Trump Won’t Leave Us Alone: Are More Street Protests on the Way?

According to the political section of Saed News Agency, the US and Israeli attack on Iran, after failing to achieve significant military success, has entered a protracted phase through a naval blockade. In this stage, the main question is which side will be forced to yield sooner under predominantly economic pressures. Therefore, the key challenge for policymakers on both sides is maintaining and strengthening resilience.

Despite the importance of resilience, there is no consensus on it in Iran. The expert community and government officials each have different perceptions: some believe the state should preserve financial resources by reducing its expenses, while others argue that the government should not only cut unnecessary costs but also stabilize the economy in order to create social calm.

Stages of Academic Article Publication in Reputable Journals (Zero to One Hundred)

Ehsan Farzaneh, a political economy analyst, told Khabar Online that Iran’s resilience concern is fundamental, but the main problem is not merely policymaking. Resilience requires resistance across political, social, cultural, and economic domains. In the recent war, Iran showed the strongest resistance in non-economic areas. However, strengthening economic resilience is a prerequisite for military success.

He added that the US military aggression, which began in March 2025, contrary to Washington’s expectations, unleashed a massive wave of public energy that could lead to demands for fundamental and radical changes within the country. This refers to reliance on a mass movement that could transform dependent capitalism and the ruling oligarchy, potentially freeing the country from its current situation. However, removing this class is not easy, as they will not easily give up their interests. Therefore, their main effort is to neutralize this energy.

“Iran’s Will Is Not the Issue; Trump Will Not Leave Us Alone”

Currently, two factions have formed regarding recent negotiations in the country. One faction, emphasizing US military power, believes Iran should concede as much as possible to end the war. The other faction argues that the US will not stop even if Iran makes concessions and will increase its demands; therefore, Iran should not compromise unless it is certain that Washington will end the war.

Farzaneh explained: the “give in and let it go” approach, or the idea that Iran must normalize and become conventional, all follow the same logic. The goal of this section of the oligarchy is to turn Iran into a “Bin Salman-style regime,” but a bigger issue exists: whether internal factions accept it or not, it is the United States and the right-wing Trump administration that does not want to let Iran go, and it is Netanyahu and Israel that prevent tensions around Iran from easing.

Best Center for Extracting Academic Articles from Master’s and PhD Theses and Publishing in ISI, Scientific-Research, Scopus Journals + Educational PowerPoint

The analyst’s emphasis on “normalization” refers to integration into the existing global order and alignment with the interests of imperialism.

Referring to the last round of negotiations before the war, he said Iran reached a level of flexibility that surprised British officials. Iranian diplomats were ready to make major concessions, but even this did not remove the incentive for an attack, and despite all concessions, Iran was attacked militarily for the second time in a year.

In Farzaneh’s view, the US, considering internal conditions such as currency shocks and the December protests, expected Iran’s rapid collapse after the attack. However, this did not happen, and the sense of resistance and patriotism overcame public dissatisfaction.

He warned those who see negotiation as the only solution: US excessive demands destroyed the JCPOA, imposed war twice on Iran, and now there is no guarantee Washington will accept anything short of surrender. Dealing with the US is not as easy as some claim; the situation is more complex.

US Tactics Have Changed, But Iran Has Not Adopted a Wartime Economic Structure

Although the US attack began suddenly and in a surprise manner, it did not proceed as Washington expected. Therefore, the West is now trying to change the course of the conflict.

Farzaneh said they are now trying to increase internal pressure in the economic sphere so that new street protests similar to the December events occur. They hope to create another currency shock that weakens national cohesion. Today, prices in supermarkets or service shops are shocking; buying a few basic items can equal a quarter of the minimum wage. This pressure, combined with the naval blockade, intensifies economic and social problems.

The Economy Was Not Prepared for War

The political economist argued that Iran’s main challenge is that its economy was not prepared for war.

He continued: “We have not yet adopted a wartime structure. It is as if we are not a country that has been attacked again in the past year and has been under sanctions for years.” He added that even right-wing governments such as Roosevelt’s administration in the US or Churchill’s Britain intervened heavily in the economy during World War II and implemented price controls to preserve national stability. In contrast, Iran has left the economy unattended, allowing anyone to set prices freely.

The Government Has Left the Economy Unregulated

Occasionally, proposals such as creating a new command center for economic management are raised. While the experience of such structures has not always been successful, supporters argue that wartime economic management requires maximum centralization.

Farzaneh said the issue is not the creation of a new headquarters but the government’s approach to managing the economy. In wartime conditions, state intervention and price control are necessary. Whether this is done through a new structure or existing ministries is secondary; the main issue is that many economic officials do not believe in such intervention. The state has effectively left the economy unregulated instead of stabilizing it.

He added that there are clear global and historical examples of successful wartime economic management. Iran also has the experience of managing the country during an eight-year war four decades ago, which can be considered a relatively successful example in economic governance. There is no economic or political dead-end for Iran; the reason such approaches are not pursued is not lack of knowledge, but the will and interests of a specific class resisting change.

Foreign Exchange Should Be Allocated Only to Essential Needs

The shift from a quick strike war to economic blockade comes as Richard Nephew, author of The Art of Sanctions and one of the designers of US sanctions against Iran during the Obama administration, has emphasized continued economic pressure. In an article titled “Let Iran Defeat Itself!”, he argued for increasing sanctions pressure through a limited agreement rather than returning to war, to weaken Iran internally. Therefore, increasing economic resilience is seen as a key factor for Iran’s success in this economic war, as recommended by parts of the US establishment.

Fastest Online Official Translation Center in Iran with Special Services and Affordable Prices

Farzaneh outlined key solutions for improving economic resilience: financialization of the economy must be prevented, private banks’ activities must be controlled, deindustrialization must stop, essential goods must be supplied at fixed prices, and all foreign currency resources should be allocated to basic public needs and production.

Regarding the eight-year war model, he said that although it was not flawless, the government at the time managed to develop infrastructure during the crisis, maintain a reasonable level of public welfare, and meet wartime needs, enabling the country to sustain the longest war of the 20th century. Without such economic management, the war could have ended differently.