Facebook Twitter Instagram
    Trending
    • Urban-Rural Polarization in Canada
    • Confronting the Anti-Futures Triangle
    • Symposium: War, Genocide, and Futures Beyond US Hegemony
    • Foreword: Editorial Statement On the Necessity of Critique
    • Does Genocide Have Gender?
    • Welcoming Collapse to Create Better Futures
    • From Collapse to Motherships
    • The Futures of the United Nations
    Journal of Futures Studies
    • Who we are
      • Editorial Board
      • Editors
      • Core Team
      • Digital Editing Team
      • Consulting Editors
      • Indexing, Rank and Impact Factor
      • Statement of Open Access
    • Articles and Essays
      • In Press
      • 2025
        • Vol. 30 No. 2 December 2025
        • Vol. 30 No. 1 September 2025
        • Vol. 29 No. 4 June 2025
        • Vol. 29 No. 3 March 2025
      • 2024
        • Vol. 29 No. 2 December 2024
        • Vol. 29 No. 1 September 2024
        • Vol. 28 No. 4 June 2024
        • Vol. 28 No. 3 March 2024
      • 2023
        • Vol. 28 No. 2 December 2023
        • Vol. 28 No. 1 September 2023
        • Vol. 27 No. 4 June 2023
        • Vol. 27 No. 3 March 2023
      • 2022
        • Vol. 27 No. 2 December 2022
        • Vol. 27 No.1 September 2022
        • Vol.26 No.4 June 2022
        • Vol.26 No.3 March 2022
      • 2021
        • Vol.26 No.2 December 2021
        • Vol.26 No.1 September 2021
        • Vol.25 No.4 June 2021
        • Vol.25 No.3 March 2021
      • 2020
        • Vol.25 No.2 December 2020
        • Vol.25 No.1 September 2020
        • Vol.24 No.4 June 2020
        • Vol.24 No.3 March 2020
      • 2019
        • Vol.24 No.2 December 2019
        • Vol.24 No.1 September 2019
        • Vol.23 No.4 June 2019
        • Vol.23 No.3 March 2019
      • 2018
        • Vol.23 No.2 Dec. 2018
        • Vol.23 No.1 Sept. 2018
        • Vol.22 No.4 June 2018
        • Vol.22 No.3 March 2018
      • 2017
        • Vol.22 No.2 December 2017
        • Vol.22 No.1 September 2017
        • Vol.21 No.4 June 2017
        • Vol.21 No.3 Mar 2017
      • 2016
        • Vol.21 No.2 Dec 2016
        • Vol.21 No.1 Sep 2016
        • Vol.20 No.4 June.2016
        • Vol.20 No.3 March.2016
      • 2015
        • Vol.20 No.2 Dec.2015
        • Vol.20 No.1 Sept.2015
        • Vol.19 No.4 June.2015
        • Vol.19 No.3 Mar.2015
      • 2014
        • Vol. 19 No. 2 Dec. 2014
        • Vol. 19 No. 1 Sept. 2014
        • Vol. 18 No. 4 Jun. 2014
        • Vol. 18 No. 3 Mar. 2014
      • 2013
        • Vol. 18 No. 2 Dec. 2013
        • Vol. 18 No. 1 Sept. 2013
        • Vol. 17 No. 4 Jun. 2013
        • Vol. 17 No. 3 Mar. 2013
      • 2012
        • Vol. 17 No. 2 Dec. 2012
        • Vol. 17 No. 1 Sept. 2012
        • Vol. 16 No. 4 Jun. 2012
        • Vol. 16 No. 3 Mar. 2012
      • 2011
        • Vol. 16 No. 2 Dec. 2011
        • Vol. 16 No. 1 Sept. 2011
        • Vol. 15 No. 4 Jun. 2011
        • Vol. 15 No. 3 Mar. 2011
