Many experts and political commentators speaking to Iran's state-controlled media agree that Tehran now faces a United States with greater political coherence after Donald Trump’s election.
Abolfazl Fateh, former head of the state-owned Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA) and a prominent reformist figure in Iran, echoed this sentiment in a commentary for Etemad newspaper. He argued that Trump’s victory in the US election is likely to have far-reaching consequences for his opponents and increase concerns in many countries.
"Iran will need to come up with a new strategy as Trump, Netanyahu and their European and regional allies are likely to form a unified front," Fateh said, adding that "the Islamic Republic needs new plans and a new strategy to protect Iran's interests for the next two months before Trump takes office and for the next four years when he will be in the White House."
Fateh also argued that Trump is unlikely to spare his opponents and critics, both in the US and abroad, who may be entering a turbulent period. He carefully hinted without mentioning the Iranian government that some may need to reassess their positions on human rights policies.
Fateh further suggested that Trump’s victory could become the catalyst for a global political and military alliance among right-wing forces. He argued that this marks a new phase of globalization, with influential super-capitalists like Elon Musk ushering in an era focused on the digital economy, while Trump steers the direction of global politics and economics.
Fateh warned that Iran should be vigilant for a potential alliance between Trump and Arab and European states that have previously challenged Iran’s sovereignty over three Persian Gulf islands. He cautioned Iranian leaders, noting that Trump’s stance on Iran is rooted in a complex history.
In contrast, in an article titled "Trump's Comeback and Iran's Strategy," Etemad columnist Ali Ahangar commended Iranian officials for remaining unfazed by Trump’s return. He described Iran’s approach to the United States as “forward-looking.”
In a somewhat unusual argument, Ahangar suggested that Iran effectively blocked the United States from rejoining the 2015 nuclear deal during Biden’s administration, asserting that Iranian leaders had anticipated the November 5, 2024, election outcome. As a result, Iran maintained its uranium enrichment capabilities, while avoiding theJCPOA agreements automatic trigger mechanism for more sanctions.
Another indication that Iran was not caught off guard by Trump’s victory, Ahangar argued, is its leadership’s support for the rise of a "pacifist and moderate government" under Masoud Pezeshkian, who advocates for "negotiation and reconciliation." This move, he said, signaled to the world that Iran is forward-looking and open to dialogue.
Meanwhile, he emphasized that as the Middle East engages in a high-stakes struggle, it is Iran that plays the defining role. “Trump now has two options: pursue a dignified negotiation with a government seeking reconciliation or confront a Middle East racing at full speed toward nuclear armament.” Ahangar added, “Iran’s choice is one of negotiation while maintaining its dignity. Now it’s the United States’ turn to decide its path forward.”
In a separate commentary, foreign policy analyst Abdolreza Faraji-Rad reviewed Trump’s past relations with Iran, particularly his decision to withdraw from the nuclear deal, and concluded that Trump’s approach toward Iran will partly hinge on Iran’s strategy with the incoming US administration.
Faraji-Rad noted that Trump sought to initiate negotiations with Iran near the end of his term in 2020, but Iran was unprepared, especially following the killing of IRGC Quds Force Commander Qasem Soleimani. “Now, we have to wait and see how President Pezeshkian will approach the possibility of negotiations with Trump,” he wrote.
He added, “Pezeshkian has the potential to advance negotiations with Trump, but he must adapt his tactics to achieve relief from sanctions; otherwise, tensions will escalate. If Trump concludes that Iran is unwilling to negotiate, he will undoubtedly revert to his maximum pressure policy.”
However, Iran watchers understand that Pezeshkian’s actions ultimately depend on Supreme Leader Khamenei’s directives. Persuading Khamenei to endorse meaningful negotiations is likely more crucial than the specific approach Pezeshkian takes to move discussions forward.
