Iran: Internal Politics and U.S. Policy and Options

Summary: U.S.-Iran relations have been mostly adversarial—but with varying degrees of intensity—since the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran. Since then, U.S. officials have consistently identified Iran's support for militant Middle East groups as a significant threat to U.S. interests and allies, and Iran's nuclear program took precedence in U.S. policy after 2002 as that program advanced.

Summary: In 2010, the Obama Administration led a campaign of broad international economic pressure on Iran to persuade it to agree to strict limits on the program—an effort that contributed to the June 2013 election of the relatively moderate Hassan Rouhani as president of Iran and the July 2015 multilateral nuclear agreement—the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). That agreement exchanged sanctions relief for limits on Iran's nuclear program, but did not contain binding limits on Iran's missile program or on its regional influence or human rights abuses.

Summary: The Trump Administration cited the JCPOA's deficiencies in its May 8, 2018, announcement that the United States would exit the JCPOA and reimpose all U.S. secondary sanctions. The stated intent of that step, as well as subsequent actions such as the April 2019 designation of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a foreign terrorist organization (FTO) and the May 2019 ending of sanctions exceptions for buyers of Iranian oil, is to apply "maximum pressure" on Iran to compel it to change its behavior, including negotiating a new JCPOA that takes into account the broad range of U.S. concerns. Included in these concerns is Iran's support for pro-Iranian regimes and armed factions. Iran has responded by abrogating some of its JCPOA commitments.

Summary: Before and particularly during an escalation of U.S.-Iran tensions in May 2019, President Trump has indicated a willingness to meet with Iranian leaders. However, Administration statements and reports detail a long litany of objectionable behaviors that Iran must change for there to be any dramatic change in U.S.-Iran relations. Iranian leaders say they will not talk with the Administration unless and until it reenters the 2015 JCPOA.

Summary: Some experts assert that the threat posed by Iran stems from the nature and ideology of Iran's regime, and that the underlying, if unstated, goal of Trump Administration policy is to bring about regime collapse. In the context of escalating U.S.-Iran tensions in May 2019, President Trump has specifically denied that this is his Administration's goal. Any U.S. regime change strategy presumably would take advantage of divisions and fissures within Iran, as well as evident popular unrest. In part as a response to repression as well as economic conditions, unrest erupts periodically, most recently during December 2017-January 2018, and sporadically since then, including in response to the regime's apparent mishandling of relief efforts for vast flooding in southwestern Iran. But the unrest evident to date is not at a level where it threatens the leadership's grip on power.

Summary: U.S. pressure has widened leadership differences in Iran. Hassan Rouhani, who seeks to improve Iran's relations with the West, including the United States, won successive presidential elections in 2013 and 2017, and reformist and moderate candidates won overwhelmingly in concurrent municipal council elections in all the major cities. But hardliners continue to control the state institutions that maintain internal security in large part through suppression. And Iran's Supreme Leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamene'i, is increasingly critical of Rouhani's commitment to the JCPOA in public statements.

Summary: See also CRS Report R43333, Iran Nuclear Agreement and U.S. Exit, by Paul K. Kerr and Kenneth Katzman; CRS Report RS20871, Iran Sanctions, by Kenneth Katzman; CRS Report R44017, Iran's Foreign and Defense Policies, by Kenneth Katzman; and CRS In Focus IF11212, U.S.-Iran Tensions Escalate, by Kenneth Katzman.

Iran is a country of nearly 80 million people, located in the heart of the Persian Gulf region. The United States was an ally of the late Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi ("the Shah"), who ruled from 1941 until his ouster in February 1979. The Shah assumed the throne when Britain and Russia forced his father, Reza Shah Pahlavi (Reza Shah), from power because of his perceived alignment with Germany in World War II. Reza Shah had assumed power in 1921 when, as an officer in Iran's only military force, the Cossack Brigade (reflecting Russian influence in Iran in the early 20 th century), he launched a coup against the government of the Qajar Dynasty, which had ruled since 1794. Reza Shah was proclaimed Shah in 1925, founding the Pahlavi dynasty. The Qajar dynasty had been in decline for many years before Reza Shah's takeover. That dynasty's perceived manipulation by Britain and Russia had been one of the causes of the 1906 constitutionalist movement, which forced the Qajar dynasty to form Iran's first Majles (parliament) in August 1906 and promulgate a constitution in December 1906. Prior to the Qajars, what is now Iran was the center of several Persian empires and dynasties whose reach shrank steadily over time. After the 16 th century, Iranian empires lost control of Bahrain (1521), Baghdad (1638), the Caucasus (1828), western Afghanistan (1857), Baluchistan (1872), and what is now Turkmenistan (1894). Iran adopted Shiite Islam under the Safavid Dynasty (1500-1722), which ended a series of Turkic and Mongol conquests.

The Shah was anti-Communist, and the United States viewed his government as a bulwark against the expansion of Soviet influence in the Persian Gulf and a counterweight to pro-Soviet Arab regimes and movements. Israel maintained a representative office in Iran during the Shah's time and the Shah supported a peaceful resolution of the Arab-Israeli dispute. In 1951, under pressure from nationalists in the Majles (parliament) who gained strength in the 1949 Majles elections, he appointed a popular nationalist parliamentarian, Dr. Mohammad Mossadeq, as prime minister. Mossadeq was widely considered left-leaning, and the United States was wary of his drive for nationalization of the oil industry, which had been controlled since 1913 by the Anglo-Persian Oil Company. His followers began an uprising in August 1953 when the Shah tried to dismiss him, and the Shah fled. The Shah was restored to power in a CIA-supported uprising that toppled Mossadeq ("Operation Ajax") on August 19, 1953.

The Shah tried to modernize Iran and orient it toward the West, but in so doing he alienated the Shiite clergy and religious Iranians. He incurred broader resentment by using his SAVAK intelligence service to repress dissent. The Shah exiled Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1964 because of Khomeini's active opposition to what he asserted were the Shah's anticlerical policies and forfeiture of Iran's sovereignty to the United States. Khomeini fled to and taught in Najaf, Iraq, a major Shiite theological center. In 1978, three years after the March 6, 1975, Algiers Accords between the Shah and Iraq's Baathist leaders that temporarily ended mutual hostile actions, Iraq expelled Khomeini to France, where he continued to agitate for revolution that would establish Islamic government in Iran. Mass demonstrations and guerrilla activity by pro-Khomeini forces caused the Shah's government to collapse. Khomeini returned from France on February 1, 1979, and, on February 11, 1979, he declared an Islamic Republic of Iran.

Khomeini's concept of velayat-e-faqih (rule by a supreme Islamic jurisprudent, or "Supreme Leader") was enshrined in the constitution that was adopted in a public referendum in December 1979 (and amended in 1989). The constitution provided for the post of Supreme Leader of the Revolution. The regime based itself on strong opposition to Western influence, and relations between the United States and the Islamic Republic turned openly hostile after the November 4, 1979, seizure of the U.S. Embassy and its U.S. diplomats by pro-Khomeini radicals, which began the so-called hostage crisis that ended in January 1981 with the release of the hostages. Ayatollah Khomeini died on June 3, 1989, and was succeeded by Ayatollah Ali Khamene'i.

