The Making of a Nemesis: How the United States Created the Iran It Now Fears
America's 70-Year Campaign Against Iran: From Destroying Democracy to Engineering Collapse—And Why the Next Version Could Be Even More Dangerous
America’s Greatest Irony: Building the Threat It Fears Most
The Iran that Washington fears today is no accident of history. It is the direct product of deliberate American choices.
Sanctions, coups, wars, and unrelenting pressure did not weaken Iran—they reshaped it into a far more resilient and defiant adversary. Read this to the end, because without understanding how this Iran was forged, you cannot grasp why U.S. policy toward it has repeatedly failed.
The Current Crisis in Iran
Right now, Iran faces a profound crisis: massive protests have erupted, the economy is collapsing, and inflation has surged dramatically (reaching around 44% or higher in recent months, with point-to-point figures even exceeding 50% amid sharp rial depreciation). But this is no accident.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, a billionaire hedge fund manager, stated in a January 2026 Fox News interview that the “maximum pressure” campaign had caused Iran’s economy to collapse: a major bank failed, the central bank printed money fueling inflation, dollar shortages restricted imports, and these conditions sparked the unrest. He described this as “economic statecraft” carried out with “no shots fired,” directly crediting sanctions for the protests.
Nine months earlier—in March 2025—Bessent acknowledged during a speech at the Economic Club of New York that the campaign was “designed to collapse Iran’s already buckling economy.” He urged Iranians to abandon the rial, outlined plans to shut down Iran’s oil sector, collapse its exports, and block access to the international financial system by targeting regional facilitators. He even joked about “making Iran broke again,” drawing applause from Wall Street executives, including Blackstone CEO Steven Schwarzman, a major Trump donor. It is hardly surprising that these policies align with billionaire interests—Bessent’s Wall Street background and Blackstone’s vast U.S. real estate holdings make the connection clear.
High inflation and the rial’s massive depreciation brought thousands of protesters to the streets—starting peacefully, then with armed rioters joining in. Dozens of mosques, police stations, and fire brigade vehicles were burned; hundreds of police officers and civilians were killed; thousands were arrested. The people are suffering deeply and blaming the regime. Trump is watching and warning: if Iran kills protesters, America will intervene—”locked and loaded.” He pointed to Venezuela: “We just captured Maduro. We can do the same to you.”
That is the message.
Many observers believe the regime may finally fall—that this could mark the end of the Islamic Republic.
The Core Question: How Did We Get Here?
But the more important question is: How did we get here? Not just to this moment, but to this Iran—the persistent supposed threat America has confronted for nearly half a century? The nuclear program, the anti-American ideology, the Revolutionary Guards—all bear the imprint of U.S. actions. Let’s walk through the history, because it explains everything.
1953: The Original Sin – Operation Ajax
In 1953, Iran had a functioning democracy—not perfect, but real. It had a parliament and a democratically elected prime minister, Mohammad Mossadegh. Mossadegh nationalized Iran’s oil industry, then controlled by the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (later BP). Britain took the vast majority of profits while Iran received almost nothing from its own resources. Mossadegh declared: “This is our oil. The profits should go to the Iranian people.” It was reasonable, democratic, and popular.
Britain opposed it and turned to the United States. Under President Eisenhower, the CIA orchestrated Operation Ajax: paying mobs to create chaos and riots in Tehran, bribing military officers, and spreading destabilizing propaganda. In August 1953, Mossadegh was overthrown. He spent the rest of his life under strict house arrest. The West installed Mohammad Reza Pahlavi—the Shah—as dictator. This was the original sin. America destroyed Iranian democracy to protect Western economic exploitation. Iranians never forgot or forgave. Everything the U.S. now fears in Iran traces back to this moment.
The first lesson Iran learned: America will destroy your democracy if it threatens its interests.
The Shah Era: 25 Years of American-Backed Tyranny
For the next 25 years, the Shah ruled as America’s ally. His regime was brutal. He created SAVAK, a secret police trained by the CIA in interrogation, torture, and surveillance. Thousands of political opponents, intellectuals, and dissidents were tortured or killed.
Yet the West supported the Shah unwaveringly. Pahlavi purchased billions in U.S. weapons, kept the oil flowing (while Western companies reaped enormous profits and Iran received little in return), and served as a bulwark against the Soviet Union. Presidents Nixon, Ford, and Carter embraced him, turning a blind eye to the abuses because he was useful.
