Iraq News Now

Shafaq News/ It was the 8th of May, 2018, when President Donald Trumpstood at the White House podium, staring into the cameras, convinced he wasundoing one of the US's greatest mistakes. "This is a horrible deal,one-sided, and a disaster for the United States," he declared. "Weare pulling out."

Just like that, Trump decided to withdraw from the Joint ComprehensivePlan of Action (JCPOA), the 2015 nuclear agreement designed to limit Iran’snuclear capabilities in exchange for sanction relief. It was a move thatstunned allies, infuriated Tehran, and set in motion one of the most aggressiveeconomic campaigns in US history, the "maximum pressure" strategy.

Maximum Pressure: The Far-Reaching Impact of Sanctions

The maximum pressure strategy, introduced in 2015, was a key USinitiative aimed at curbing Iran’s nuclear ambitions and regional influencethrough severe economic sanctions and diplomatic isolation. Under Trump, thisapproach was intensified, especially after the US withdrew from the JCPOA in2018. Trump justified his decision by arguing that the deal imposedinsufficient restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program, failed to address itsmissile development, and ignored its support for armed groups in Iraq, Lebanon,and Yemen.

He criticized the agreement, stating, “This was a bad deal for the US.It allowed Iran to continue enriching uranium and gave them billions ofdollars. It also ignored their growing missile threats and their destabilizingactivities in the Middle East.” His goal was to renegotiate a new deal withstricter limitations on Iran’s nuclear and military capabilities.

A key aspect of the maximum pressure strategy was crippling Iran’seconomy, particularly by cutting its oil exports to zero, as oil revenue isTehran’s primary financial resource for both domestic programs and militaryoperations.

The US aimed to weaken Iran’s banking system, drive up inflation, andrestrict imports. Trump emphasized, “We are going to bring Iranian oil exportsto zero. This is the only way to deal with them. We have to squeeze theireconomy to force them to negotiate.”

While his administration successfully reduced Iran’s oil exports to nearzero, these numbers began rising under Former President Joe Biden, as Iran foundways to bypass sanctions. Trump criticized Biden’s approach, warning, “UnderBiden, Iran’s oil exports have risen again. This is a mistake, as it allowsIran to fund its nuclear ambitions and terror activities.”

Beyond economic pressure, the strategy sought to force Iran into newnegotiations under more stringent terms. Historically, economic hardship hadpushed Iran to the negotiating table, as seen in the 2015 nuclear deal, andTrump believed that sanctions would again compel Tehran to accept a betteragreement.

He asserted, “The sanctions will bring Iran to the table. They know theyneed a deal, but this time, it’s going to be a better deal for the US.”Additionally, the strategy aimed to curb Iran’s regional influence by cuttingits financial resources, limiting its ability to support groups like Hezbollahin Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and factions in Iraq and Syria. Trumpstressed the necessity of this approach, stating, “Iran’s influence in theMiddle East is dangerous. We cannot allow them to continue funding terrorgroups. The sanctions are meant to stop that.”

Impacts on Iran

The reimposition of sanctions led to a significant contraction in Iran'seconomy. In 2018, Iran's gross domestic product (GDP) shrank by an estimated4.8%, with forecasts predicting a further decline of 9.5% in 2019. Thesanctions particularly targeted Iran's oil exports. By September 2012, Iranianoil exports had fallen to a record low of 860,000 barrels per day, down from2.2 million barrels per day at the end of 2011. The devaluation of Iran'scurrency, the Riyal, exacerbated economic challenges. By February 2025, theRiyal had plunged to a new all-time low, trading at around 892,500 to the USdollar on the unofficial market.

Sanctions have directly targeted various sectors of Iran’s economy,including its financial institutions and industries. The US Treasury Departmentdesignated multiple Iranian banks and companies, effectively isolating themfrom the global financial system. This isolation hindered Iran’s ability toconduct international trade and attract foreign investment.