The regime faced serious unrest in its first few years, including a June 1981 bombing at the headquarters of the Islamic Republican Party (IRP) and the prime minister's office that killed several senior elected and clerical leaders, including then-Prime Minister Javad Bahonar, elected President Ali Raja'i, and IRP head and top Khomeini disciple Ayatollah Mohammad Hussein Beheshti. The regime used these events, along with the hostage crisis with the United States, to justify purging many of the secular, liberal, and left-wing personalities that had been prominent in the years just after the revolution. Examples included the regime's first Prime Minister Mehdi Bazargan; the pro-Moscow Tudeh Party (Communist); the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI, see below); and the first elected president, Abolhassan Bani Sadr. The regime was under economic and military threat during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War.

Regime Structure, Stability, and Opposition

Some experts attribute the acrimony that has characterized U.S.-Iran relations since the Islamic revolution to the structure of Iran's regime. Although there are some elected leadership posts and diversity of opinion, Iran's constitution—adopted in public referenda in 1980 and again in 1989—reserves paramount decisionmaking authority for a "Supreme Leader" (known in Iran as "Leader of the Revolution"). The President and the Majles (unicameral parliament) are directly elected, and since 2013, there have been elections for municipal councils that set local development priorities and select mayors.

Even within the unelected institutions, factional disputes between those who insist on ideological purity and those considered more pragmatic are evident. In part because of the preponderant political power of the clerics and the security services, the regime has faced repeated periodic unrest from minorities, intellectuals, students, labor groups, the poor, women, and members of Iran's minority groups. (Iran's demographics are depicted in a text box below.)

U.S. officials in successive Administrations have accused Iran's regime of widespread corruption, both within the government and among its pillars of support. In a speech on Iran on July 22, 2018, Secretary of State Michael Pompeo characterized Iran's government as "something that resembles the mafia more than a government." He detailed allegations of the abuse of privileges enjoyed by Iran's leaders and supporting elites to enrich themselves and their supporters at the expense of the public good. The State Department's September 2018 "Outlaw Regime" report (p. 41) states that "corruption and mismanagement at the highest levels of the Iranian regime have produced years of environmental exploitation and degradation throughout the country."

Unelected or Indirectly Elected Institutions: The Supreme Leader, Council of Guardians, and Expediency Council

Iran's power structure consists of unelected or indirectly elected persons and institutions.

At the apex of the Islamic Republic's power structure is the "Supreme Leader." He is chosen by an elected body—the Assembly of Experts—which also has the constitutional power to remove him, as well as to redraft Iran's constitution and submit it for approval in a national referendum. The Supreme Leader is required to be a senior Shia cleric. Upon Ayatollah Khomeini's death, the Assembly selected one of his disciples, Ayatollah Ali Khamene'i, as Supreme Leader. Although he has never had Khomeini's undisputed political or religious authority, the powers of the office ensure that Khamene'i is Iran's paramount leader. Under the constitution, the Supreme Leader is commander-in-chief of the armed forces, giving him the power to appoint commanders.

Khamene'i makes five out of the nine appointments to the country's highest national security body, the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC), including its top official, the secretary of the body. Khamene'i also has a representative of his office as one of the nine members, who typically are members of the regime's top military, foreign policy, and domestic security organizations. The Supreme Leader can remove an elected president, if the judiciary or the Majles (parliament) assert cause for removal. The Supreme Leader appoints half of the 12-member Council of Guardians , all members of the Expediency Council , and the judiciary head.

There is no announced successor to Khamene'i. The Assembly of Experts could conceivably use a constitutional provision to set up a three-person leadership council as successor rather than select one new Supreme Leader. Khamene'i reportedly favors as his successor Hojjat ol-Eslam Ibrahim Raisi, whom he appointed in March 2019 as new head of the judiciary, and in 2016 to head the powerful Shrine of Imam Reza (Astan-e Qods Razavi) in Mashhad, which controls vast property and many businesses in the province. Raisi is a hardliner who has served as state prosecutor and was allegedly involved in the 1988 massacre of prisoners and other acts of repression. The 2019 judiciary appointment suggests that Raisi's chances of becoming Supreme Leader were not necessarily diminished by his loss in the May 2017 presidential elections.

Still, the person Raisi replaced as judiciary chief, Ayatollah Sadeq Larijani, remains a succession candidate. Another contender is hardline Tehran Friday prayer leader Ayatollah Ahmad Khatemi, and some consider President Rouhani as a significant contender as well.

Council of Guardians and Expediency Council

Two appointed councils play a major role on legislation, election candidate vetting, and policy.

The 12-member Council of Guardians (COG) consists of six Islamic jurists appointed by the Supreme Leader and six lawyers selected by the judiciary and confirmed by the Majles . Each councilor serves a six-year term, staggered such that half the body turns over every three years. Currently headed by Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, the conservative-controlled body reviews legislation to ensure it conforms to Islamic law. It also vets election candidates by evaluating their backgrounds according to constitutional requirements that each candidate demonstrate knowledge of Islam, loyalty to the Islamic system of government, and other criteria that are largely subjective. The COG also certifies election results. Municipal council candidates are vetted not by the COG but by local committees established by the Majles .

The Expediency Council was established in 1988 to resolve legislative disagreements between the Majles and the COG. It has since evolved into primarily a policy advisory body for the Supreme Leader. Its members serve five-year terms. Longtime regime stalwart Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani was reappointed as its chairman in February 2007 and served in that position until his January 2017 death. In August 2017, the Supreme Leader named a new, expanded (from 42 to 45 members) Council, with former judiciary head Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi as chairman. Shahroudi passed away in December 2018 and Sadeq Larijani, who was then head of the judiciary, was appointed by the Supreme Leader as his replacement. President Hassan Rouhani and Majles Speaker Ali Larijani were not reappointed as Council members but attend the body's sessions in their official capacities. The council includes former president Ahmadinejad.

The leaders and senior officials of a variety of overlapping domestic security organizations form a parallel power structure that is largely under the direct control of the Supreme Leader in his capacity as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. State Department and other human reports on Iran repeatedly assert that internal security personnel are not held accountable for human rights abuses. The domestic security organs include the following:

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). The IRGC's domestic security role is generally implemented through the IRGC-led volunteer militia force called the Basij . The Basij is widely accused of arresting women who violate the regime's public dress codes and raiding Western-style parties in which alcohol, which is illegal in Iran, might be served. However, IRGC bases are often located in urban areas, giving the IRGC a capability to quickly intervene to suppress large antigovernment demonstrations. Law Enforcement Forces. This body is an amalgam of regular police, gendarmerie, and riot police that serve throughout the country. It is the regime's first "line of defense" in suppressing antiregime demonstrations or other unrest. Ministry of Interior. The ministry exercises civilian supervision of Iran's police and domestic security forces. The IRGC and Basij are generally outside ministry control. Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS). Headed by Mahmoud Alavi, the MOIS conducts domestic surveillance to identify regime opponents and try to penetrate antiregime cells. The Ministry works closely with the IRGC and Basij .

Several of these organizations and their senior leaders or commanders are sanctioned by the United States for human rights abuses and other violations of U.S. Executive Orders.

Several major institutional positions are directly elected by the population, but international observers question the credibility of Iran's elections because of the role of the COG in vetting candidates and limiting the number and ideological diversity of the candidate field. Women can vote and run for most offices, and some women serve as mayors, but the COG interprets the Iranian constitution as prohibiting women from running for the office of president. Candidates for all offices must receive more than 50% of the vote, otherwise a runoff is held several weeks later.

Another criticism of the political process in Iran is the relative absence of political parties; establishing a party requires the permission of the Interior Ministry under Article 10 of Iran's constitution. The standards to obtain approval are high: to date, numerous parties have filed for permission since the regime was founded, but only those considered loyal to the regime have been granted license to operate. Some have been licensed and then banned after their leaders opposed regime policies, such as the Islamic Iran Participation Front and Organization of Mojahedin of the Islamic Revolution, discussed in the text box below.