      • 2010
        • Vol. 15 No. 2 Dec. 2010
        • Vol. 15 No. 1 Sept. 2010
        • Vol. 14 No. 4 Jun. 2010
        • Vol. 14 No. 3 Mar. 2010
      • 2009
        • Vol. 14 No. 2 Nov. 2009
        • Vol. 14 No. 1 Aug. 2009
        • Vol. 13 No. 4 May. 2009
        • Vol. 13 No. 3 Feb. 2009
      • 2008
        • Vol. 13 No. 2 Nov. 2008
        • Vol. 13 No. 1 Aug. 2008
        • Vol. 12 No. 4 May. 2008
        • Vol. 12 No. 3 Feb. 2008
      • 2007
        • Vol. 12 No. 2 Nov. 2007
        • Vol. 12 No. 1 Aug. 2007
        • Vol. 11 No. 4 May. 2007
        • Vol. 11 No. 3 Feb. 2007
      • 2006
        • Vol. 11 No. 2 Nov. 2006
        • Vol. 11 No. 1 Aug. 2006
        • Vol. 10 No. 4 May. 2006
        • Vol. 10 No. 3 Feb. 2006
      • 2005
        • Vol. 10 No. 2 Nov. 2005
        • Vol. 10 No. 1 Aug. 2005
        • Vol. 9 No. 4 May. 2005
        • Vol. 9 No. 3 Feb. 2005
      • 2004
        • Vol. 9 No. 2 Nov. 2004
        • Vol. 9 No. 1 Aug. 2004
        • Vol. 8 No. 4 May. 2004
        • Vol. 8 No. 3 Feb. 2004
      • 2003
        • Vol. 8 No. 2 Nov. 2003
        • Vol. 8 No. 1 Aug. 2003
        • Vol. 7 No. 4 May. 2003
        • Vol. 7 No. 3 Feb. 2003
      • 2002
        • Vol. 7 No.2 Dec. 2002
        • Vol. 7 No.1 Aug. 2002
        • Vol. 6 No.4 May. 2002
        • Vol. 6 No.3 Feb. 2002
      • 2001
        • Vol.6 No.2 Nov. 2001
        • Vol.6 No.1 Aug. 2001
        • Vol.5 No.4 May. 2001
        • Vol.5 No.3 Feb. 2001
      • 2000
        • Vol. 5 No. 2 Nov. 2000
        • Vol. 5 No. 1 Aug. 2000
        • Vol. 4 No. 2 May. 2000
      • 1999
        • Vol. 4 No. 1 Nov. 1999
        • Vol. 3 No. 2 May
      • 1998
        • Vol. 3 No. 1 November 1998
        • Vol. 2 No. 2 May. 1998
      • 1997
        • Vol. 2 No. 1 November 1997
        • Vol. 1 No. 2 May. 1997
      • 1996
        • Vol. 1 No. 1 November 1996
    • Information
      • Submission Guidelines
      • Publication Process
      • Duties of Authors
      • Notice of Publication Fee Implementation
      • Submit a Work
      • JFS Premium Service
      • Electronic Newsletter
      • Contact us
    • Topics
    • Authors
    • Perspectives
      • About Perspectives
      • Podcast
      • Multi-lingual
      • Exhibits
        • When is Wakanda
      • Special Issues and Symposia
        • The Hesitant Feminist’s Guide to the Future: A Symposium
        • The Internet, Epistemological Crisis And The Realities Of The Future
        • Gaming the Futures Symposium 2016
        • Virtual Symposium on Reimagining Politics After the Election of Trump
        • War, Genocide and Futures Beyond US Hegemony
    • JFS Community of Practice
      • About Us
      • Teaching Resources
        • High School
          • Futures Studies for High School in Taiwan
        • University
          • Adults
    Journal of Futures Studies
    Home»Perspectives»Alternative Futures of Iran Nuclear Deal After the US Exit
    Perspectives