Iranian politicians have also been affected, with sanctions imposed onkey figures within the government and military. Notable individuals includeSupreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who has faced sanctions due to his role in guidingthe country's policies; former Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif,sanctioned for his involvement in shaping Iran's foreign relations,particularly regarding nuclear talks; the late Qasem Soleimani, commander of theQuds Force, who was killed in a US airstrike in January 2020 after beingsanctioned for his leadership in Iran's military operations across the MiddleEast; as well as Esmail Qaani, Soleimani’s successor and current commander ofthe Quds Force.

These measures aimed to pressure Iran’s leadership by restricting theirinternational travel and freezing assets held abroad. However, the politicalimpact of these sanctions has been mixed, with some analyses suggesting limitedeffectiveness in changing government behavior.

The Iranian populace has also borne the brunt of the sanctions’ adverseeffects. The economic downturn led to increased unemployment and inflation,diminishing the purchasing power of ordinary citizens. A study found thatsanctions caused a fall in the country's revenues, devaluation of the nationalcurrency, and increased inflation and unemployment, resulting in adeterioration of people's overall welfare and lowering their ability to accessnecessities such as nutritious food, healthcare, and medicine.

Access to essential medicines has been particularly challenging. Despiteexemptions for humanitarian goods, sanctions have disrupted the supply ofcritical drugs for conditions like cancer, epilepsy, and multiple sclerosis.

Human Rights Watch reported that the consequences of intensified USsanctions pose a serious threat to Iranians' right to health and access toessential medicines, contributing to documented shortages.

The sanctions have also led to a phenomenon known as the"rally-around-the-flag" effect, where public sentiment shifts insupport of the government in response to external pressure. Research indicatesthat comprehensive sanctions generally improved sentiments toward the Iraniangovernment, even among its moderate opposition, rendering them more alignedwith the state's stance.

Russia-China Factor: Breaking the US Grip

Despite the sanctions, Iran has developed several ways to evade USrestrictions and continue exporting oil. Tehran has employed covert tactics,including using front companies and secretive shipping routes, makingenforcement difficult. Iranian political analyst and former IRGC officer,Mohammad Sadeq Al-Hosseini Afqahi, acknowledged these tactics, stating,"Iran has learned to navigate the sanctions. They are not as effective asWashington hopes. Iran has been able to sell its oil secretly through fakecompanies and clandestine routes."

Iran has also strengthened its ties with countries like Russia andChina, both of which have been less inclined to follow US sanctions.

Russia, for example, has consistently opposed the sanctions, viewingthem as an infringement on national sovereignty. Russia has benefited fromIran’s struggles, particularly by increasing its own energy exports, whileoffering Tehran diplomatic support at the UN.

A Russian official stated, "We view US sanctions on Iran as aviolation of international law and a challenge to the sovereignty of othernations."

China, Iran’s largest oil buyer, has also continued its trade with Irandespite the sanctions. Beijing’s ongoing support is part of its broaderstrategic goals, particularly within the framework of the Belt and RoadInitiative, where Iran plays a key role. This defiance of US sanctions alignswith China’s broader efforts to challenge American economic dominance. AChinese official commented, "We have our economic interests, and we willcontinue to buy Iranian oil. Our relationship with Iran is strategic andimportant."

Collateral Damage: Iraq Caught in the Middle

The maximum pressure campaign has had significant repercussions forneighboring Iraq, which shares a 1,599 km border with Iran and maintains deepeconomic ties with Tehran.

One of the most critical impacts has been disruptions to Iraq's energysupply. Iraq relies heavily on Iranian electricity and natural gas to meet itsdomestic needs. Around 40% of Iraq's electricity comes from Iran, with Tehransupplying about 1,200 megawatts of electricity to Iraq every day. Although theUS had previously granted exemptions to allow these imports, the revocation ofthese waivers has placed Iraq in a precarious position.

Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed al-Sudani acknowledged, "Thesanctions on Iran put us in a very difficult position. Our energy suppliesdepend on Iran, and these new restrictions will have a serious impact on oureconomy."

The sanctions also affect Iraq’s trade with Iran, which has been a vitaleconomic partner. Annual trade between the two countries exceeds $13 billion,encompassing critical sectors such as agriculture, construction, and industrialproducts. For example, Iran supplies Iraq with essential goods like food,medicine, and raw materials for building projects, and sanctions on these goodsare expected to disrupt local markets. If trade restrictions remain in place,they could destabilize Iraq's economy, given that more than 30% of Iraq'simports come from Iran. These disruptions could ripple across Iraq’s keyindustries, potentially leading to supply shortages, inflation, and slowereconomic growth.