The main directly elected institution is the presidency, which is formally and in practice subordinate to the Supreme Leader. Virtually every successive president has tried but failed to expand his authority relative to the Supreme Leader. Presidential authority, particularly on matters of national security, is also often circumscribed by key clerics and the generally hardline military and security organization called the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). But, the presidency is often the most influential economic policymaking position, as well as a source of patronage. The president appoints and supervises the cabinet, develops the budgets of cabinet departments, and imposes and collects taxes on corporations and other bodies. The presidency also runs oversight bodies such as the Anticorruption Headquarters and the General Inspection Organization, to which government officials are required to submit annual financial disclosures.

Prior to 1989, Iran had both an elected president and a prime minister selected by the elected Majles (parliament). However, the holders of the two positions were constantly in institutional conflict and a 1989 constitutional revision eliminated the prime ministership. Because Iran's presidents have sometimes asserted the powers of their institution against the office of the Supreme Leader itself, since October 2011, Khamene'i has periodically raised the possibility of eventually eliminating the post of president and restoring the post of prime minister .

Iran's Majles , or parliament, is a 290-seat, all-elected, unicameral body. There are five "reserved seats" for "recognized" minority communities—Jews, Zoroastrians, and Christians (three seats of the five). The Majles votes on each nominee to a cabinet post, and drafts and acts on legislation. Among its main duties is to consider and enact a proposed national budget (which runs from March 21 to March 20 each year, coinciding with Nowruz). It legislates on domestic economic and social issues, and tends to defer to executive and security institutions on defense and foreign policy issues. It is constitutionally required to ratify major international agreements, and it ratified the JCPOA in October 2015. The ratification was affirmed by the COG. Women regularly run and some generally are elected; there is no "quota" for the number of women. Majles elections occur one year prior to the presidential elections; the latest were held on February 26, 2016.

A major but little publicized elected institution is the 88-seat Assembly of Experts. Akin to a standing electoral college, it is empowered to choose a new Supreme Leader upon the death of the incumbent, and it formally "oversees" the work of the Supreme Leader. The Assembly can replace him if necessary, although invoking that power would, in practice, most likely occur in the event of a severe health crisis. The Assembly is also empowered to amend the constitution. It generally meets two times a year.

Elections to the Assembly are held every 8-10 years, conducted on a provincial basis. Assembly candidates must be able to interpret Islamic law. In March 2011, the aging compromise candidate Ayatollah Mohammad Reza Mahdavi-Kani was named chairman, but he died in 2014. His successor, Ayatollah Mohammad Yazdi, lost his seat in the Assembly of Experts election on February 26, 2016 (held concurrently with the Majles elections), and COG Chairman Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati was appointed concurrently as the Assembly chairman in May 2016.

Following the presidency regime stalwart Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani during 1989-1997, a reformist, Mohammad Khatemi, won landslide victories in 1997 and 2001. However, hardliners marginalized him by the end of his term in 2005. Aided by widespread voiding of reformist candidacies by the COG, conservatives won a slim majority of the 290 Majles seats in the February 20, 2004, elections. In June 2005, the COG allowed eight candidates to compete (out of the 1,014 persons who filed), including Rafsanjani, Ali Larijani, IRGC stalwart Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, and Tehran mayor Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. With reported tacit backing from Khamene'i, Ahmadinejad advanced to a runoff against Rafsanjani and then won by a 62% to 36% vote. Splits later erupted among hardliners, and pro-Ahmadinejad and pro-Khamene'i candidates competed against each other in the March 2008 Majles elections.

Disputed 2009 Election . Reformists sought to unseat Ahmadinejad in the June 12, 2009, presidential election by rallying to Mir Hossein Musavi, who served as prime minister during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War and, to a lesser extent, former Majles speaker Mehdi Karrubi. Musavi's generally young, urban supporters used social media to organize large rallies in Tehran, but pro-Ahmadinejad rallies were large as well. Turnout was about 85%. The Interior Ministry pronounced Ahmadinejad the winner (63% of the vote) only two hours after the polls closed. Supporters of Musavi, who received the second-highest total (about 35% of the vote) immediately protested the results as fraudulent because of the hasty announcement of the results—but some outside analysts said the results tracked preelection polls. Large antigovernment demonstrations occurred June 13-19, 2009. Security forces killed over 100 protesters (opposition figure—Iran government figure was 27), including a 19-year-old woman, Neda Soltani, who became an icon of the uprising.

The opposition congealed into the "Green Movement of Hope and Change." Some protests in December 2009 overwhelmed regime security forces in some parts of Tehran, but the movement's activity declined after the regime successfully suppressed its demonstration on the February 11, 2010, anniversary of the founding of the Islamic Republic. As unrest ebbed, Ahmadinejad promoted his loyalists and a nationalist version of Islam that limits clerical authority, bringing him into conflict with Supreme Leader Khamene'i. Amid that rift, in the March 2012 Majles elections, candidates supported by Khamene'i won 75% of the seats, weakening Ahmadinejad. Since leaving office in 2013, and despite being appointed by Khamene'i to the Expediency Council, Ahmadinejad has emerged as a regime critic. His following appears to be limited, and he has faced prosecutions of alleged corruption, meanwhile returning to his prior work as a professor of civil engineering.

In the June 14, 2013, presidential elections, held concurrently with municipal elections, the major candidates included the following:

Several hardliners that included Qalibaf (see above); Khamene'i foreign policy advisor Velayati; and then-chief nuclear negotiator Seyed Jalilli. Former chief nuclear negotiator Hassan Rouhani, a moderate and Rafsanjani ally. The COG denial of Rafsanjani's candidacy, which shocked many Iranians because of Rafsanjani's prominent place in the regime, as well as the candidacy of an Ahmadinejad ally.

Green Movement supporters, who were first expected to boycott the vote, mobilized behind Rouhani after regime officials stressed that they were committed to a fair election. The vote produced a 70% turnout and a first-round victory for Rouhani, garnering about 50.7% of the 36 million votes cast. Hardliners generally garnered control of municipal councils in the major cities. Most prominent in Rouhani's first term cabinet were

Foreign Minister: Mohammad Javad Zarif, a former Ambassador to the United Nations in New York, who was assigned to serve concurrently as chief nuclear negotiator (a post traditionally held by the chairman of the Supreme National Security Council). In September 2013, Rouhani appointed senior IRGC leader and former Defense Minister Ali Shamkhani, who generally espouses more moderate views than his IRGC peers, to head that body. Oil Minister: Bijan Zanganeh, who served in the same post during the Khatemi presidency and attracted significant foreign investment to the sector. He replaced Rostam Qasemi, who was associated with the corporate arm of the IRGC. Defense Minister: Hosein Dehgan. An IRGC stalwart, he was an early organizer of the IRGC's Lebanon contingent that evolved into the IRGC-Qods Force. He also was IRGC Air Force commander and deputy Defense Minister. Justice Minister: Mostafa Pour-Mohammadi. As deputy intelligence minister in late 1980s, he was reportedly a decisionmaker in the 1988 mass executions of Iranian prisoners. He was interior minister under Ahmadinejad. In the 115 th Congress, H.Res. 188 would have condemned Iran for the massacre.

