Iran is once again in the midst of a geopolitical storm. Donald Trump’s return to a policy of “maximum pressure” is not merely a simple shift in White House policy; it marks the beginning of a full-scale economic war targeting Iran’s livelihood infrastructure and social cohesion as its “primary objective.” Under these circumstances, continuing certain management patterns that have already been subject to criticism is not only ineffective, but could amount to opening a new front from within. To navigate this historic turning point, we need to move from a “sectoral economy” to an “economy of security” and an “integrated resilience strategy.”
National Resilience and the Gasoline Issue
Official and semi-official reports indicate that the government has plans to reform gasoline prices. The government has cited financial constraints caused by blocked oil sales and severe restrictions on current Treasury revenues as among its main reasons for considering gasoline prices. But it must be understood that reducing the gasoline issue to a price variable on the government’s balance sheet reflects a fundamental error of strategic understanding. Gasoline is a “vital artery” and an “inflation driver” in Iran’s political economy. When external sanctions are structurally targeting purchasing power, raising fuel prices is not “economic surgery”; it is a trigger for inflationary expectations in a society already “wounded by instability.”
When society is under heavy pressure from international isolation, tampering with the prices of key goods is a clear example of “self-sanctioning.” The authorities must understand that under siege, “social capital” is precisely “strategic capital.” Any policy that erodes this capital effectively weakens the country’s defensive capacity in a long-term confrontation with external pressure.
National resilience is not the product of a single ministry or particular sector. It is the outcome of the overall performance of the governing system across four layers:
Economic layer — the protective shield: The government must shift from being an “implementer of price shocks” to becoming a “protective shield for livelihoods.” The first priority must be ensuring fair access to essential goods and preventing the transmission of inflation. In an economic war, “livelihood stability” is as important as “currency stability.”
Judicial layer — visible justice: During a siege, the smallest sign of rent-seeking, corruption or discrimination acts as a breach in the country’s defensive wall. National resilience is impossible without “firm and uncompromising action against the real and principal offenders” and “maximum transparency in the distribution of resources.” People must feel that the heavy burden of war is being shared fairly by everyone, particularly officials and privileged groups. Issuing controversial judicial rulings in social, cultural and media spheres undermines efforts to strengthen this social capital.
Political layer — building consensus: The authorities need a “national pact.” Overcoming economic war requires listening to different schools of thought and involving the broader intellectual and expert community in decision-making. Domestic political cohesion sends a powerful message to the opposing camp that Iran is not a fragmented society internally, but a united front. At this level, the national broadcaster above all has a responsibility to preserve genuine cohesion and reflect all voices present in Iran’s political arena today.
Cultural layer — the narrative of victory: Economic war does not exist only on paper; it is also a war of narratives. The public must be given a clear explanation of why these pressures exist and what each person’s role is in these circumstances. Hope does not mean making false promises; it means seeing a clear future through justice and rational governance. The fact that the president has spoken openly about the government’s lack of funds and the difficulties of running the country could be interpreted as an effort to be transparent and speak honestly with the people. But this dialogue with the public must necessarily be accompanied by efforts to create hope and build a future.
“Structural Surgery” Instead of “Surgery on People’s Tables”
Decision-makers must now be told that the era of trial and error with conventional policies under wartime conditions has passed. The correct strategy is “justice-centered governance.” Instead of focusing on raising prices, the authorities must prioritise “restructuring inefficient, cost-generating structures” and “cutting off currency and commodity middlemen.”
The clear recommendation is for the system to move towards establishing a “Supreme National Resilience Headquarters” with cross-sectoral authority, tasked not only with overseeing prices but also judicial performance in combating economic corruption and social cohesion. This headquarters should assess the social impact of every economic decision before implementation, not in closed rooms, but through the measure of “public approval.”
This proposal does not mean adding another layer to the country’s already long bureaucratic chain. Such a headquarters could exist only as a conceptual framework; within that framework, however, existing government institutions could be mobilised towards greater national resilience.
Trump’s economic war is a test of our “resolve” and “collective wisdom.” The adversary seeks to use external pressure to push Iran to the brink of domestic crises. Victory in this campaign requires an “unwritten agreement” between the authorities and the people: the authorities must guarantee justice and protect livelihoods so that the people can preserve their historic patience and resilience in the face of foreign pressure.
In this two-way arrangement, the slightest deviation towards injustice or price pressure could become a strategic defeat. The time has come to reconsider “economic justice” not as a slogan, but as the first “front line of national security.”
NOURNEWS