Iran walks a tightrope between anti-war Trump and security-obsessed clergy

As the US President-elect is slated to start his second non-consecutive term on January 20 2025, the Middle East will continue to test the new American leadership, especially on the question of Iran – with many geopolitical analysts wondering what will be Trump’s policy on Tehran this time?

Trump's victory has already triggered diverse interpretations and debates within Iranian political circles, exacerbating significant ideological divisions, particularly between reformist and conservative factions.

In 2016, when Trump made his presidential debut, his arrival in the White House marked the beginning of a transformative period in international relations, particularly concerning the Middle East.

The Trump administration's unilateral withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), signed during Barack Obama's tenure, and its subsequent "maximum pressure" policy triggered a major shift in Iranian politics. These political maneuvers created notable divergences among key political actors in Iran regarding their perceptions and interpretations of the Trump administration.

For instance, soon after Trump walked away from the nuclear agreement, prominent Iranian reformists authored a letter addressed to Trump, advocating for Iran to engage in direct negotiations with him.

Contrary to that, Iranian conservatives called upon the administration of then-President Hassan Rouhani to suspend Iran’s obligations under Article 37 of the nuclear agreement, citing it as a response to Trump’s withdrawal from the accord.

Russia, China, and balancing act

With Trump set to return to the White House next month, Iran is once again experiencing political tensions at home stemming from ideological divisions between conservatives and reformists.

Reformists contend that Trump's strategy to contain China and scale back the US military presence in the Middle East renders a deal with Iran unavoidable.

In other words, signing a deal with Iran constitutes a strategic necessity to advance US global objectives.

This perspective however solely rests on whether Trump would take a pragmatic approach and leverage the Iran deal to establish a personal legacy of being a peacemaker both at home and abroad. And Iranian reformists interpret Trump's anti-war rhetoric as a strategic opportunity, claiming that the costs of a deal with Iran would be significantly less than the economic and political burdens of waging war.

Though a potential US-Iran deal under Trump’s leadership would undermine Tehran's ties with Moscow and Beijing, Iranian reformists are willing to play that gamble, seeking multialignment.

The conservative approach, however, emphasises the preservation of Iran's security and existing geopolitical status, which clashes with the incoming US government’s calculations since Trump would push for some profound alterations in Iran’s regional conduct, especially with regards to Iranian-supported regional alliances such as the "Axis of Resistance" in the Middle East.

Several hawkish figures in Trump’s administration have advocated for stricter and more uncompromising policies toward Iran. If Iran enters negotiations with a hostile US, it would tarnish Tehran’s carefully-crafted military machismo and provoke backlash within Iran. It would erode the confidence of strategic partners, China and Russia, in Iran, and prompt them to limit their commercial and military engagements with Tehran. Even regional adversaries such as Saudi Arabia and Israel would be emboldened to take tough measures to limit Tehran’s regional influence.

Trump’s unilateral withdrawal from the nuclear agreement in 2016 has reinforced the notion among conservatives that Washington is an untrustworthy actor. Moreover, the Trump administration’s firm stance on Iran’s missile program and regional influence has further solidified conservatives' opposition to potential negotiations.

What will be Iran's strategy under Trump?

The Iranian government will most likely pursue a dual strategy - one focused on reducing international pressures through global de-escalation; and the other devoted to enhancing its strategic deterrence by expanding regional influence.

This approach will reflect in Tehran’s diplomatic rhetoric, which would be centred on projecting an Iran open to negotiations while simultaneously solidifying its defences and regional proxies to not lose sight on its foreign policy objectives.

Iran's network of influence within Western media and think tanks will play a key role in convincing the world, especially the European and American leadership, that the opportunity for dialogue must not be overlooked. Since Trump’s first term featured diplomatic tensions between the US and European Union over the financial burden Washington has been shouldering to keep Europe safe from Russia’s advances, many analysts argue that Iran is waiting for a similar dynamic to play out in Trump’s second term. Iran can milk this split to its advantage.

On the other hand, Tehran is likely to maintain its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) at a limited but strategic level, while continuing its nuclear program without interruption.

However, amid deepening economic crises, Iran may open some space for dissenting voices as it may help the country’s president to win some tacit support from European democracies.

So Iran is likely to unblock some social media platforms, facilitate high speed internet access, and allow the expression of sectarian and ethnic demands to some degree.

Overall, the country is showing signs to formulate a multi-layered strategy to safeguard its position on both domestic and foreign policy fronts, while ensuring its nuclear program continues despite Trump returning to the White House.

Much depends on how Trump responds to Iran’s carefully crafted moves, however. Given Trump’s bellicose and erratic persona, Tehran will either be squeezed under a new wave of sanctions and face strategic losses in the region, or it will sail through and open a new chapter with Washington.