Majles and Assembly of Experts Elections in 2016

On February 26, 2016, Iran held concurrent elections for the Majles and for the Assembly of Experts. A runoff round for 68 Majles seats was held on April 29. For the Majles, 6,200 candidates were approved, including 586 female candidates. Oversight bodies invalidated the candidacies of about 6,000, including all but 100 reformists. Still, pro-Rouhani candidates won 140 seats, close to a majority, and the number of hardliners in the body was reduced significantly. Independents, whose alignments vary by issue, hold about 50 seats. Seventeen women were elected—the largest number since the revolution. The body reelected Ali Larijani as Speaker.

For the Assembly of Experts election, 161 candidates were approved out of 800 who applied to run. Reformists and pro-Rouhani candidates defeated two prominent hardliners—the incumbent Assembly Chairman Mohammad Yazdi and Ayatollah Mohammad Taqi Mesbah-Yazdi. COG head Ayatollah Jannati retained his seat, but came in last for the 30 seats elected from Tehran Province. He was subsequently named chairman of the body.

In the latest presidential election on May 19, 2017, Rouhani won a first-round victory with about 57% of the vote. He defeated a major figure, Hojjat ol-Eslam Ibrahim Raisi—a close ally of Khamene'i. Even though other major hardliners had dropped out of the race to improve Raisi's chances, Raisi received only about 38% of the vote.

Municipal elections were held concurrently. After vetting by local committees established by the Majles , about 260,000 candidates competed for about 127,000 seats nationwide. More than 6% of the candidates were women. The alliance of reformists and moderate-conservatives won control of the municipal councils of Iran's largest cities, including all 21 seats on the Tehran municipal council. The term of the existing councils expired in September 2017 and a reformist official, Mohammad Ali Najafi, replaced Qalibaf as Tehran mayor. However, Najafi resigned in March 2018 after criticism from hardliners for his viewing of a dance performance by young girls during a celebration of a national holiday. The current mayor, selected in November 2018, is Pirouz Hanachi.

Rouhani was sworn into a second term in early August 2017. His second-term cabinet nominations retained most of the same officials in key posts, including Foreign Minister Zarif. Since the Trump Administration withdrew from the JCPOA in May 2018, hardliners have threatened to try to impeach Zarif for his role in negotiating that accord. In late February 2019, after being excluded from a leadership meeting with visiting President Bashar Al Asad of Syria, Zarif announced his resignation over the social media application Instagram. Rouhani did not accept the resignation and Zarif resumed his duties.

Key changes to the second-term cabinet include the following:

Minister of Justice Seyed Alireza Avayee replaced Pour-Mohammadi. Formerly a state prosecutor, Avayee oversaw trials of protesters in the 2009 uprising and is subject to EU travel ban and asset freeze. Defense Minister Amir Hatami, a regular military officer, became the first non-IRGC Defense Minister in more than 20 years and the first regular military officer in that position. The cabinet has two women vice presidents, and one other woman as a member of the cabinet (but not heading any ministry).

In December 2017, significant unrest erupted in more than 80 cities, mostly over economic conditions, although demonstrations were smaller than the 2009-2010 protests. Protests initially cited economic concerns—the high prices of staple foods—but quickly evolved to expressions of opposition to Iran's leadership and the expenditure of resources on interventions throughout the Middle East. Some protesters were motivated by Rouhani's 2018-2019 budget proposals to increase funds for cleric-run businesses (" bonyads ") and the IRGC, while cutting subsidies.

Rouhani sought to defuse the unrest by acknowledging the right to protest and the legitimacy of some demonstrator grievances. Khamene'i at first attributed the unrest to covert action by Iran's foreign adversaries, particularly the United States, but he later acknowledged unspecified "problems" in the administration of justice. Security officers used force against protester violence in some cities, but experts say they generally exercised restraint. The government also temporarily shut down access to the social media site Instagram and a widely used messaging system called "Telegram." Iranian official media reported that 25 were killed and nearly 4,000 were arrested during that period of unrest.

Since February 2018, some women have continued protesting the strict public dress code, and some have been detained. Small protests and other acts of defiance have continued since, including significant unrest in the Tehran bazaar in July 2018 in the context of shortages of some goods and shop closures due to the inability to price their goods for profit. Since September 2018, workers in various industries, including trucking and teaching, have conducted strikes to demand higher wages to help cope with rising prices. Rounds of nationwide teachers' strikes began in mid-February 2019.

In mid-2018, possibly to try to divert blame for Iran's economic situation, the regime established special "anticorruption courts" that have, in some cases, imposed the death penalty on businessmen accused of taking advantage of reimposed sanctions for personal profit. Iran also has used military action against armed factions that are based or have support outside Iran.

In early 2019, protests have taken place in southwestern Iran in response to the government's missteps in dealing with the effects of significant flooding in that area. The regime has tasked the leadership of the relief efforts to the IRGC and IRGC-QF, working with Iraqi Shia militias who are powerful on the Iraqi side of the border where the floods have taken place.

President Trump and other senior officials have supported protests by warning the regime against using force and vowing to hold officials responsible for harming protestors. The Administration also has requested U.N. Security Council meetings to consider Iran's crackdown on the unrest, although no formal U.N. action was taken. The Administration also imposed U.S. sanctions on identified regime officials and institutions responsible for abuses against protestors, including then-judiciary chief Sadeq Larijani, representing the highest-level Iranian official sanctioned by the United States to date. In the 115 th Congress, several resolutions supported the protestors, including H.Res. 676 (passed House January 9, 2018), S.Res. 367 , H.Res. 675 , and S.Res. 368 .

U.S. State Department reports, including the Iran Action Group's September 2018 "Outlaw Regime" document, and reports from a U.N. Special Rapporteur, have long cited Iran for a wide range of abuses—aside from its suppression of political opposition—including escalating use of capital punishment, executions of minors, denial of fair public trial, harsh and life-threatening conditions in prison, and unlawful detention and torture. In a speech on Iran on July 22, 2018, Secretary of State Pompeo recited a litany of U.S. accusations of Iranian human rights abuses, and stated "America is unafraid to expose human rights violations and support those who are being silenced."

State Department and U.N. Special Rapporteur reports have noted that the 2013 revisions to the Islamic Penal Code a nd the 2015 revisions to the Criminal Procedure Code made some reforms, including eliminating death sentences for children convicted of drug-related offenses and protecting the rights of the accused. A "Citizen's Rights Charter," issued December 19, 2016, at least nominally protects free expression and is intended to raise public awareness of citizen rights. It also purportedly commits the government to implement the Charter's 120 articles. In August 2017, Rouhani appointed a woman, former vice president Shahindokht Molaverdi, to oversee implementation of the Charter. The State Department's human rights report for 2018 says that key Charter protections for individual rights of freedom to communicate and access information have not been implemented.

A U.N. Special Rapporteur on Iran human rights was reestablished in March 2011 by the U.N. Human Rights Council (22 to 7 vote), resuming work done by a Special Rapporteur on Iran human rights during 1988-2002. The Rapporteur appointed in 2016, Asma Jahangir, issued two Iran reports, the latest of which was dated August 14, 2017 (A/72/322), before passing away in February 2018. The special rapporteur mandate was extended on March 24, 2018 and British-Pakistani lawyer Javaid Rehman was appointed in July 2018. The U.N. General Assembly has insisted that Iran cooperate by allowing the Special Rapporteur to visit Iran, but Iran has instead only responded to Special Rapporteur inquiries through agreed "special procedures."

Despite the criticism of its human rights record, on April 29, 2010, Iran acceded to the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women. It also sits on the boards of the U.N. Development Program (UNDP) and UNICEF. Iran's U.N. dues are about $9 million per year.