In addition to the economic impact, Iraq's political landscape is deeplydivided, with factions loyal to both the US and Iran. This division complicatesBaghdad's ability to navigate the pressures exerted by both sides.

Political analyst Abbas Al-Jubouri observed, "Iraq is stuck betweentwo powers, one a neighbor and the other a global superpower. The politicalfactions in Iraq are deeply divided, and the sanctions exacerbate thistension." This political fragmentation makes it even harder for Iraq to maintainstability, as it struggles to balance competing interests while trying tosafeguard its economic and energy needs.

Afghanistan has also been affected, as Iranian fuel and food imports arecrucial to its economy.

Iraq and Afghanistan are not the only side feeling the effects of USsanctions on Iran. Lebanon’s Hezbollah and several Iraqi Resistance groups, forinstance, receive direct funding from Iran. The sanctions could disrupt thisflow, as all Hezbollah members, for example, receive their salaries in freshdollars from the IRGC.

Other regional players are closely monitoring the situation. SaudiArabia and the UAE, both strong supporters of US sanctions on Iran, see them asa tool to weaken Tehran’s influence. In response, they have ramped up oil productionto stabilize global energy prices while also curbing their role as trade hubsfor Iranian goods under increased US pressure.

Meanwhile, Qatar and Oman have maintained their economic ties with Iran.Qatar relies on shared natural gas reserves with Tehran, while Oman hastraditionally acted as a mediator between the US and Iran, seeking to easetensions and facilitate dialogue.

Domestic Dissent: Iranian Public Opinion

The economic and political consequences of sanctions on Iran have beenprofound, but these sanctions have also been strategically utilized to pressureIran into negotiations.

Jordanian political analyst Hazem Ayad highlighted that the US aimed toexacerbate Iran’s domestic economic difficulties by cutting off crucial tradelinks, particularly with countries like Iraq and other nations across Asia.Ayad stated, "The sanctions are not just about inflicting economic damage,they are designed to bring Iran to the negotiating table. The US hopes thatthis economic pressure will compel Iran to reconsider its policies."

Despite the significant economic hardship caused by sanctions, Iranianleadership remains highly distrustful of US intentions. For decades, theIranian leadership, spanning from Ayatollah Khomeini to Supreme Leader AliKhamenei, has viewed engagement with the US as a betrayal of nationalsovereignty. Although there have been indirect talks regarding Iran’s nuclearprogram, direct negotiations with Washington remain a red line for Tehran.Mohammad Ali Afqahi, an Iranian political analyst, dismissed former PresidentTrump’s proposal to meet with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian as a"mockery." Afqahi explained that while certain reformist factionswithin Iran might be open to such talks, they would likely focus exclusively onIran's nuclear program, with Tehran setting strict terms.

For Iran, the use of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes,particularly in fields like science and medicine, is a non-negotiableprinciple. Afqahi emphasized, "For Iran, nuclear technology is a right,not a bargaining chip. There will be no talks unless the US respects thisfundamental principle." This sentiment underscores Iran's firm stance inany negotiations, highlighting that their nuclear ambitions are framed aslegitimate, rather than as a subject for trade or compromise.

However, in December 2024, Rafael Grossi, the head of the InternationalAtomic Energy Agency (IAEA), confirmed that Iran had significantly acceleratedits uranium enrichment, reaching 60% purity. This brought Iran closer to thethreshold necessary for developing nuclear weapons, though the Iraniangovernment continues to deny any intention of pursuing nuclear weapons. Grossiexpressed concern, stating, "Iran is advancing its nuclear program at analarming rate, and we are closely monitoring the situation."

The expiration of the United Nations resolution tied to the 2015 JointComprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is set for October 2025. This resolutionlifted sanctions on Iran in exchange for restrictions on its nuclear program.Once the resolution expires, Iran will no longer be subject to the sameinternational limitations, and Western signatories, including the US, will losetheir ability to act against Iran under the agreement.