Beneath the surface, resentment, rage, and humiliation steadily built. Iranians watched their country being plundered, their leaders reduced to puppets, and their loved ones tortured by an apparatus trained by the United States. This pressure accumulated over a quarter of a century until it finally exploded.
1979: The so-called Islamic Revolution
In 1979 the revolution broke out—and America lost Iran. At first, the revolution was not inherently Islamist; it encompassed communists, liberals, nationalists, and others united against the Shah. But the most uncompromisingly anti-American faction—the Islamists led by Ayatollah Khomeini—prevailed. Why? After 25 years of perceived U.S. domination, Iranians yearned for complete independence and resistance. Khomeini promised: “We will never again be America’s puppet.” That message resonated deeply because of 1953 and the era of the Shah.
Then came the 444-day hostage crisis at the U.S. embassy, which humiliated America and cemented the enmity. But it did not arise in a vacuum—it stemmed directly from 1953, the Shah, SAVAK, and decades of accumulated humiliation. The Iranians declared: “We are no longer your puppet.” The Islamic Republic deliberately defined itself as anti-American; that very stance gave it legitimacy and set it apart from the pro-American tyranny of the Shah.
America helped create that logic by backing the Shah, destroying democracy, and training the torturers.
1980–1988: The Iran-Iraq War and U.S. Support for Saddam
Next came the Iran–Iraq War (1980–1988): eight long years, roughly one million dead. Saddam Hussein invaded Iran in 1980, and the United States backed him—supplying intelligence, satellite imagery of Iranian positions, loans, credits, and weapons (including helicopters used in chemical attacks). America knew Saddam was using chemical weapons and continued its support nonetheless. When Iran appealed to the United Nations about these attacks, the United States blocked condemnations and shielded Saddam.
The iconic photograph from 1983—U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein while the latter was already employing chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers and civilians—is real and unforgettable.
(German companies supplied large quantities of the necessary chemicals and equipment for Saddam’s chemical- and biological-weapons arsenal and thereby actively contributed to war crimes.)
For Iranians, that scene remains a burning symbol to this day; it has become indelibly etched into the collective national memory.
The lesson: The international community will not protect you. International law is selective and useless. You must rely solely on yourself. That realization drove Iran’s pursuit of self-reliance: the nuclear program, missiles, proxy networks—everything traces back to this profound isolation.ourself. This drove Iran’s pursuit of self-reliance: the nuclear program, missiles, proxy networks—all rooted in this isolation.
1988: The Downing of Iran Air Flight 655
In 1988, the USS Vincennes shot down Iran Air Flight 655, a civilian airliner, killing 290 people (including 66 children). The U.S. called it an accident; the captain received the Legion of Merit medal, and no formal apology followed (only a later settlement). Iranians saw this as proof that American lives matter, but Iranian lives do not. It hardened perceptions of the U.S. as an existential enemy willing to kill civilians without consequence.
The Nuclear Logic: Why Iran Pursues Deterrence
This leads to the nuclear issue. Why does Iran pursue nuclear capabilities? America taught it the necessity. A religious fatwa by Supreme Leader Khamenei prohibits nuclear weapons, yet Iran has enriched uranium to 60%—close to weapons-grade—and could pivot if the fatwa were lifted under extreme existential threat.
Iran observed clear lessons from the fates of other nations regarding nuclear weapons and regime survival.
In Iraq, Saddam Hussein had no nuclear weapons (his program had been dismantled after the 1991 Gulf War and further constrained by inspections and sanctions). Yet the U.S. invaded in 2003, overthrew and executed him, devastated the country, caused roughly a million deaths (including from ensuing chaos and conflict), and left Iraq unstable for decades.
In Libya, Muammar Gaddafi voluntarily abandoned his nascent nuclear program in 2003, reaching a deal with the U.S. and Britain that involved dismantling equipment and allowing inspections in exchange for normalized relations and sanctions relief. Eight years later, in 2011, NATO intervened militarily amid the Arab Spring uprising; Gaddafi was captured, tortured, and killed on video; and Libya descended into prolonged civil war, state failure and chaos that persists today.
By contrast, North Korea has steadfastly maintained and advanced its nuclear arsenal, refusing to give it up despite pressure. Rather than facing invasion or regime change, it has engaged in high-level negotiations—including direct summits between North Korean leaders and U.S. presidents (Clinton, Trump)—where the U.S. treats it with a degree of diplomatic respect precisely because of its nuclear deterrent. No destruction or overthrow has followed.