Iran has an official body, the High Council for Human Rights, headed by former Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Larijani (brother of the Majles speaker and the judiciary head). It generally defends the government's actions to outside bodies rather than oversees the government's human rights practices, but Larijani, according to the Special Rapporteur, has questioned the effectiveness of drug-related executions and other government policies.

As part of its efforts to try to compel Iran to improve its human rights practices, the United States has imposed sanctions on Iranian officials alleged to have committed human rights abuses, and on firms that help Iranian authorities censor or monitor the internet. Human rights-related sanctions are analyzed in significant detail in CRS Report RS20871, Iran Sanctions , by Kenneth Katzman.

U.S.-Iran Relations, U.S. Policy, and Options

The February 11, 1979, fall of the Shah of Iran, who was a key U.S. ally, shattered U.S.-Iran relations. The Carter Administration's efforts to build a relationship with the new regime in Iran ended after the November 4, 1979, takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran by radical pro-Khomeini "Students in the Line of the Imam." The 66 U.S. diplomats there were held hostage for 444 days, and released pursuant to the January 20, 1981 "Algiers Accords." Their release was completed minutes after President Reagan's inauguration on January 20, 1981. The United States broke relations with Iran on April 7, 1980, two weeks prior to a failed U.S. military attempt to rescue the hostages.

Iran has since then pursued policies that successive Administrations considered inimical to U.S. interests in the Near East region and beyond. Iran's authoritarian political system and human rights abuses have contributed to, but have not necessarily been central to, the U.S.-Iran rift, although some observers assert that Iran's behavior flows directly from the nature of its regime.

Iran has an interest section in Washington, DC, under the auspices of the Embassy of Pakistan, and staffed by Iranian Americans. The former Iranian Embassy closed in April 1980 when the two countries broke diplomatic relations, and remains under the control of the State Department. Iran's Mission to the United Nations in New York runs most of Iran's diplomacy inside the United States. The U.S. interests section in Tehran, under the auspices of the Embassy of Switzerland, has no American personnel.

The following sections analyze some key hallmarks of past U.S. policies toward Iran.

Reagan Administration: Iran Identified as Terrorism State Sponsor

The Reagan Administration designated Iran a "state sponsor of terrorism" in January 1984—a designation established by the Export Administration Act of 1979—largely in response to Iran's backing for the October 1983 bombing of the Marine Barracks in Beirut. The Administration also "tilted" toward Iraq in the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War. During 1987-1988, U.S. naval forces fought several skirmishes with Iranian naval elements while protecting oil shipments transiting the Persian Gulf from Iranian mines and other attacks. On April 18, 1988, Iran lost one-quarter of its larger naval ships in an engagement with the U.S. Navy, including a frigate sunk. However, the Administration contradicted its efforts to favor Iraq's war effort by providing arms to Iran ("TOW" antitank weapons and I-Hawk air defense batteries) in exchange for Iran's help in the releasing of U.S. hostages held in Lebanon. On July 3, 1988, U.S. forces in the Gulf mistakenly shot down Iran Air Flight 655 over the Gulf, killing all 290 on board, contributing to Iran's decision to accept a cease-fire in the war with Iraq in August 1988.

George H. W. Bush Administration: "Goodwill Begets Goodwill"

In his January 1989 inauguration speech, President George H.W. Bush, in stating that "goodwill begets goodwill" with respect to Iran, implied that U.S.-Iran relations could improve if Iran helped obtain the release of U.S. hostages held by Hezbollah in Lebanon. Iran's apparent assistance led to the release of all remaining U.S. hostages there by the end of December 1991. However, no U.S.-Iran thaw followed, possibly because Iran continued to back violent groups opposed to the U.S. push for Arab-Israeli peace that followed the 1991 U.S. liberation of Kuwait.

Clinton Administration: "Dual Containment"

The Clinton Administration articulated a strategy of "dual containment" of Iran and Iraq—an attempt to keep both countries simultaneously weak rather than alternately tilting to one or the other. In 1995-1996, the Administration and Congress banned U.S. trade and investment with Iran and imposed penalties on foreign investment in Iran's energy sector, in response to Iran's support for terrorist groups seeking to undermine the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. The election of the moderate Mohammad Khatemi as president in May 1997 precipitated a U.S. offer of direct dialogue, but Khatemi did not accept the offer. In June 1998, then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright called for mutual confidence building measures that could lead to a "road map" for normalization. In a March 17, 2000, speech, the Secretary admitted past U.S. interference in Iran.

George W. Bush Administration: Iran Part of "Axis of Evil"

In his January 2002 State of the Union message, President Bush named Iran as part of an "axis of evil" including Iraq and North Korea. However, the Administration enlisted Iran's diplomatic help in efforts to try to stabilize post-Taliban Afghanistan and post-Saddam Iraq. The Administration rebuffed a reported May 2003 Iranian overture transmitted by the Swiss Ambassador to Iran for an agreement on all major issues of mutual concern ("grand bargain" proposal). State Department officials disputed that the proposal was fully vetted within Iran's leadership. The Administration aided victims of the December 2003 earthquake in Bam, Iran, including through U.S. military deliveries into Iran. As Iran's nuclear program advanced, the Administration worked with several European countries to persuade Iran to agree to limit its nuclear program. President Bush's January 20, 2005, second inaugural address and his January 31, 2006, State of the Union message stated that the United States would be a close ally of a "free and democratic" Iran—appearing to support regime change.

Obama Administration: Pressure, Engagement, and the JCPOA

President Obama asserted that there was an opportunity to persuade Iran to limit its nuclear program through diplomacy and to potentially rebuild a U.S.-Iran relationship after decades of mutual animosity. The approach emerged in President Obama's first message to the Iranian people on the occasion of Nowruz (Persian New Year, March 21, 2009), in which he stated that the United States "is now committed to diplomacy that addresses the full range of issues before us, and to pursuing constructive ties among the United States, Iran, and the international community." He referred to Iran as "The Islamic Republic of Iran," appearing to reject a policy of regime change. The Administration reportedly also loosened restrictions on U.S. diplomats' meeting with their Iranian counterparts at international meetings. In a speech to the "Muslim World" in Cairo on June 4, 2009, President Obama acknowledged that the United States had played a role in the overthrow of Mossadeq and said that Iran had a right to peaceful nuclear power. In addition, President Obama exchanged several letters with Supreme Leader Khamene'i, reportedly expressing the Administration's support for engagement with Iran.

In 2009, Iran's crackdown on the Green Movement uprising and its refusal to accept compromises to limit its nuclear program caused the Obama Administration to shift to a "two track" strategy: stronger economic pressure coupled with offers of negotiations that could produce sanctions relief. The sanctions imposed during 2010-2013 received broad international cooperation and caused economic difficulty in Iran, but the Administration also altered U.S. regulations to help Iranians circumvent their government's restrictions on internet usage. In early 2013, the Administration began direct but unpublicized talks with Iranian officials in the Sultanate of Oman to probe Iran's willingness to reach a comprehensive nuclear accord. The Administration also repeatedly stated that a military option is "on the table."

The election of Rouhani in June 2013 contributed to a U.S. shift to emphasizing diplomacy. President Obama, in his September 24, 2013 U.N. General Assembly speech, confirmed an exchange of letters with Rouhani stating U.S. willingness to resolve the nuclear issue peacefully and that the United States "[is] not seeking regime change." The two presidents spoke by phone on September 27, 2013—the first direct U.S.-Iran presidential contact since Iran's revolution.

