Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_1026996595-scaled

Top officials in Iran laugh at U.S. sanctions while the people suffer

There is a growing number of nationalist, anti-government independents in Iran who refuse to affiliate with either reformists or hardliners and the U.S. 'maximum pressure' campaign isn't helping them.

Analysis | Reporting | Middle East
google cta
google cta

New U.S.-imposed sanctions on Iran have become so recurrent nowadays that they’ve become a joke, even among hardline clerics.

Soon after Brian Hook, the State Department's special representative for Iran, announced that five members of the government’s Guardian Council were to be blacklisted ahead of the country's parliamentary elections last Friday, the Council's chief Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, whipped back: “They sanctioned me and I am wondering how I can access all my money in those American banks now?” he told reporters with a chuckle at a press conference in Tehran. “How can I go there for Christmas?”

A video clip of his response quickly trended across social media. To be clear, Jannati is a conservative hardliner whose views are by no means an accurate measure of public opinion. But his fiercely nationalistic and defiantly resistant tone resonated with millions of Iranians.

Pooria Asteraky, a digital marketing consultant and election volunteer in Tehran, laughs over Jannati’s comments. “Practically, what does it mean that Trump is sanctioning a Guardian Council member?” he asks. “Sanctioning is an act against the whole country. It doesn’t matter if it's directed against one person, because that person doesn't have a particular interest against the U.S. He [Trump] is hurting all Iranians.”

Asteraky holds that his political views are in a different category from officials on The Guardian Council, an un-elected 12-person board of experts in constitutional and Islamic law who this year disqualified 7,296 of 15,000 people who applied to run for parliament largely because of their moderate or reformist mindset. “On internal policy, I disagree with them on many things,” he says. “I’m mostly close to the reformists in my political views.”

But at the same time, the declaration of additional sanctions runs deep. “I don’t translate it to anything other than declaring war on Iran’s democracy," Asteraky says. "I don’t think we have the most perfect democracy in the world, but we do have a voting system, an elected parliament, an elected government and a democratically elected mayor. It’s a democracy that millions of people trust and attended and voted — and that’s after 40 years of revolution.”

“If the democracy has a problem, it doesn’t concern Trump,” he adds. “It’s our democracy, our country, our problem.”

This nationalist, but anti-government sentiment aligns with what some political observers are noting as an interesting emergence in Iran: Independents who refuse to affiliate with either political bloc. “These edalat khwahs [Justice Seekers] are young, dynamic people, many of whom are pro-revolution and nationalistic but do not buy into the dichotomy of reformist and liberals and hardliners/conservatives,” says Kaneez Fatima, a journalist who used to live in Tehran. “They have based their political platform on wanting a justice-based society far removed from scoring political points, and that is something that has resonated with many Iranians who are slowly taking notice.”

While these self-professed edalat khwahs are not a new emergence, they could end up posing a serious threat to hardline politicians. Iranian journalist Rohollah Faghihi reports that two years ago the group wrote a letter challenging Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to appear at the University of Tehran to answer students’ questions about institutions under his supervision, including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and state TV, and to discuss the “performance of the Islamic Republic for the past 40 years.” More recently, these activists openly criticized Tehran for branding fuel price protesters in November as “vandals” and called for them to reveal the “disastrous” death toll from the protests. These actions are particularly notable because they are rioting against those who raised them — “the Godfathers of the conservativism camp,” says Faghih.

It is exactly these types of internal criticisms laced with nationalism and resistance that are critical for foreign governments like the U.S. to recognize and appreciate — but at the same time, to stay clear of leveraging for their own interests.

The Trump administration, of course, has chosen to do exactly the opposite. Each and every angry protest in Iran is closely monitored and exploited, whether it be through shrewd tweets from the U.S State Department account sympathizing with Iranian women’s rights activists, to cozying up with the MEK, a controversial Iranian dissident group whose singular goal is to overthrow Iran’s government through war. Some Canadian and British MPs have also taken the same approach.

While government officials have been impacted, it is more the Iranian people that have suffered immeasurably through decades of U.S. imposed sanctions. The International Monetary Fund estimates Iran's economy to have shrunk by 9.5 percent in 2019, nearly double the 4.8 percent contraction already experienced in 2018. The IMF's latest World Economic Outlook report shows the country will experience zero percent economic growth in 2020.

And with Washington threatening to punish any private companies or banks that work with Iran, life-saving medicines have been prevented from getting in. Now, with the added threat of the coronavirus — which has already killed 26 Iranians — Human Rights Watch warns that Iran will be unable to contain its spread and reduce its ability to mobilize international support.

It’s well past time to evaluate the utility of these broad-based sanctions on Iran that only end up hurting the Iranian people while entrenching the power of those already running a corrupt system. While top officials laugh off U.S. penalties, the suffering of 82 million people continues, and their anger is palpable. Political reform is desperately needed; it should come, but only from within will it carry the legitimacy needed for the best chance to succeed.


google cta
Analysis | Reporting | Middle East
Trump $1.5 trillion
Top image credit: Richard Peterson via shutterstock.com

The reality of Trump’s cartoonish $1.5 trillion DOD budget proposal

Military Industrial Complex

After promising on the campaign trail that he would drive the war profiteers out of Washington, and appointing Elon Musk to trim the size of government across the board, some will be surprised at President Trump’s social media post on Wednesday that the U.S. should raise the Pentagon budget to $1.5 trillion. That would mean an unprecedented increase in military spending, aside from the buildup for World War II.

The proposal is absurd on the face of it, and it’s extremely unlikely that it is the product of a careful assessment of U.S. defense needs going forward. The plan would also add $5.8 trillion to the national debt over the next decade, according to the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Budget.

keep readingShow less
Trump Venezuela
Top image credit: President Donald Trump monitors U.S. military operations in Venezuela, from Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida, on Saturday, January 3, 2026. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

Trump's sphere of influence gambit is sloppy, self-sabotage

Latin America

Spheres of influence stem from the very nature of states and international relations. States will always seek to secure their interests by exerting influence over their neighbors, and the more powerful the state, the greater the influence that it will seek.

That said, sphere of influence strategies vary greatly, on spectrums between relative moderation and excess, humanity and cruelty, discreet pressure and open intimidation, and intelligence and stupidity; and the present policies of the Trump administration in the Western Hemisphere show disturbing signs of inclining towards the latter.

keep readingShow less
 Ngo Dinh Diem assassination
Top photo credit: Newspaper coverage of the coup and deaths, later ruled assassination of Vietnamese leader Ngo Dinh Diem and his brother Ngo Dinh Nhu. (Los Angeles Times)

JFK oversaw Vietnam decapitation. He didn't live to witness the rest.

Washington Politics

American presidents have never been shy about unseating foreign heads of state, by either overt or covert means. Since the late 19th century, our leaders have deposed, or tried to depose their counterparts in Iran, Cuba, Iraq, Afghanistan, the Philippines, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, and elsewhere.

Our presidents indulge in regime change when they perceive foreign leaders as inimical to U.S. security or corporate interests. But such efforts can backfire. The 1961 attempt to topple Fidel Castro, organized under President Eisenhower and executed under President Kennedy, led to a slaughter of CIA-trained invasion forces at the Bay of Pigs and a triumph for Castro’s communist government. Despite being driven from power by President George W. Bush in retribution for the 9/11 attacks, the Taliban roared back in 2023, again making Afghanistan a haven for terrorist groups.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.