Shadow of Trump’s ...
Page 1
In foreign policy, Trump is expected to consider individuals like Richard Grenell and Robert O’Brien as main candidates for Secretary of State and National Security Advisor. Grenell, who has worked closely with Trump on security and diplomatic issues, could, given his experience in international relations and the strategies adopted during Trump’s presidency, pursue more aggressive policies towards Iran and its allied countries. This approach, coupled with support for anti-Iran regional coalitions, particularly in West Asia, could lead to intensified sanctions and increased diplomatic pressure on Iran.
Robert O’Brien, who has collaborated with Trump and supported aggressive policies, especially in national security, might play a crucial role in strengthening Trump’s administration’s policies against Iran, particularly in preventing Iran from acquiring advanced technologies. With his harsh and critical views on Iran’s role in shaping regional dynamics, O’Brien might attempt to increase pressure on Iran in international negotiations, especially in the UN Security Council, and challenge any nuclear agreement.
Regarding national security, Mike Waltz and Tom Cotton are potential candidates for Secretary of Defense and National Security Advisor. Both figures advocate for stringent and interventionist policies globally. Mike Waltz, particularly sensitive to security threats from China and Russia, might propose new strategies to counter global threats with an aggressive approach. On the other hand, Tom Cotton, a representative of the interventionist wing of the Republican Party and a staunch supporter of military aid to Ukraine and increased pressure on Iran, is likely to intensify US military and security policies in West Asia if appointed. The presence of these individuals in Trump’s cabinet, especially in the Department of Defense, could pose new threats for West Asia’s security and result in military actions against Resistance forces. Specifically, these policies could lead to increased US military movements in the region. Furthermore, increased US military presence in Middle East countries, particularly in Saudi Arabia and Iraq, could escalate regional tensions.
In domestic security, figures like Thomas Homan and Chad Wolf are considered potential candidates for the Department of Homeland Security. Both individuals, with significant security backgrounds, pursued stringent policies towards immigrant communities and opposition groups, especially during Trump’s post-election period. These approaches might ultimately strengthen the anti-Iranian atmosphere within the US, particularly at a time when domestic political tensions in the US have sharply increased. Adopting such strict immigration policies and increasing pressure on Iranian-American communities could negatively impact cultural and diplomatic relations between the two countries.
Given the potential composition of Trump’s cabinet and the presence of hardliners in key positions, Iran must adopt a smart approach to diplomacy to handle potential threats and pressures from this cabinet. This diplomacy should not only focus on increasing cooperation with allied countries in West Asia and other parts of the world but also actively engage in international forums to counter US economic and military pressures. This requires greater international coordination with global powers like China, Russia, and even the European Union to prevent the negative consequences of Trump’s potential actions while steering the situation towards managing tensions and negotiating with the “deal-making Trump”.
In conclusion, it’s important to note that the potential presence of hardliners in Trump’s cabinet could lead to significant changes in US’s domestic and foreign policies. These changes will not only impact the global economy and security but could also initiate a new phase of tension between Iran and the US. Therefore, the Iranian government and establishment must adopt a smart strategy, focusing on strengthening national cohesion to manage both domestic and international arenas in a way that reduces potential threats, whether they be economic or military and security, while maximizing the opportunities arising during Trump’s second term.