After the JCPOA was finalized in July 2015, the United States and Iran held bilateral meetings at the margins of all nuclear talks and in other settings, covering regional and bilateral issues. President Obama expressed hope that the JCPOA would "usher[] in a new era in U.S.-Iranian relations," while at the same time asserting that the JCPOA would benefit U.S. national security even without a broader rapprochement. President Obama met Foreign Minister Zarif at the September 2015 General Assembly session, but no contact was reported during the September 2016 U.N. General Assembly session. Still, the signs that U.S.-Iran relations could improve as a result of the JCPOA were mixed, including as discussed below.

Coinciding with Implementation Day of the JCPOA (January 16, 2016), the dual citizens held by Iran at that time were released and a long-standing Iranian claim for funds paid for undelivered military equipment from the Shah's era was settled—resulting in $1.7 billion in cash payments (euros, Swiss francs, and other non-U.S. hard currencies) to Iran—$400 million for the original DOD monies and $1.3 billion for an arbitrated amount of interest. Administration officials asserted that the nuclear diplomacy provided an opportunity to resolve these outstanding issues, but some Members of Congress criticized the simultaneity of the financial settlement as paying "ransom" to Iran. Obama Administration officials asserted that it had long been assumed that the United States would need to return monies to Iran for the undelivered military equipment and that the amount of interest agreed was likely less than what Iran might have been awarded by the U.S.-Iran Claims Tribunal. Iran subsequently jailed several other dual nationals (see box below). Iran continued to provide support to allies and proxies in the region, and it continued "high speed intercepts" of U.S. warships in the Persian Gulf. Iran conducted at least four ballistic missile tests from the time the JCPOA was finalized in 2015 until the end of the Obama Administration, which termed the tests "defiant of" or "inconsistent with" Resolution 2231. The tests prompted additional U.S. designations for sanctions of entities that support Iran's program. Iranian officials argued that new U.S. visa requirements in the FY2016 Consolidated Appropriations Act ( P.L. 114-113 ) would cause European businessmen to hesitate to travel to Iran and thereby limit Iran's economic reintegration. Then-Secretary of State Kerry wrote to Foreign Minister Zarif on December 19, 2015, that the United States would implement the provision so as to avoid interfering with "legitimate business interests of Iran." In January 2016, Kerry worked with Zarif to achieve the rapid release of 10 U.S. Navy personnel who the IRGC took into custody when their two riverine crafts strayed into what Iran considers its territorial waters. There was no expansion of diplomatic representation such as the posting of U.S. nationals to staff the U.S. interests section in Tehran, nor did then-Secretary of State Kerry visit Iran. In 2014, Iran appointed one of those involved in the 1979 seizure of the U.S. embassy in Tehran—Hamid Aboutalebi—as ambassador to the United Nations. But, in April 2014, Congress passed S. 2195 ( P.L. 113-100 ), which gave the Administration authority to deny him a visa to take up his duties. The United States subsequently announced he would not be admitted. Iran replaced him with Gholam Ali Khoshroo, who studied in the United States and served in Khatemi's government. In May 2015, the two governments granted each other permission to move their respective interests sections to more spacious locations. Khoshroo was replaced in April 2019 by Majid Takht Ravanchi.

Trump Administration: Return to Hostility and "Maximum Pressure"

The Trump Administration has shifted policy back to the pre-JCPOA stance, asserting that the JCPOA addressed only nuclear issues and hindered the U.S. ability to roll back Iran's "malign" regional activities or reduce its military and missile capabilities. Administration officials assert that Administration policy is to pressure Iran's economy to (1) compel it to renegotiate the JCPOA to address the broad range of U.S. concerns and (2) deny Iran the revenue to continue to develop its strategic capabilities or intervene throughout the region. Administration statements of opposition to how Iran is governed suggest that an element of the policy is to create enough economic difficulties to stoke unrest in Iran, possibly to the point where the regime collapses.

The policy, and elements of it, have been articulated as follows:

Citing Iran's arming of the Houthis in Yemen, on February 1, 2017, then-National Security Adviser Michael Flynn stated that Iran was "officially on notice" about its provocative behavior. In April 2017, the Administration announced a six-month Iran policy review based on the premise that the JCPOA "only delays [Iran's] goal of becoming a nuclear state" and had failed to curb Iran's objectionable regional behavior. During his May 20-24, 2017, visit to the region, President Trump told Arab leaders in Saudi Arabia that "Until the Iranian regime is willing to be a partner for peace, all nations of conscience must work together to isolate Iran, deny it funding for terrorism, and pray for the day when the Iranian people have the just and righteous government they deserve." The following month, then-Secretary of State Tillerson testified that the Administration would work to support elements in Iran that would lead to a "peaceful transition" of Iran's government. On October 13, 2017, President Trump, citing the results of the policy review, stated that he would not certify Iranian JCPOA compliance (under the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, INARA, P.L. 114-17 ), and that the United States would only stay in the accord if Congress and U.S. allies (1) address the expiration of JCPOA nuclear restrictions, (2) curb Iran's ballistic missile program, and (3) counter Iran's regional activities. The denial of certification under INARA triggered a 60-day period for Congress to take legislative action under expedited procedures to reimpose those sanctions that were lifted. Congress did not take such action. On January 12, 2018, the President announced that he would not continue to waive Iran sanctions at the next expiration deadline (May 12) unless the JCPOA's weaknesses were addressed by Congress and the European countries.

Withdrawal from the JCPOA and Subsequent Pressure Efforts

On May 8, 2018, following visits to the United States by the leaders of France and Germany imploring the United States to remain in the JCPOA, President Trump announced that the United States would withdraw from the JCPOA and reimpose all U.S. secondary sanctions, with full effect as of November 5, 2018. Statements by President Trump and Secretary of State Pompeo have since articulated U.S. policy as follows:

On May 21, 2018, in his first speech as Secretary of State, Michael Pompeo announced a return to a U.S. strategy of pressuring Iran through sanctions and by working with allies against Iran's regional activities and proxies, as well as against its ballistic missile program, cyberattacks, and human rights abuses. He also expressed U.S. "solidarity" with the Iranian people. On July 22, 2018, in a speech to Iranian Americans at the Reagan Library in California, Secretary Pompeo recited a litany of Iranian human rights abuses, official corruption, and efforts to destabilize the region. The Secretary stated that "I have a message for the people of Iran. The United States hears you; the United States supports you; the United States is with you." On July 23, 2018, following threats by Rouhani and other Iranian leaders to cut off the flow of oil through the Persian Gulf if Iran's oil exports are prevented by sanctions, President Trump posted the following on Twitter: "To Iranian President Rouhani: NEVER, EVER THREATEN THE UNITED STATES AGAIN OR YOU WILL SUFFER CONSEQUENCES THE LIKES OF WHICH FEW THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE EVER SUFFERED BEFORE. WE ARE NO LONGER A COUNTRY THAT WILL STAND FOR YOUR DEMENTED WORDS OF VIOLENCE & DEATH. BE CAUTIOUS!" The tweet suggested to some that the United States might be intent on military action against Iran. On August 16, 2018, Secretary Pompeo announced the creation of an "Iran Action Group" at the State Department responsible for coordinating the department's Iran-related activities. The group is headed by Brian Hook, who holds the title of "Special Representative for Iran." In late September 2018, the group issued its "Outlaw Regime" report on Iran, in which Secretary of State Pompeo wrote in a preface that "The policy President Trump has laid out comes to terms fully with fact that the Islamic Republic of Iran is not a normal state ... " On October 3, 2018, the Administration abrogated the 1955 U.S.-Iran "Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights." Iran's legal representatives had cited the treaty to earn a favorable October 2 judgment from the International Court of Justice demanding that the United States reverse some humanitarian-related sanctions on Iran. The treaty, which provides for freedom of commerce between the two countries and unfettered diplomatic exchange, has long been mooted by post-1979 developments in U.S.-Iran relations. The abrogation of the treaty did not affect the status of the interests sections in each others' countries. Illustrating the extent to which the Administration wants U.S. partners to adopt U.S. policy toward Iran, the Administration organized a ministerial meeting in Warsaw, Poland, during February 13-14, 2019, focused on Middle East issues and with particular focus on countering the threat posed by Iran. For further information, see CRS In Focus IF11132, Coalition-Building Against Iran , by Kenneth Katzman On April 8, 2019, the Administration designated the IRGC as a foreign terrorist organization (FTO), blaming it for involvement in multiple past acts of Iran-backed terrorism and anti-U.S. actions. For further information, see CRS Insight IN11093, Iran's Revolutionary Guard Named a Terrorist Organization , by Kenneth Katzman. On April 22, 2019, the Administration announced it would no longer provide exceptions to countries that pledged to reduce their purchases of Iranian oil under the FY2012 National Defense Authorization Act ( P.L. 112-81 ). For further information, see CRS Insight IN11108, Iran Oil Sanctions Exceptions Ended , by Kenneth Katzman. As of May 3, 2019, U.S.-Iran tensions escalated following intelligence reports that Iran and/or its allies and proxies might be preparing to attack U.S. forces or personnel in the region, and the United States deployed additional forces to the Gulf to deter such action. As tensions escalated, U.S. officials issued a variety of statements. For example, on May 20, 2019, President Trump posted the following on Twitter: "If Iran wants to fight, that will be the official end of Iran. Never threaten the United States again!" Yet, as May ended, President Trump and his senior aides and Cabinet officers all indicated that the United States did not seek war with Iran, did not seek to change Iran's regime, and welcomed talks to ease tensions and renegotiate a JCPOA.

