Nik Kowsar: How will Trump deal with Iran?

Published 6:30 am Wednesday, January 29, 2025

When it comes to Iran, many Americans understandably ask, “Why should we care?”

After decades of strained relations, it’s a fair question. But understanding why supporting Iran’s people is essential requires exploring the long and complex history between the two nations — a story of collaboration, conflict, and unfulfilled promises.

American involvement in Iran stretches back more than a century. In 1911, Morgan Shuster, a U.S. financial expert, was invited to help reform Iran’s economy. Though his mission was cut short, it symbolized early American support for Iran. Meanwhile, missionaries built schools and hospitals, leaving a lasting impact on society.

During World War II, Iran’s strategic importance was undeniable. As a critical supply route for Allied forces, the Tehran Conference hosted Franklin Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, and Joseph Stalin on Iranian soil, with Iranians witnessing the unprecedented presence of an American president. Post-war programs like Harry Truman’s Point Four Initiative advanced agriculture, education, and healthcare, shaping Iran’s middle class.

However, in 1953 the way the U.S. restored the Shah’s power remains a contentious point. Many Iranians saw it as a betrayal, fueling resentment that later shaped revolutionary rhetoric. By the late 1970s, tensions deepened as the U.S. faced criticism for abandoning the Shah and its perceived role in the 1979 revolution, culminating in the storming of the U.S. Embassy — a defining moment in U.S.-Iran relations.

Even after the revolution, Iranians seeking systemic change often looked to the U.S. for support, only to be met with disappointment. During the 2009 Green Movement, protesters chanted, “Obama, Obama, either you’re with them or with us,” but their pleas were met with silence as the U.S. prioritized diplomacy over human rights. Nuclear negotiations during the Obama administration further sidelined issues like human rights and environmental devastation, leaving many Iranians disillusioned.

The Trump administration, in contrast, marked a dramatic shift. By withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal in 2018 and adopting a “maximum pressure” campaign, Trump aimed to weaken the regime’s nuclear ambitions and diminish its regional influence.

His presidency also drew rare international attention to Iran’s environmental crisis. In early 2018, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman suggested the president could address Iran’s water issues by spotlighting the Revolutionary Guards’ mismanagement of the nation’s resources, linking their corruption to rural unrest and environmental collapse.

Months later, in his Iranian New Year (Nowruz) message, Trump echoed this sentiment, directly highlighting the Islamic Revolutionary Guard’s role in Iran’s ecological crisis: “Twenty-five centuries ago, Darius the Great asked God to protect Iran from three dangers: hostile armies, drought, and falsehood. Today, the Iranian regime’s IRGC represents all three… The IRGC’s corruption and mismanagement have exacerbated the effects of an ongoing drought and created an ecological crisis.”

This acknowledgment resonated with many Iranians, who saw their suffering rooted in the regime’s systemic corruption.

The Nowruz message resonated with many Iranians who saw the regime’s corruption as the root of their suffering. Trump’s elimination of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani, further weakened the regime’s regional operations, and the Abraham Accords isolated Tehran diplomatically. Critics, however, argue that the lack of a cohesive long-term strategy left these policies with a mixed legacy.

Environmental concerns remain central to Iran’s challenges. Decades of mismanagement have turned water scarcity into a man-made disaster. Rampant dam construction by companies related to the IRGC’s has drained rivers, dried lakes, and devastated ecosystems. Without intervention, millions of Iranians may be forced to flee, creating a regional and international crisis.

One year ago, in a piece for the Atlantic Council, I wrote: “By recognizing Iranians as potential allies, the United States could prioritize their well-being in ways that align with its national interests. Addressing Iran’s water crisis requires a transformative approach — shifting towards a democratic system that values expertise and fosters active public engagement, moving away from the entrenched top-down decision-making model.”

Washington must decide whether to continue legitimizing an oppressive regime or stand with those fighting for freedom and environmental justice. Using the Magnitsky Act to hold Iranian officials accountable for ecological mismanagement would send a powerful signal of solidarity.

Some Iranians view a potential return of Trump as a chance to further pressure the regime, inspired by his hardline stance and actions against figures like Soleimani. While concerns about U.S. environmental rollbacks are valid, his focus on Iran’s ecological collapse suggests he could advocate solutions benefiting both nations.

America’s choices will shape its global legacy. Will it prioritize short-term diplomacy or align with Iranians striving for liberty and sustainability? The answer will define U.S. foreign policy for generations.

Nik Kowsar is an award-winning Iranian-American journalist, cartoonist, and water issues analyst based in Washington, D.C. He was exiled to Canada and the U.S. after his arrest for a cartoon satirizing a powerful cleric.