Nournews: A review of U.S. actions in Iraq at political, economic, and security levels shows that Donald Trump's administration, in its second term, is pursuing the project of containing Iran and obstructing Tehran-Baghdad relations with greater intensity. While these plans were previously on Washington’s agenda, they are now being implemented with more cohesion and focus.

The new U.S. measures in Iraq—including halting gas and electricity imports from Iran and strengthening economic ties with Turkey and Persian Gulf states—are all designed to reduce Iraq’s cooperation with Iran. But will these policies succeed? And is this strategy purely economic, or does it serve broader geopolitical goals?

Economic strategy disguised as political pressure

One of the key pillars of this project is cutting Iraq’s dependence on Iranian energy. By pressuring Baghdad, the U.S. has forced Iraq to reduce its gas and electricity imports from Iran and shift toward energy supplies from countries such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey. This policy not only affects Iran economically but also aims to create a strategic gap between the two nations, which have had close ties for decades. However, the reality is that Iraq’s infrastructure is not yet capable of rapidly replacing Iranian energy, making this decision more likely to push Iraq into an energy crisis rather than making it self-sufficient.

Blocking trade routes and altering transportation dynamics

The U.S. has also introduced new policies to prevent Iraq from becoming a commercial corridor for Iran. One such measure is blocking currency and goods transfers from Iraq to Iran, which Washington claims are used to bypass sanctions. Additionally, the Iran-Iraq railway project connecting Shalamcheh to Basra—which could have been a strategic game changer in trans-Asian trade—has faced challenges due to U.S. pressure.

Instead, Washington is reviving the Iraq-Turkey pipeline and trade route, redirecting Iraq’s oil exports toward alternatives that reduce Iran’s influence. This move brings Iraq closer to Turkey’s economy while simultaneously limiting Iran’s economic footprint in the country.

Increasing U.S. corporate influence: A substitute for Iran?

Alongside these efforts, new contracts with American companies for investments in Iraq’s energy and infrastructure sectors are being finalized. This approach aims to diminish Iran’s economic presence while bolstering that of the U.S. in key sectors. However, past experience has shown that Western companies often prioritize short-term profits without committing to Iraq’s long-term development. In contrast, Iran has structured its relations with Iraq based on historical, cultural, and long-term economic ties rather than short-term calculations.

Challenges facing Trump's strategy

Although Trump's new policies in Iraq may exert short-term pressure on Iran, they face significant obstacles. First, due to geopolitical and economic realities, Iraq cannot completely distance itself from Iran. Second, many political groups and the general public in Iraq remain skeptical of U.S. policies and view Washington’s attempts to weaken Iran-Iraq relations as interference in their domestic affairs.

Furthermore, history has shown that external pressure often backfires, potentially strengthening Baghdad-Tehran ties rather than weakening them.

Will this project fail?

The U.S. has consistently sought to pressure Iran through economic and diplomatic means, but past experiences suggest these strategies have not been entirely successful. As the global order shifts and new powers emerge, regional countries are becoming less reliant on Washington’s policies.

Iran, in turn, is mitigating these pressures through alternative strategies, including strengthening ties with its neighbors, engaging with other regional players, and joining organizations like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, BRICS, and the Eurasian Economic Union.

Although Trump’s anti-Iran project in Iraq is being pursued with greater intensity, it still faces fundamental challenges. Shifting regional dynamics, growing internal resistance in Iraq, and the rise of competing global powers all contribute to potential setbacks for this strategy.

It seems that for the U.S. to succeed in this approach, it must rely less on economic and diplomatic pressure and instead engage in genuine regional dialogue and understanding—something rarely seen in Trump’s foreign policy.