As have its predecessors, the Trump Administration has not publicly taken any policy option "off the table." Some options, such as sanctions, are being emphasized, while others are being considered or threatened to varying degrees.

Engagement and Improved Bilateral Relations

Successive Administrations have debated the degree to which to pursue engagement with Iran, and U.S. efforts to engage Iran sometimes have not coincided with Iranian leadership willingness to engage the United States. President Trump has publicly welcomed engagement with Iran's President Rouhani, but Administration officials have set strict conditions for any significant improvement in U.S.-Iran relations. Secretary of State Pompeo, in his May 21, 2018, speech referenced above, stipulated a list of 12 behavior changes by Iran that would be required for a normalization of U.S.-Iran relations and to be included in a revised JCPOA. Many of the demands—such as ending support for Lebanese Hezbollah—would strike at the core of Iran's revolution and are unlikely to be met by Iran under any circumstances.

At a July 30, 2018, press conference, President Trump stated he would be willing to meet President Rouhani without conditions, presumably during the September 2018 General Assembly meetings in New York. Rouhani indicated that the U.S-Iran relationship was not conducive to such a meeting, and President Trump later stated he would not meet with Rouhani during the General Assembly meetings, even though President Rouhani is probably "an absolutely lovely man." In December 2018, President Rouhani stated that the United States directly requested negotiations with Iran on eight occasions in 2017, and "indirectly" requested negotiations on three occasions in 2018. He said that Iran rebuffed these overtures.

Following the U.S. designation of the IRGC as an FTO and the denial of further sanctions exceptions for the purchases of Iranian oil, Foreign Minister Zarif appeared to raise the possibility for some U.S.-Iran talks on selected issues. At an April 24, 2019 research institute public meeting in New York, Zarif offered to negotiate an exchange of Iranians held in U.S. jails for some or all of the U.S.-Iran nationals held by Iran (see box above).

In the context of escalating U.S.-Iran tensions in May 2019, President Trump apparently sought to de-escalate by restating his interest in direct talks, stating the following on May 9, 2019:

What they [Iranian leaders] should be doing is calling me up, sitting down; we can make a deal, a fair deal ... but they should call, and if they do, we're open to talk to them.

In late May 2019, in the course of an official visit to Japan, President Trump said he would support Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's efforts to act as a mediator between the United States and Iran. Concurrently, Secretary Pompeo and other U.S. officials were in contact with leaders of Oman, Qatar, and Switzerland, apparently in an effort to explore the potential for talks with Iran. Possibly in connection, foreign ministers and other high-ranking diplomats from Iran and Oman, Qatar, and Kuwait exchanged visits.

Successive Administrations have sought to back up other policy options with a capability to use military force against Iran. Prior to the JCPOA, supporters of military action against Iran's nuclear program argued that such action could set back Iran's nuclear program substantially. A U.S. ground invasion to remove Iran's regime apparently has not been considered at any time.

The Obama Administration repeatedly stated that "all options are on the table" to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. However, the Obama Administration asserted that military action would set back Iran's nuclear advancement with far less certainty or duration than would a nuclear agreement. And Iranian retaliation could potentially escalate and expand throughout the region, reduce Iran's regional isolation, strengthen Iran's regime domestically, and raise oil prices. After the JCPOA was finalized, President Obama reiterated the availability of this option should Iran violate the agreement. Obama Administration officials articulated that U.S. military action against Iran might also be used if Iran attacked or prepared to attack U.S. allies or attempted to interrupt the free flow of oil or shipping in the Gulf or elsewhere.

The Trump Administration has similarly stated that "all options are open," referring to military action. The Administration's pullout from the JCPOA was accompanied by threats to take unspecified action if Iran were to leave the accord and restart banned aspects of its nuclear program. In the context of significant U.S.-Iran tensions in May 2019 that resulted in added U.S. military deployments to the Gulf region, the Administration has reiterated threats to use force against Iran's nuclear program or if Iran were to attack U.S. forces or personnel in the region. Yet, as noted, President Trump has sought to de-escalate tensions and has told his top officials that the Administration does not want conflict with Iran. For more information on the potential for U.S. military action in the context of U.S.-Iran tensions, see CRS In Focus IF11212, U.S.-Iran Tensions Escalate , by Kenneth Katzman.

Whereas the United States has not initiated military action against Iranian or Iran-backed forces in Syria, the Administration has publicly supported Israel's frequent strikes on Iranian and Hezbollah infrastructure there. And, the U.S. Navy has conducted operations to interdict Iranian weapons shipments to the Houthi rebels in Yemen. For detailed information on U.S. military activity in the region that is, in whole or in part, directed against Iran and Iranian allies, see CRS Report R44017, Iran's Foreign and Defense Policies , by Kenneth Katzman.

With regard to presidential authorities, S.J.Res. 41 , which passed the Senate on September 22, 2012, in the 112 th Congress, rejects any U.S. policy that relies on "containment" of a potential nuclear Iran. No legislation has been enacted that would limit the President's authority to use military force against Iran, but neither has there been legislation authorizing the use of force against Iran. At a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on April 10, 2019, Secretary of State Pompeo answered questions on whether the Administration considers the use of force against Iran as authorized, indicating that he would defer to Administration legal experts on that question. However, he indicated, in response to questions whether the 2001 authorization for force against Al Qaeda could apply to Iran, that Iran has harbored members of Al Qaeda.

The U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA and reimposition of all U.S. sanctions has major implications. The table below summarizes sanctions that have been used against Iran.

