Donald Trump's anticipated return to the White House is generating intense speculation about the geopolitical repercussions of his second term, particularly concerning relations with Iran and the broader international community. Many experts argue his presidency could lead to significant shifts, echoing past policies and potentially resulting in escalated tensions rather than detente.
Since his first term, Trump has pursued foreign policies characterized by unilateralism and harsh rhetoric against adversaries, particularly Iran. Upon his administration's withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in May 2018, concerns about nuclear proliferation surged dramatically as Iran ramped up its uranium enrichment efforts. Observers fear Trump's re-election could lead to renewed sanctions and military tensions.
According to The Wall Street Journal, U.S. intelligence estimates indicate Iran possesses enough fissile material to produce more than a dozen nuclear weapons, raising alarms about the potential for regional proliferation. IAEA Director Rafael Grossi noted the situation surrounding the JCPOA was dire, stating it now exists “only on paper.”
The recent military and diplomatic setbacks faced by Iran globally have exacerbated these fears. Significant engagements, such as Israel’s increased military operations and Trump’s expected hardline policies, may heighten Iran's resolve to develop its nuclear capabilities. On December 7, 2024, BBC News reported Iran's decision to increase its stockpile of 60% enriched uranium due to these pressures.
Trump’s allies are reportedly considering military options to prevent Iran's nuclear breakout, including potential airstrikes against nuclear facilities. This brings about the unnerving specter of military conflict, reminiscent of the tensions leading up to the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
Simultaneously, discussions are surfacing about changes to American foreign policy beyond Iran, especially concerning the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Experts anticipate Trump will pivot efforts from Europe to the Indo-Pacific, focusing on negotiating peace between Kyiv and Moscow. Trump's goal would be to reassess NATO obligations and reduce U.S. military involvement, leading to potential shifts away from established priorities of the Biden administration, who escalated military support for Ukraine.
While Trump claims he could end the Ukraine war “in 24 hours,” specifics remain absent. Ideas from his aides suggest freezing the conflict, creating demilitarized zones, and guaranteeing Ukraine’s non-NATO membership, which would alter the security framework established over decades. Moscow's cautious reaction to Trump's election stems from skepticism about his earlier proclamations and their realizability, as the Kremlin demands clear-cut security guarantees.
China's role complicates matters, too. Trump's strategy may aim to unravel the close partnership between China and Russia. The two countries have strengthened ties significantly, witnessing their trade relations intensify even as Western sanctions took effect. If Trump can’t effectively counter this alliance, significant geopolitical ramifications could follow.
Indeed, relations with Tehran are no less complex. Experts from Iran express skepticism about negotiations under Trump, citing his appointment of hawkish officials as major barriers. The consensus among Iranian analysts, as discussed during conversations reported by The Tehran Times, leans toward strengthening relationships with China and Russia instead, especially considering the U.S. focus on regional conflicts such as those affecting Ukraine and Gaza.
Iran's officials appear to be adopting differing strategies: some advocate for engagement with the U.S. to capitalize on potential shifts during Trump's presidency, noting Iran's stronger negotiating position since the previous administration. Others contend the U.S. government lacks leverage due to its own operational constraints, diverting attention toward multiple crises globally.
Abolfath, an American affairs expert, suggested Iran should pursue negotiations regardless of the results, emphasizing the necessity of dialogue even if the current geopolitical dynamics complicate efforts. Conversely, Ebrahim Rezaei reflected on the strength Iran has built over recent years, which may allow it to navigate Trump's administration from a position of confidence and resilience.
Mohammad Mehdi Abbasi proposed prioritizing relations with China and Russia over direct negotiations with the Trump-led U.S. administration, warning against false hopes of productive conversations with hawkish figures within the government. On the flip side, certain analysts, like Rahman Ghahremanpour, caution against prematurely predicting continued hostilities between Washington and Tehran, hinting at the possibility of less aggressive U.S. policy under new domestic pressures, particularly isolationism and focus on challenges outside the Middle East.
This complex web of alliances, enmities, and strategic calculations marks the geopolitical terrain awaiting Trump should he assume office once more. Observers will be watching closely to see how his policies align with the needs and aspirations of global players, particularly as Iran grapples with its own nuclear ambitions and the ramifications of U.S. foreign policy shifts.
