How might Trump’s “Make Iran Great Again” harm the economy of ‘Great America’?

Introduction: The Paradox of Presidential Slogans

Donald Trump’s presidential campaign promises have always centered on the slogan “Make America Great Again” (MAGA), built on fostering a strong and prosperous U.S. economy: creating jobs, curbing inflation, achieving energy self-sufficiency, and reducing national debt. As the election season approaches, a recent tweet from Trump, stating “Make Iran Great Again” (MIGA), has sparked considerable debate.

Given Trump’s well-known tough stance on the Iranian regime, many analysts initially interpreted this tweet as a dangerous geopolitical objective: the pursuit of regime change in Iran, based on the belief that this would restore a supposed “greatness” to post-regime Iran.

However, recent escalations, notably Iran’s retaliatory strikes on US bases in Qatar and Iraq following American military action against its nuclear facilities, have shifted this interpretation.

In this escalating environment, the option of overthrowing the Iranian regime is increasingly viewed by some not merely as a policy choice, but as an integral part of Washington’s broader strategy to defend its core interests, assets, and influence in a volatile Middle East.

Herein lies the striking contradiction: How can a “MIGA” policy, aiming for a forced change in the heart of the Middle East and potentially involving a sustained conflict, align with the “MAGA” promises of economic stability and prosperity in America?

This report aims to analyze how a policy of forced regime change in Iran could specifically impact the U.S. economy negatively, and how this directly contradicts the declared goals of “Make America Great Again.”

MAGA’s Economic Vision: Foundations of American Prosperity

The MAGA economic agenda rests on several core promises directly aimed at the American citizen: bringing manufacturing and jobs back to U.S. soil through incentive and protectionist policies; reducing tax burdens on businesses and individuals; combating inflation to increase purchasing power; boosting domestic oil and gas production to ensure abundant and affordable energy, thereby reducing foreign dependence and ensuring sustainable growth. These objectives require a relatively stable global economic environment, where trade can flow smoothly and raw material and commodity prices remain within a reasonable range.

MIGA’s Geopolitical Ambition: The Cost to America

If the “MIGA” tweet translates into a U.S. policy aimed at forcibly overthrowing the Iranian regime, it would lead to a “forced fall” scenario. This event, even if achieving its geopolitical aim, would unleash widespread negative economic repercussions directly impacting the U.S. economy and fundamentally undermining MAGA’s promises.

Iran is a major player in the global energy market, with significant oil production and vast gas reserves. Any forced change to its regime would inevitably lead to major disruption in global energy flows. Disruption in Iran and its surrounding region would halt Iranian oil and gas exports (around 2.5 million barrels per day of oil before sanctions) and destabilize production and export from other regional producers due to heightened security risks.

This massive global supply deficit would drive oil prices to $150 a barrel or much higher. Global LNG markets would also be severely affected, pushing international gas prices astronomically high.

Such a drastic rise in energy prices would fuel inflation across all sectors of the American economy. Transportation, shipping, and manufacturing costs would soar, directly reflecting in the prices of goods and services purchased by American consumers. This directly contradicts Trump’s promise to combat inflation. Americans would find themselves paying significantly more for fuel, electricity, and essential goods, diminishing their purchasing power and increasing their financial strain.

American businesses, from factories to transportation companies, would face massive increases in operating costs, reducing profits, hindering investment, and potentially leading to downsizing or layoffs, which goes against the goal of job creation.

Financial Market Turmoil: A Blow to Investment and Savings

Furthermore, the geopolitical upheaval resulting from regime change in Iran would create chaos in global financial markets, which the U.S. economy cannot escape. American and international investors would flock to safe-haven assets like gold, potentially driving its price above $3,400 an ounce. U.S. stock market indices would experience sharp declines, negatively impact American citizens’ retirement savings and investment portfolios, and erode economic confidence.

While the U.S. dollar might initially be seen as a temporary safe haven, the inflationary impact of rising energy prices on the U.S. economy itself, and the potential global recession, could lead to violent fluctuations in the dollar’s value, affecting the U.S.’s borrowing capacity and trade stability. American banks would face challenges from rising non-performing loan risks from companies struggling under increasing costs and potential recession.

Supply Chain Disruptions: Hitting American Manufacturing

Any chaos in the Middle East, because of regime change in Iran, would significantly affect global trade and shipping. Maritime insurance premiums and shipping costs would rise substantially across key waterways in the region, meaning that U.S. imports, from raw materials to finished goods, would become more expensive. This would place an additional burden on American consumers and businesses reliant on imported components.

In a chaotic global environment with soaring shipping costs, Trump’s goal of reshoring industries and making American products more competitive would become increasingly difficult, as the cost of importing raw materials or exporting finished products would be prohibitive. Iran produces and exports raw materials like iron, copper, and aluminum. Any disruption to its production or export capacity would lead to volatility in the prices of these essential commodities, harming American manufacturing industries.

The Illusion of US Economic Resilience

Undoubtedly, the U.S. possesses significant economic strength. Its record oil production (around 13.2 million barrels per day in 2024, projected to rise to 13.7 million barrels per day in 2025) provides a high degree of energy independence, a cornerstone of the MAGA agenda. The U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve (around 367 million barrels) also offers a temporary buffer against shocks.

However, this strength does not equate to absolute immunity from the consequences of “MIGA.” The economic shock resulting from regime change in Iran would be global in scale. The loss of millions of barrels of oil and gas globally, widespread financial contagion, and supply chain disruptions would create repercussions that U.S. domestic production alone cannot fully absorb. American consumer purchasing power, savings, and corporate investments would all be negatively impacted. The goal of “making America great” economically comes under severe pressure when the country faces global shocks that cannot be entirely contained within its borders.

Political and Humanitarian Challenges of the “MIGA” Scenario

The “MIGA” scenario poses a significant political and economic challenge for President Donald Trump. How could a president who built his campaign on promises of prosperity, jobs, and economic security justify or manage a global economic crisis potentially triggered by his foreign policy? The immense economic cost of regime change in Iran, which could translate into a global recession, rampant inflation, and financial volatility, would be an unbearable burden on American households and businesses.

Beyond economic repercussions, the internal chaos in Iran could lead to armed conflicts and widespread security disintegration, creating a deep humanitarian crisis and waves of internal displacement that might spill over into neighboring countries, destabilizing the entire region.

A Contradiction of Agendas

Ultimately, Trump’s “Make Iran Great Again” (MIGA) tweet, if interpreted as a U.S. pursuit of forced regime change in Tehran, embodies a profound contradiction with the economic goals of “Make America Great Again” (MAGA). While MAGA strives for prosperity, stability, and reduced costs for Americans, MIGA risks unleashing global economic chaos that would directly harm the U.S. economy through inflation, rising costs, market volatility, and even recession.

The economic and political chaos resulting from a forced fall scenario could be more complex and dangerous than the challenges posed by the regime itself, if the transition phase is not managed with extreme caution and precise international and regional planning.

The pursuit of a geopolitical objective like regime change in Iran, while having its political dimensions, must be carefully weighed against the economic price that American citizens and the global economy might have to pay. This fundamental contradiction between two presidential slogans puts Trump’s potential strategy under scrutiny: Can a policy “make Iran great” in some eyes, while simultaneously undermining the very “greatness” promised to America economically?