One recurring U.S. policy question has been whether the United States should support efforts within Iran to overthrow Iran's leadership. During the 2009 Green Movement uprising, the Obama Administration asserted that extensive U.S. support for the uprising would undermine the opposition's position in Iran. President Obama did, however, give some public support to the demonstrators, and his 2011 Nowruz (Persian New Year) address mentioned specific dissidents and said "young people of Iran ... I want you to know that I am with you." However, in a September 24, 2013, General Assembly speech, President Obama explicitly stated that the United States does not seek to change Iran's regime.

The Trump Administration—in cited statements by Secretary Pompeo and other U.S. officials—asserts that its policy is to change Iran's behavior, not to change its regime. However, the content of these and other statements by Administration officials, in particular Secretary Pompeo's speech to Iranian Americans at the Reagan Library on July 22, 2018, suggests support for a regime change outcome. In his speech on May 21, 2017, in Saudi Arabia, President Trump stated that his Administration is hoping that Iran's government will change to one that the Administration considers "just and righteous." In testimony before two congressional committees in June 2017, then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said the Administration supports a "philosophy of regime change" for Iran (Senate Appropriations Committee) and that the Administration would "work toward support of those elements inside of Iran that would lead to a peaceful transition of that government" (House Foreign Affairs Committee). In his October 13, 2017, policy announcement on Iran, President Trump stated that

we stand in total solidarity with the Iranian regime's longest-suffering victims: its own people. The citizens of Iran have paid a heavy price for the violence and extremism of their leaders. The Iranian people long to—and they just are longing, to reclaim their country's proud history, its culture, its civilization, its cooperation with its neighbors.

Subsequently, President Trump issued statements of support for the December 2017-January 2018 protests in Iran on Twitter and in other formats. In his May 8, 2018, announcement of a U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA, President Trump stated

Finally, I want to deliver a message to the long-suffering people of Iran. The people of America stand with you.... But the future of Iran belongs to its people. They are the rightful heirs to a rich culture and an ancient land, and they deserve a nation that does justice to their dreams, honor to their history and glory to God.

In his speech to the Heritage Foundation on May 21, 2018, Secretary of State Pompeo added that the United States expresses total solidarity with the Iranian people. In his Reagan Library speech on July 22, 2018, Pompeo recited a litany of Iranian regime human rights abuses and governmental corruption that called into question its legitimacy and, in several passages and answers to questions, clearly expressed the hope that the Iranian people will oust the current regime. The apparent support for a regime change policy was furthered by Secretary Pompeo's announcement during that speech that the Broadcasting Board of Governors is launching a new full-time Persian-language service for television, radio, digital, and social media to help "ordinary Iranians inside of Iran and around the globe can know that America stands with them."

Yet, there were signs of a possible modification or shift, at least in tone, in the context of escalating U.S.-Iran tensions in May 2019 that some assessed as potentially leading to conflict. During his visit to Japan in late May, President Trump specifically ruled out a policy of regime change, stating the following on May 27:

These are great people—has a chance to be a great country with the same leadership. We are not looking for regime change. I just want to make that clear. We're looking for no nuclear weapons.

At times, some in Congress have advocated that the United States adopt a formal policy of overthrow of the regime. In the 111 th Congress, one bill said that it should be U.S. policy to promote the overthrow of the regime (the Iran Democratic Transition Act, S. 3008 ).

Many of Iran's leaders, particularly Supreme Leader Khamene'i, continue to articulate a perception that the United States has never accepted the 1979 Islamic revolution. Khamene'i and other Iranian figures note that the United States provided funding to antiregime groups, mainly promonarchists, during the 1980s.

Democracy Promotion and Internet Freedom Efforts

Successive Administrations and Congresses have sought to at least lay the groundwork for eventual regime change through "democracy promotion" programs and sanctions on Iranian human rights abuses. Legislation authorizing democracy promotion in Iran was enacted in the 109 th Congress. The Iran Freedom Support Act ( P.L. 109-293 , signed September 30, 2006) authorized funds (no specific dollar amount) for Iran democracy promotion. Several laws and Executive Orders issued since 2010 are intended to promote internet freedom, and the Administration has amended U.S.-Iran trade regulations to allow for the sale to Iranians of consumer electronics and software that help them communicate. Then-Under Secretary of State Wendy Sherman testified on October 14, 2011, that some of the democracy promotion funding for Iran was used to train Iranians to use technologies that circumvent regime internet censorship.

Many have argued that U.S. funding for such programs is counterproductive because the support has caused Iran to use the support as a justification to accuse the civil society activists of disloyalty. Some civil society activists have refused to participate in U.S.-funded programs, fearing arrest. The Obama Administration altered Iran democracy promotion programs somewhat toward working with Iranians inside Iran who are organized around apolitical issues such as health, education, science, and the environment. The State Department, which often uses appropriated funds to support prodemocracy programs run by organizations based in the United States and in Europe, refuses to name grantees for security reasons. The funds shown below have been obligated through DRL and the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs in partnership with USAID. Some of the funds have also been used for cultural exchanges, public diplomacy, and broadcasting to Iran. A further indication of the sensitivity of specifying the use of the funds is that, since FY2010, funds have been provided for Iran civil society/democracy promotion as part of a broader "Near East Regional Democracy programs" (NERD).

Iran asserts that funding democracy promotion represents a violation of the 1981 "Algiers Accords" that settled the Iran hostage crisis and provide for noninterference in each other's internal affairs. The George W. Bush Administration asserted that open funding of Iranian prodemocracy activists (see below) was a stated effort to change regime behavior, not to overthrow the regime, although some saw the Bush Administration's efforts as a cover to achieve a regime change objective.

Another part of the democracy promotion effort has been the development of Iran-specific U.S. broadcasting services to Iran. Radio Farda ("tomorrow," in Farsi) began under Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), in partnership with the Voice of America (VOA), in 2002. The service was established as a successor to a smaller Iran broadcasting effort begun with an initial $4 million from the FY1998 Commerce/State/Justice appropriation ( P.L. 105-119 ). It was to be called Radio Free Iran but was never formally given that name by RFE/RL. Based in Prague, Radio Farda broadcasts 24 hours/day, and its budget is over $11 million per year. No U.S. assistance has been provided to Iranian exile-run stations. As noted above, Secretary Pompeo has announced a new Persian-language channel for Iranians through various media, but it is not clear whether this new service will augment existing programs or form an entirely new program.

VOA Persian Service. The VOA established a Persian-language service to Iran in July 2003. It consists of radio broadcasting (one hour a day of original programming); television (six hours a day of primetime programming, rebroadcast throughout a 24-hour period); and internet. The service has come been criticized by observers for losing much of its audience among young, educated, antiregime Iranians who are looking for signs of U.S. official support. The costs for the service are about $20 million per year.

State Department Public Diplomacy Efforts

The State Department has sought outreach to the Iranian population. In May 2003, the State Department added a Persian-language website to its list of foreign-language websites, under the authority of the Bureau of International Information Programs. The website was announced as a source of information about the United States and its policy toward Iran. In February 14, 2011, the State Department began Persian-language Twitter feeds in an effort to connect better with internet users in Iran.

Since 2006, the State Department has been increasing the presence of Persian-speaking U.S. diplomats in U.S. diplomatic missions around Iran, in part to help identify and facilitate Iranian participation in U.S. democracy-promotion programs. The Iran unit at the U.S. Consulate in Dubai has been enlarged significantly into a "regional presence" office, and "Iran-watcher" positions have been added to U.S. diplomatic facilities in Baku, Azerbaijan; Istanbul, Turkey; Frankfurt, Germany; London; and Ashkabad, Turkmenistan, all of which have large expatriate Iranian populations and/or proximity to Iran.