May 23, Rome hosted the fifth round of Iran-U.S. talks to resolve differences over Iran’s nuclear program.

Washington is reverting to its old tactics, telling Iran that it must either halt even “peaceful uranium enrichment” or face attack.  For decades, the United States has tried to break Iran through sanctions, ultimatums, and military threats. Yet each time, this strategy fails. Tehran not only refuses to back down but also strengthens its position, proving that Washington’s pressure policy is ineffective.

Why does the U.S. keep repeating the same mistakes? Why do threats that once worked against other countries fail to sway Iran? And most importantly - why does Washington insist on a futile approach instead of seeking real diplomatic solutions?

The answer lies in American strategists’ profound misunderstanding of Iran’s political culture, economic resilience, and regional realities. History shows that pressure only consolidates Iranian society around the ruling regime, while threats of military intervention have long-lost their credibility.

The Diplomacy of Ultimatums: Why Trump Failed

In 2018, Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), known as the “Iran nuclear deal.” This agreement, brokered in 2015 under Barack Obama, limited Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief.

Trump called the deal “the worst in history” and demanded its complete revision. Yet, his alternative - the “maximum pressure” policy - achieved nothing. Instead of capitulating, Tehran gradually abandoned its JCPOA commitments, increasing uranium enrichment and restricting IAEA inspections.

The collapse of the deal became a classic example of America’s reliance on force over diplomacy. But Iran, unlike many other nations, cannot be intimidated by sanctions. When talks stalled, the Trump administration resorted to scare tactics. Media outlets like CNN and Reuters, obedient to Washington, circulated reports of an “imminent Israeli strike” on Iranian nuclear sites, citing anonymous sources. The message was clear: if negotiations failed, military action was inevitable.

But the threats fell flat. Iranian media, including the influential Tehran Times, reacted skeptically: “They’ve already imposed every possible sanction. What else can they do? If they could bomb us, they would have done it long ago.” Even former U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates admitted: “Destroying Iran’s nuclear program is impossible. It’s well-protected, and any attack would only strengthen Iran’s resolve.”

The failure of “maximum pressure” stems from several factors:

Iran doesn’t bluff. Its missile capabilities and regional proxy networks make military confrontation extremely risky for the U.S. Any attack would trigger a major Middle East escalation.

Threats no longer work. After decades of sanctions, Iranian society has adapted. Economic hardships affect living standards but don’t destabilize the regime.

Trump’s diplomacy was chaotic. He demanded the impossible - Iran’s complete abandonment of uranium enrichment, a non-starter since 2015. Instead of compromise, his administration took a hard-line stance, leaving Tehran no room to manoeuvre.

The Collapse of “Maximum Pressure”

The U.S. imposed the harshest sanctions in history: an oil embargo, SWIFT cut-off, and frozen assets. Yet instead of collapsing, Tehran found workarounds. Increased trade with China and Russia became key to Iran’s economic survival. These nations, ignoring U.S. sanctions, continue buying Iranian oil despite Washington’s threats. Iran also developed a shadow oil market - tankers disabling transponders, shipments rerouted through third countries, and complex sanction-evasion schemes.

Simultaneously, Tehran accelerated self-sufficiency, expanding domestic industries from pharmaceuticals to auto manufacturing. Despite inflation and hardships, the regime didn’t collapse - it grew more resilient.

Military threats also proved hollow. Trump repeatedly claimed the U.S. could “wipe Iran off the map,” yet no action followed. The reason is simple: the risk of regional war is too high. Striking Iran would trigger retaliation via Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and Shiite militias in Iraq. A Hormuz Strait blockade would spike oil prices, harming the U.S. and its allies. Even Israel and Saudi Arabia aren’t ready for all-out war.

After “maximum pressure” failed, the Biden administration tried reviving talks. But Washington still insists on unrealistic terms: Iran must halt uranium enrichment, curb its missile program, and change its regional policies. Tehran, in turn, demands guarantees that the U.S. won’t abandon the deal again and insists on full sanctions relief before compliance. Unsurprisingly, negotiations have stalled.

Why Pressure Policy Is Doomed to Fail

Iran has shown remarkable resilience. Elite unity, support from China and Russia, and ideological fervour make Tehran nearly impervious to external pressure. Even reformists critical of the government back the nuclear program as a matter of national sovereignty.

Meanwhile, the U.S. keeps making the same mistakes. It fails to grasp Iranian psychology: threats only harden Tehran’s resolve. Inconsistency also undermines Washington - Trump tore up the deal, Biden tried restoring it - who’s to say the next president won’t flip again?

Sanctions hurt ordinary Iranians, not the ruling elite. Washington is trapped: continuing pressure is pointless, war is too risky, and diplomacy means admitting past failures.

The U.S. is losing this game. Iran won’t back down, and Washington’s threats no longer scare anyone. The only way out is real diplomacy based on mutual concessions. But for that, America’s political elite must face reality: pressure on Iran doesn’t work. It’s time to seek alternatives - something Trump, in his short-sightedness, was never prepared to do.

Viktor Mikhin, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, Middle East Expert. Courtesy

https://journal-neo.su/2025/05/31/the-futility-of-u-s-pressure-policy-on-iran-why-threats-dont-work/