The rational conclusion Iran draws: surrendering nuclear ambitions invites vulnerability and potential destruction (as seen in Iraq and Libya), while retaining them ensures survival and leverage (as with North Korea). This is not irrational fanaticism but a pragmatic response to observed historical outcomes driven by U.S. and Western actions.
The clear lesson: Give up nuclear ambitions, and you get overthrown. Retain them, and you survive. Iran drew the rational conclusion from U.S. actions—not irrationality, but observed reality.
The Proxy Logic: Asymmetric Warfare Born of Encirclement
Proxy networks (Hezbollah, Hamas, Iraqi militias, Houthis—all sharing Shia religious ties like Iran’s majority) exist for similar reasons. Iran is encircled by U.S. bases in Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, and elsewhere, plus carriers and jets in the Gulf. It cannot match U.S. conventional power—sanctions block modern arms, its forces are outdated. Asymmetric tools—proxies, deniable strikes—raise the cost of attack, deterring full-scale war. America’s overwhelming presence created the incentive for these networks.
Only recently has Iran further expanded its military cooperation with Russia and China in order to strengthen its defense capabilities – particularly in the area of air defense and radar systems. This includes the expansion of modern surface-to-air missiles as well as extended radar surveillance networks. Observers evaluate this as preparation for a possible large-scale attack from the USA and Israel.
2015–2018: The JCPOA and Its Destruction
The 2015 JCPOA (Iran nuclear deal) offered a potential turning point. Iran limited its program, reduced enriched uranium by 98%, removed centrifuges, and accepted inspections. Sanctions were lifted in return. Iran complied fully—inspectors confirmed it. Then, in 2018, Trump withdrew, reimposed “maximum pressure” sanctions, and aimed to zero out oil exports. No better deal replaced it. Iran resumed enrichment (from 3.67% to 60%), added centrifuges, and limited inspector access. Trump’s exit pushed Iran closer to breakout capability, not farther.
2020: The Assassination of Qasem Soleimani
In 2020, Trump ordered the drone assassination of Qasem Soleimani, Iran’s top military commander (who helped defeat ISIS in Iraq and Syria), without congressional approval. It hardened Iran’s resolve: America can kill your leaders anywhere, anytime. Nuclear deterrence became even more essential.
June 2025: The 12-Day War
In June 2025, the 12-day war unfolded. Israel launched Operation Rising Lion on June 13, striking nuclear sites, killing dozens of generals and scientists (and their families), and causing over a thousand deaths—an unprovoked, illegal war of aggression. On June 22, Trump authorized Operation Midnight Hammer: B-2 bombers targeted underground enrichment facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan with massive ordnance. Trump claimed obliteration; assessments vary (Pentagon: setback of 1–2 years; IAEA: possible resumption in months). Iran retaliated symbolically against a U.S. base in Qatar (with advance warning, no casualties) before a June 24 ceasefire.
Iran’s nuclear facilities were damaged but not destroyed. Iran may rebuild, and Trump threatens further bombing.
The Endgame: Pressure Radicalizes, Does Not Moderate
Now, in early 2026, protests continue amid economic collapse, weakened proxies (Hezbollah partly destroyed in 2024, Hamas largely so, Assad fallen in Syria, Houthis bombed). If the regime survives, it will likely harden: more determined on nukes, more hostile. Pressure doesn’t moderate Iran; it radicalizes it. That’s the 70-year pattern.
Make America Grieve Again (MAGA) versus Make Israel Greater Again (MIGA)
____
Related: The Architecture of a Crisis Manufactured by Hostile Foreign Powers —An exclusive exposé on the hidden forces, intelligence networks, and propaganda machinery fueling turmoil in Iran.
_____
A Different Reality: Social Evolution in Iran
A contrast that Western mainstream narratives tend to ignore—likely on purpose: As Iran’s defense and foreign policies have become increasingly intransigent, everyday social life inside the country has liberalized markedly in numerous areas since the Revolution.
During my first business trip there more than 40 years ago, all women wore the hijab and long coats (often with jeans underneath for the younger ones). Today, in the cities—especially in Tehran—the decision by many women to forgo the hijab has become commonplace; nightlife is vibrant, with women appearing in tight, fashionable clothing. Religious minorities such as Christians produce and consume alcohol and operate establishments like the well-known Armenian Club in Tehran, which offers wine and high-proof vodka. Women have been driving cars for decades, now also ride motorcycles, and attend football matches in stadiums.
