pressure to surrender under the strategy of 'maximum pressure.' Nevertheless, he repeatedly stated during that time that he wanted to reach a new agreement with Iran, but that ultimately did not happen, and the assassination of Qassem Soleimani, the then-commander of the Quds Force, exacerbated tensions between the Iranian government and him. But will Trump pursue the same approach upon his return to the White House, and should we expect a new chapter of the 'maximum pressure' strategy? Ali Vaez, director of the Iran program at the International Crisis Group, tells Radio Farda: 'Trump's advisors and those responsible for planning his second term believe in the maximum pressure policy and argue that it did not yield results because there was not enough time and the pressure did not reach its maximum level, and the Biden administration did not continue it decisively. Therefore, they emphasize that Washington should first move towards reviving that policy and pursue it through stricter pressure and reactivating UN Security Council sanctions with the help of the European Union.' However, Leslie Vinjamuri, a political science professor at SOAS University, has a different view and believes that the challenges facing the U.S. will prevent Trump from pursuing a maximum pressure strategy. She tells Radio Farda: 'If the challenges of U.S. foreign policy were clear and defined, he might prefer to return to his maximum pressure strategy, but if Trump is re-elected, he will face serious challenges, including Ukraine, the war in Gaza [which can also be considered in the broader context of Iran], the global economy, confrontation with China, and similar issues.' Vinjamuri, who is the director of the U.S. program at Chatham House, adds that she does not expect Trump to address the issue of Iran anytime soon: 'If you remember, Trump did not address Iran at the beginning of his presidency in 2017 either. Although he criticized the JCPOA from the start and considered it an inadequate agreement, it ultimately took him a long time to withdraw from the nuclear agreement with Iran.' The approaches Trump took during his four years in office regarding Iran gave some opposition groups hope for the fall of the regime. Some opposition figures and movements believe that if maximum pressure continues, their long-held wish for the end of the Islamic Republic would be realized. However, Trump himself has a different opinion and says that the U.S. does not have the capacity for such a thing. In his latest interview, in response to a question about whether he would prefer Iran to return to the Shah's era, he said: 'We cannot intervene completely in all matters. We must be honest; we cannot even manage ourselves completely.' He adds that he only wants Iran not to acquire a nuclear bomb and hopes that 'Iran is very successful.' Trump has previously emphasized that he has no intention of regime change in Iran, and his only goal is to prevent the Islamic Republic from acquiring nuclear weapons. This U.S. presidential candidate has previously stated that his goal in withdrawing from the JCPOA was to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear bomb, arguing that this 'imperfect agreement' does not have that capability. Consequently, it can be expected that in the new term, tensions between Iran and the United States over the nuclear program will increase. After the assassination of Hassan Nasrallah by Israel, Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law, recommended to Israel on Twitter on October 8 to 'finish the unfinished work and attack Iran.' It seems that with Trump's rise to power, the gap between Iran and the U.S. in reaching an agreement will widen, and more voices in the West will be heard regarding an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. Trump's first term foreign policy advisors held a deep belief in the maximum pressure strategy against Iran, such as John Bolton, the national security advisor, Mike Pompeo, the Secretary of State, and Nikki Haley, the U.S. ambassador to the UN, all of whom believed that the only way to change the behavior of the Iranian government was to exert more pressure on Iran and opposed any dialogue with the Iranian government. Some of those individuals have had disagreements with Trump over the years and are no longer in his inner circle. Can the departure of such individuals pave the way for a change in his new administration's approach towards Iran? Ali Vaez, who does not consider this event likely, tells Radio Farda: 'People like Rob Greenway, who are working on planning for Trump's second term at the Heritage Foundation, have ideologies similar to Hossein Shariatmadari in Kayhan newspaper and are ideologically inclined towards issues related to Iran. Moreover, it is necessary to distinguish between Mr. Trump and the Trump administration. They may share the view that pressure is necessary for U.S. policy towards Iran, but they differ in their final perspectives. His administration will continue to pursue the same policy without individuals like John Bolton, but with the presence of others like Mike Pompeo or Richard Grenell, who was the U.S. ambassador to Germany, to exert pressure towards regime change and create unrest and chaos within the country, although Trump himself will seek an agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran.' Vaez points out that such a desire is 'impossible,' saying: 'There have been numerous issues between Iran and Mr. Trump that did not exist before. In recent months, Iran hacked Donald Trump's campaign and accessed secrets from his campaign headquarters with the aim of undermining his efforts to return to the White House. On the other hand, Trump killed Qassem Soleimani in 2020, after which Iran sought revenge and aimed to kill the former president of the United States and his associates. Therefore, I believe it is naive to think that these two can come together and move towards a win-win agreement.' But can Trump's policies lead the Islamic Republic towards collapse? While he insists he has no intention of regime change in Iran and other countries, could his policies ultimately lead to such an effect in Iran? Vinjamuri does not agree much and says: 'The difference between Donald Trump and George W. Bush is that over 20 years ago, neoconservatives surrounded the U.S. president who theorized that regime change in Iran would bring democracy to that country, but I do not think Trump has any idea or theory about change in Iran. His priorities are different. It is true that he is not an isolationist politician, but he does not like interventionism either. Therefore, I do not think he can be called an imperialist who seeks to overthrow regimes around the world.' However, some opponents of the Islamic Republic believe that the result of the U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA and the imposition of sanctions against Iran has ignited protests in Iran and seen public discontent in the streets of the country. Although some argue that as a result of those protests, no change occurred in the Islamic Republic, and only innocent lives were lost during the protests. Stephen Walt, a professor of international relations at Harvard University, tells Radio Farda: 'Donald Trump does not have much information about Iran and does not care about it at all. He left the nuclear agreement mainly because he was convinced to do so by people close to Israel.' Walt, a prominent theorist of international relations who has written books criticizing U.S. foreign policy, adds: 'For 40 years, many have predicted that the regime in Iran will eventually change, and they have constantly said this happened in the East, but it ultimately did not. We have been hearing for decades that the Islamic Republic is unpopular and on the verge of collapse, and that just a little more pressure will cause this regime to fall. This is something that has been said repeatedly over the years but has never been true. I do not think that Trump, if he wins the election, will do much to change the regime. Although you never know what happens in the world of politics, and sometimes governments fall suddenly, overall I do not think Trump will do anything to expedite the fall of the Islamic Republic, and even if he tries, it will probably not be effective.' With Donald Trump's return to the White House, there will not be a promising outlook for those who hope for de-escalation between Iran and the U.S.; on the contrary, it will likely bring hope to a group of opponents of the Islamic Republic who believe that Trump's presence can accelerate the process of the Iranian government's collapse. Although Masoud Pezeshkian managed to defeat his hardline rival a few months ago with the slogan of dialogue and friendship with the world, the historical relations between the Islamic Republic and Donald Trump indicate that a new round of extensive tensions between Tehran and Washington will likely emerge, especially as the Middle East is already on the brink of a major explosion.