Trump’s Trade War is an Opportunity for Iran

Trump has made many grand promises: annexing Greenland to the United States, making Canada the 51st state, bringing the Panama Canal under American control, peacefully relocating two million people of Gaza and placing it under U.S. administration, expelling millions of illegal immigrants, imposing heavy tariffs on China, Mexico, Europe, Canada, and other U.S. trading partners, and halting Iran’s nuclear program—either through a deal or, if necessary, with a “limited” military strike.

If Trump fulfills these ambitious and unprecedented pledges, he will undoubtedly be remembered as one of the most consequential presidents in U.S. history, standing alongside figures like George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. What makes these plans even more intriguing is that he has promised to achieve them all without resorting to war—after all, Trump has his eyes set on the Nobel Peace Prize. If these promises come to fruition, the United States will more than double in size, and its economic and political power will reach legendary heights, surpassing even the greatest empires in history. Given these grand aspirations, it is understandable why Americans voted for him—perhaps even a fraction of these promises becoming reality would justify their choice. Notably, many of these pledges emerged only after his electoral victory and not throughout the election competitions.

Trump has already delivered on some of his promises, or is on the verge of doing so, while others remain highly unlikely. He successfully ended the Gaza war, proving himself to be a man of action—unlike Biden. The war in Ukraine also appears to be approaching its final stages. While ending these wars after years of bloodshed was expected, it would be unfair to dismiss Trump’s role in these developments.

However, certain promises will almost certainly never be realized. While negotiating agreements that grant the U.S. certain benefits in Greenland and the Panama Canal might be feasible, annexing Canada is a fantasy—even with full-scale military, trade, and political pressure. Similarly, relocating two million Gazans, even through war and genocide, is not a practical possibility. Trump could further impoverish and devastate Gaza through military force, but transforming it into the “Riviera” he envisions is out of the question.

Expelling millions of illegal immigrants from the U.S. also presents formidable challenges. Even if Trump successfully secures the border to prevent new arrivals, the mass deportation of the existing immigrant workforce would have serious economic consequences. Many industries in the U.S. rely heavily on cheap labor, and a large-scale exodus of immigrants could trigger an economic crisis.

Let’s go for  two other key promises: (1) halting Iran’s nuclear program and (2) addressing the U.S. trade deficit through a trade war against China, Europe, Canada, Mexico, and other key partners. According to the logic of economics and politics, when a country engages in economic, political, and military confrontations with multiple powers simultaneously, these powers are likely to form alliances against it. In this context, Trump’s trade war presents a strategic opportunity for Iran.

Had the U.S. waged a trade war solely against China—Iran’s top trading partner—Beijing might have been pressured into concessions, possibly using its economic ties with Iran as leverage in negotiations with Washington. However, with the U.S. now engaged in simultaneous economic battles with all major economic powers in Europe, Asia, and the Americas, Iran finds itself in a favorable position to exploit this situation.

A broad confrontation between major powers and the U.S. could not only destabilize the American economy but also lead to a Republican defeat in the 2026 elections, putting Trump on a downward trajectory. Moreover, Trump’s focus on multiple high-priority issues—Greenland, Canada, Panama, Gaza, Ukraine, China, Mexico, and Europe—means that Iran is unlikely to be a top foreign policy concern. When Iran is not a priority, Washington may be more willing to offer a favorable deal to Tehran in pursuit of its greater strategic objectives, such as containing China. This could increase Iran’s chances of reaching a reasonable agreement with the U.S.

Unlike many traditional Washington politicians, Trump is not entirely beholden to the Israeli lobby—a fact that runs contrary to the predictions of many analysts. For Trump, Iran is not a primary concern, which is disappointing for opponents of the Islamic Republic.

If Trump were under the full influence of the Israeli lobby, his priorities would resemble those of George W. Bush—focused on the Middle East, dismantling Iran’s nuclear program, and countering threats to Israel, particularly from Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Ansarullah in Yemen. Instead, Trump’s main concerns lie with China, Canada, Greenland, Panama, Mexico, and resolving America’s trade deficit—rather than sinking trillions into the Middle East with no tangible returns. The evidence suggests that Trump does not blindly follow Israeli policies, which presents an opportunity for Iran. The art of politics lies in recognizing and seizing such opportunities. Analyzing Trump’s broader economic and political battles suggests that he may be willing to reach an agreement with Iran—trading nuclear restrictions for sanctions relief. Even if Iran and Trump fail to reach a comprehensive deal like the 2015 Nuclear Deal JCPOA, a tacit understanding—similar to what existed under Biden—would still be a major advantage for Tehran. Trump’s trade war against China, Europe, Canada, Mexico, and other nations presents a unique opportunity for Iran.