Nournews :The landscape of developments in Iran-U.S. relations is continually evolving, with new forms of pressure being applied. Despite the military and political failures of the U.S. in the last two months in dealing with Tehran, Trump continues to tighten the noose, imagining that by intensifying the “maximum pressure” strategy, he will soon break Iran’s resistance and sound the trumpet of victory. In this ruthless strategy, he has spared no possibility. What Iran faces today is not just fluctuations in markets, trade disruptions, or the usual difficulties caused by sanctions. Signs indicate that external pressures have entered a more complicated phase—one where the goal is no longer merely limiting governance capacities or gaining political concessions but gradually eroding society and shifting the burden of confrontation from the official structures to the everyday lives of the people.
In this strategic model, the tools are well-known, but their functions have changed. Restrictions on oil sales, blockade of maritime transactions, disruption of banking paths, hardening of foreign trade, currency market volatility, and the simultaneous cognitive battle through media games are all parts of a unified mechanism. This mechanism aims to make the Iranian citizen feel the pressure not just at the level of political analyses but in the ordinary course of life—in daily shopping, housing rents, concerns about the future, healthcare difficulties, and psychological insecurity.
When economic pressure turns into a sense of social insecurity, its architects have nearly achieved their main goal. A society that faces psychological erosion will see a decline in its social capital, a loss of public trust, and a weakening of national capacity to overcome the crisis. Therefore, understanding the current situation requires going beyond superficial analyses and seeing what is now known in strategic studies as the “big picture” or the wide-angle view: Iran is facing a form of hybrid warfare that targets the economic system, political structure, social cohesion, and ultimately the individual psyche of citizens.
In such a situation, the first necessity is to redefine and rebuild the relationship between the government and the people. The first step in this rebuilding must come from the government. Under pressure, society needs information more than anything. Concealment, ambiguity, and piecemeal information only increase uncertainty and leave the field open to rumors and psychological operations. The people need to know what limitations the country is facing, what risks lie ahead, and what plans are in place to manage the currency market, ensure the supply of essential goods, medicine, energy, and maintain economic stability.
Although the media outlets in the country are constantly producing information on these issues, what can truly satisfy the people’s widespread need for "knowing" is when senior officials speak directly to the public—speaking honestly, transparently, realistically, persuasively, and with hope. Honesty with public opinion is not about making concessions; it is a strategic tool for maintaining national resilience. Experience from many countries has shown that when a society feels that the truth is being shared with them and the burden of the crisis is fairly distributed, their ability to endure difficulties increases significantly.
Related to the necessity of speaking with the people, it is essential for those with platforms—political figures, media personalities, and spokespersons—to exercise good timing and responsibility in their rhetoric. The current situation is the worst possible time to stoke political rivalries, settle partisan scores, use inflammatory language, or exacerbate divisions. Any internal conflict that reduces public hope or creates new divisions is, in effect, amplifying the external pressures from enemies. Differences of opinion are natural, but reckless confrontation, especially through public platforms, is a fatal strategic error. When a certain cleric, who has gained fame through state media programs, speaks recklessly about the need to execute certain former officials, or another cleric uses the issue of hijab to chant slogans of death and threats of violent confrontation, the first consequence is the division of the unified public that, above all else, seeks to counter and neutralize the enemy’s hybrid war. Such ill-timed and irresponsible statements are prime examples of fatal strategic errors.
Alongside this necessity, it is crucial for the governing bodies to focus on economic justice, targeted support for vulnerable classes, and the fight against corruption and profiteers exploiting the difficult economic conditions. If external pressure disproportionately impacts the weaker sections of society, social cohesion will be severely damaged. Effective support policies, controlling rent-seeking, curbing speculative profiteering, and prioritizing the livelihoods of the people are not merely economic policies; they are part of national security. The judiciary, which has shown strictness in issuing verdicts for security-related defendants, must also activate the public prosecutor in confronting those disrupting the economic security of the country in areas such as cars, gold, and currency, thereby limiting the influence of these profiteers and wealth accumulators.
Iran is at a sensitive stage—perhaps the most critical juncture in the last fifty years of its history. The response to this phase will not solely be determined at the negotiation table or in the economic and livelihood markets. The main response lies in the quality of internal governance, the degree of transparent, enlightening, and honest communication with the people, and the community’s ability to maintain calm and hope. The U.S. maximum pressure strategy will fail when society feels not alone and when the decision-making structure prioritizes transparency and dialogue as the main governance strategy. Continuous and persistent communication between officials and the people is the cornerstone of solid governance.
Nournews