TEHRAN – The Middle East Institute's (MEI) recent report, "Beyond Maximum Pressure in US Policy on Iran: Leveraging Regional Partners to Contain Iran’s Ambitions," presents a skewed and biased narrative that seeks to undermine Iran's geopolitical achievements and propagate a Western-centric agenda.

MEI’s website attributes the authorship of this article to Brian Katulis, Alex Vatanka, and Patricia Karam, all of whom are affiliated with the think tank.

The Iran-U.S. relationship has become highly strained, especially following President Donald Trump's recent reinstatement of "maximum pressure" on Tehran and his warmongering rhetoric against Iran, one of the world's oldest civilizations.

Lacking a background in politics or studies in geopolitics and history, Trump is said to rely significantly on his advisors for policy decisions, many of whom come from think tanks like MEI, raising the importance of such reports.

In a world shifting toward multipolarity, this report not only misrepresents Iran's strategic role but also acts as a platform for vested interests that have long influenced discussions on West Asian policy.

The MEI report claims that Iran is in its "weakest and most isolated position since 1979," struggling under "unprecedented pressure" to maintain its regional influence.

It advocates for a renewed "maximum pressure" strategy, suggesting that the U.S. leverage regional allies to "redraw the geostrategic realities of the Middle East [West Asia]."

Among the recommendations are militarized alliances, diplomatic isolation, and interference in Iran's domestic affairs, which may have dangerously influenced the thinking of the Trump administration’s policymakers on Iran.

The distorted narrative of Iran’s “weakness”

MEI’s claim that “The Islamic Republic of Iran is currently in its weakest and most isolated position since the founding of the regime in 1979” is a gross mischaracterization.

It blatantly overlooks Iran's recent diplomatic wins, such as the 2023 Saudi-Iran normalization agreement, which restored ties with a key regional player and highlighted Tehran's adept maneuvering in complex geopolitical landscapes.

Furthermore, Iran's accession to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and BRICS in 2023 underscores its significant role in a multipolar world order, effectively countering Western hegemony.

The report also disregards Iran’s critical role in combating ISIS in Iraq and Syria, a contribution acknowledged even by its adversaries.

MEI’s characterization of the Axis of Resistance as a liability dismisses its effectiveness in countering U.S.-backed destabilization efforts, ranging from Yemen to Lebanon.

The recent Israeli-Western narrative framing Iran as "weak" is a calculated and sinister ploy to manipulate Western decision-makers.

This portrayal goes beyond advocating for increased pressure; it subtly paves the way for military aggression and potential bombing campaigns, aiming to destabilize Iran further and undermine its legitimate security concerns in a region already fraught with Western-induced chaos.

Such rhetoric dangerously escalates tensions, serving imperialist ambitions rather than genuine peace or even serving the national interest of Western countries.

Hypocrisy of “regional partnerships”

MEI's call for “enhanced security alliances to shape Iran’s future choices” reeks of neo-colonialism.

U.S. allies, like the Israeli regime, have sown chaos by waging disastrous wars in Gaza, Yemen, Libya, Iraq, and Syria.

MEI’s advocacy for “military coordination” ignores the consequences of U.S. arms sales to Persian Gulf governments which have fueled violence rather than stability.

The U.S. has played a prominent role as an arms supplier to countries in West Asia, highlighted by significant agreements such as the over $37 billion in Foreign Military Sales (FMS) contracts with Saudi Arabia from 2016 to 2020, making it the top customer and accounting for 24% of U.S. arms exports.

In 2020, the UAE secured a $23 billion deal for F-35 jets, alongside $9.4 billion in FMS agreements during the same timeframe, while Qatar received $15.9 billion in military sales.

If Trump's first term serves as an indicator, these kinds of arms sales are likely to persist during his current administration.

However, these transactions have not fostered peace but have instead escalated regional tensions, notably contributing to conflicts like the devastating war in Yemen.

This ongoing arms trade has significantly benefited the U.S. Military Industrial Complex, promoting conflict over stability in the region.

Conversely, Iran's de-escalation efforts, exemplified by the Chinese-backed Saudi reproachment and its participation in Persian Gulf security dialogues, demonstrate a commitment to regional integration.

MEI’s selective omission of these facts reveals its harmful alignment with bellicose actors seeking to scapegoat Iran for Western policy failures.

Flawed policy recommendations

The recommendation for a "renewed maximum pressure" campaign has already proven futile.

Despite severe sanctions, Iran’s economy grew by 4.7% in 2024, buoyed by robust partnerships with China and Russia.

MEI’s proposed escalation would only exacerbate regional resentment, as a significant majority of Iranians blame U.S. sanctions for economic hardships, according to polls.

MEI’s bias and funding: A tool for detrimental agendas

MEI’s credibility is tainted by its financial entanglements, even though it presents itself as an independent think tank.

In 2024, financial disclosures revealed significant contributions from the UAE Embassy ($1.775 million), and the U.S. State Department ($118,000), as well as substantial donations from the embassies of Qatar ($770,000) and Saudi Arabia ($50,000).

Additionally, major oil companies, including Aramco Americas ($200,000), Chevron Corporation ($60,000), ExxonMobil ($40,000), and BP ($30,000), have also provided large sums, raising concerns about the institute's impartiality.

These donors have vested interests in promoting regime-change narratives and militarizing regional security.

Lebanese-American scholar Nassim Nicholas Taleb aptly remarks, “The Middle East Institute is a lobbying firm for the UAE... disguised as a research firm.”

One of the authors of this paper, Alex Vatanka, with ties to Western-backed anti-Iran institutions, epitomizes this bias.

He has given interviews several times to anti-Iran Persian-language outlets, repeating his claim that “Israel is justified in viewing Iran as an existential threat,” which clearly echoes Zionist propaganda.

Moreover, increased tension in West Asia drives up oil prices, leading to higher share prices for major oil companies that finance the MEI.

The recent report from the think tank reflects outdated hawkish U.S. policies that have unsettled West Asia for decades.

It exemplifies how Western think tanks and policymakers, even after 46 years, still fail to grasp the core message of Iran's Islamic Revolution: that self-sufficiency and independence are essential and non-negotiable.

By ignoring Iran’s legitimate security concerns, diplomatic progress, and domestic resilience, the authors seek to create a roadmap for escalation instead of peace.

Unfortunately, this outdated, donor-driven perspective remains widely prevalent in Washington, D.C.