A screenshot from the Iranian YouTube channel “Travel Buddies” illustrates this reality.
Among women under 24, the literacy rate is nearly 100% (99% as of 2023); women dominate university admissions (63% in the 2025 Konkur entrance exam). The viral images of women burning hijabs—frequently originating from Western or Israeli propaganda machinery—do not reflect everyday reality.
Western travelers encounter a broad spectrum of opinions, including blunt criticism of the regime—a clear indication that the actual level of repression is far lower than the media portrayal suggests. It is precisely this relative social openness that is one of the reasons the system has endured despite years of externally enforced economic crisis.
But if “the regime” were actually to fall, what would replace it? Does anyone know? Does America have a plan? It had none for post-Saddam Iraq or post-Gaddafi Libya—both descended into prolonged chaos. Iran’s population exceeds 90 million (projected at around 93 million in 2026), surpassing the combined populations of Iraq (~48 million), Libya (~7.5 million), and Syria (~26.5 million). A collapse would destabilize the entire Middle East.
The Risk of Collapse: No Plan, Only Chaos
But if the regime falls, what replaces it? Does anyone know? Does America have a plan? It had none for post-Saddam Iraq or post-Gaddafi Libya—both descended into prolonged chaos. Iran’s population exceeds 90 million (projected around 93 million in 2026), surpassing the combined totals of Iraq (~48 million), Libya (~7.5 million), and Syria (~26.5 million). Collapse would destabilize the entire Middle East.
America Creates Its Own Enemies—Then Strengthens Them Through Self-Defeating Aggression
America may fear Iran’s nukes, proxies, missiles, and ideology—yet created the conditions through intervention and blowback over 70 years of wrong choices at every turn.
Trump now threatens more bombings if Iran rebuilds nuclear capabilities, kills protesters, or does anything Washington dislikes. If the regime falls, whatever emerges will likely be worse: more radical, more dangerous, more hostile. That’s the pattern. America creates the enemy it fears, then fears the enemy it creates.
Iran didn’t have to be this adversary. In 1953, it was a democracy seeking control of its oil; America destroyed that. Every government since—the Shah, the Republic, whatever follows—reacts to that original sin.
America created this supposed enemy, sustains it through unrelenting hostility, and continues to forge something potentially far worse with every new sanction, every bomb dropped, and every fresh threat issued.
Iran has withstood American pressure for 70 years; if it endures another 70, Washington will likely remain locked in the same self-defeating cycle. The reason is simple: it rarely learns from history, seldom pauses to examine how it arrived at this point. Instead, it perceives an enemy, responds with force, and then expresses genuine surprise when that force breeds more enemies.
America should not merely fear the Iran that exists today. It should fear the Iran it may yet create tomorrow—one hardened further by the very policies intended to contain or destroy it.
▪ ▪ ▪
Related:
The Architecture of a Crisis Manufactured by Hostile Foreign Powers
An exclusive exposé on the hidden forces, intelligence networks, and propaganda machinery fueling turmoil in Iran.
A War to Topple Iran That Toppled the Non-Proliferation Regime Instead
In the attempt to stop a bomb Iran wasn’t building, Israel and the U.S. have ended the era of nuclear restraint.
The Snapback of Sanctions: Escalation Against Iran
After years of violating their own commitments, the US and Europe are projecting their behavior onto Iran in order to pave the way for the next conflict.
Iran Ditches U.S. GPS for China’s BeiDou — Sparking a Global Rebellion Against Western Tech Dominance and Control
Iran, Israel, and the Geopolitical Chessboard: A Manufactured Crisis
From Nuclear Hysteria to Regime Change, How the Empire Recycles Old Playbooks to Block a New Eurasian Order
Although the recent moves by the US empire in its desperate attempt to maintain world domination are highly dangerous, they receive little attention in the mainstream media.
Rerouting Global Trade: The Rise of the Eurasian Corridor
Bypassing US Maritime Chokepoints Through Steel and Strategy
▪ ▪ ▪
Stay connected and informed—join me on Substack:
▪ ▪ ▪
Felix Abt is an entrepreneur, author and travel blogger living in Asia.
With his articles, he tries to make a modest contribution to debunking the omnipresent propaganda of the mainstream media for those who don’t have the time (and that’s most people) to do the research to see through it.