By K. Salimi | May 17, 2025
As regional tensions deepen, a recent commentary in Iran warns of the depth of U.S. intelligence penetration—suggesting that even the cracked foundations of post-revolutionary Tehran and its dried riverbeds are within the White House’s reach. The report speculates that if Donald Trump were to disclose secret negotiations—such as alleged deals to release Babak Zanjani or to fund networks responsible for the influx of Afghan migrants—the remaining political credibility of Tehran’s leadership would collapse.
Trump, in a familiar maneuver, publicly distances himself from Iran’s internal affairs, stating: “It’s not our concern who governs Iran—just make sure there are no nuclear weapons.” But this seemingly neutral language, the writer argues, is deceptive. It conceals a broader strategy of indirect interference and pressure that has contributed to Iran’s internal dysfunction. The claim: the U.S. knows full well that the Iranian people, democratic at heart, are not pursuing nuclear arms—just as nations like Japan have stepped away from nuclear ambition.
Trump’s implicit comparison between Iran and Gulf Arab states—Saudi Arabia and the UAE—was particularly stinging. While Iran faces economic decay and ecological disaster, its neighbors have leveraged oil wealth into desalination technology, wheat self-sufficiency, and megaprojects like NEOM. This contrast found an unsettling echo at home when Iranian parliament speaker Dr. Masoud Pezeshkian appeared to endorse Trump’s tone, suggesting Iranians could survive without air conditioning—much like “the old days.”
In the same week, Iran’s Martyrs Foundation announced it had organized 120,000 ceremonies for the late President Raisi, costing over 3.6 trillion tomans, while regional media mocked Iranians “searching trash bins for bread atop oil barrels.” Observers question how such lavish commemorations can coexist with economic collapse and the presence of 17 million Afghan migrants—often blamed for social and economic pressure.
The report speculates that Trump might one day invoke Article 39 of the UN Charter to declare Iran’s environmental degradation a threat to regional biosecurity. In that case, would Iran’s leaders, eager for relief, strike a new deal? Restoring Lake Urmia, halting lithium mining, and controlling salt storms aren’t matters that can be solved with religious decrees or political slogans.
In closing, the author suggests Trump’s critiques, though wrapped in diplomatic ambiguity, cut deeply because they resonate with visible failures—orange skies, dust storms, and water scarcity. These are not abstract threats; they are lived realities in Iran today.
Leave a Reply