    Alternative Futures of Iran Nuclear Deal After the US Exit

    July 28, 2018Updated:January 7, 20265 Mins Read
    Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email

    On 8 May 2018 in Washington D.C. Trump announced that the US withdraws from the JCPOA. It is also known as the Iran nuclear deal that was negotiated during Obama administration. The alternative futures that might emerge can be developed in four key scenarios and we can follow the direct and indirect paths of impacts using a tool known as the Future Wheel.

     The nuclear deal with Iran cancels altogether. When every other partner of the deal declares its withdrawal, the immediate consequences are the highest level of sanctions against Iran and in particular the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). As a result, more sudden shocks will happen to the exchange rate of the local currency compared to the hard currencies including US dollar. Cost of production will rise because of inflated dollar price, decrease of liquidity for industries, and the rise in uncertainty and risks. This will only take the price of goods to even higher records and the inflation surges. In such circumstances the loans in arrears will also increase in the banking industry.

    Intensified sanctions against the IRGC by the world powers in coordination with the US to limit its economic and political clout outside of Iran, for example in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Yemen, will make it more likely that it will develop its economic activity back inside the country. This big picture is shown in Figure 1.

    Figure 1: The Futures Wheel for Cancellation of the Deal

    The EU stays despite the US withdrawal. In case that the UK, France, and Germany, do not exit the deal with Iran we can anticipate some short term consequences such as increased regional stability and security in the Middle East, more pressure by the US on the EU, improved balance of trade for Iran, increased presence of European banks in Iran economy, more foreign investment, and more tourists from Europe to visit the country. Another significant consequence will be more cooperation between Iranian and European banks. A key potential change will be that due to integration in the European banking network and increased foreign investment, Iran government can successfully replace US dollar with Euros for all international trade, projects and contracts. Moreover, more European tourists, in the light of the recent devaluation of the local currency, will afford to visit the country and stay for several weeks and as a result employment in the tourism industry will grow.

    Figure 2: The Futures Wheel for the EU stays despite the US withdrawal

    But the US will not stop further intervention.  In these circumstances the alliance of the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia will consolidate which will lead to more regional tensions and a likely new war in the region instead of the current proxy wars. Figure 2 shows the relationships in this scenario.

      A repeat of North Korea case. The US administration has declared that it only accepts a new deal in which Iran agrees to all the US conditions. In this scenario more interactions with the world financial and banking system will contribute to the upgrade of infrastructure and update of the regulatory environment. The process of adopting international financial and banking standards will bring more transparency to the financial system of the country. Increased foreign investments will renovate the technology level in all industries and sectors. It will in turn improve the productivity of the national economy and accelerates its growth rate. The positive and less uncertain climate will lead to a reverse brain drain. Figure 3 illustrates these layers of consequences.

     

    Figure 3: The Futures Wheel for a repeat of the North Korea Case

    A demilitarized Iran has to suffer a roll back of its hard-obtained influence and hard power in the region even though it can keep the soft power to some degree. A weaker government has to initiate some major political reforms. Reforms in the internal and external politics will also lead to key structural and institutional reforms in the economy.

    An overwhelming China and Russia presence. In this scenario, we assume that the EU surrenders to the US threats of increasing sanctions against Iran and punishing those who do not respect the new order imposed by Trump administration. But the two other partners of the deal namely China and Russia will prefer to stay committed. Russia provides the military shield and even considers a much bigger role in the oil and gas economy of Iran. See Figure 4 for details.

    Figure 4: The Futures Wheel for an Overwhelming China and Russia Presence

    Even though a pull out of the EU will harm the oil and gas projects it is likely that because of China’s One Belt, One Road Initiative new investments and new civil work projects be launched despite the fact that China is almost bypassing the Iran route as much as possible. Therefore, an increase of employment could be anticipated in the sector building new roads, ports, and other urban infrastructures, despite the growing unemployment in the manufacturing sector.

    About the author:

    Victor V. Motti is a Tehran based senior adviser of strategic foresight and anticipation. He is also the Director of the World Futures Studies Federation. His new book Our Anticipatory Planetary Era will be published in late 2018 in the UK.

    Related

    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
    Admin
    • Website

    Related Posts

    Urban-Rural Polarization in Canada

    February 23, 2026

    Confronting the Anti-Futures Triangle

    February 11, 2026

    Symposium: War, Genocide, and Futures Beyond US Hegemony

    January 29, 2026

    Comments are closed.

    Top Posts & Pages
    • Homepage
    • Towards an Explicit Research Methodology: Adapting Research Onion Model for Futures Studies
    • The Futures Cone Reimagined: A Framework for Critical and Plural Futures Thinking
    • Jose Rizal: Precursor of Futures Thinking in the Philippines
    • Urban-Rural Polarization in Canada
    • Iran at the Crossroads
    • Embodied Presence, COVID-19 and the Transcendence of ITopian Fear
    • Articles by Author
    • Submission Guidelines
    • Special Relativity Theory Expands the Futures Cone’s Conceptualisation of the Futures and The Pasts
    In-Press

    Spawning new futures: new pathways in futures education after COVID-19 — the Metafutureschool story

    February 16, 2026

    Article Barbara Maingon1,2 1Metafutureschool; 2 Uppsala University, Sweden Abstract The COVID-19 crisis shattered the illusion…

    Imagining the Future after Crisis: Science and Environmental Imaginaries in the Anthropocene

    February 16, 2026

    Sawali Weaving as Decolonial Design Futures Practice

    February 3, 2026

    Characters, values, aesthetics: Creative methods for water futures

    February 3, 2026

    Cultural Dimensions in Foresight and Scenario Planning: An Exploratory Study

    February 3, 2026

    Layering Interreligious Harmony: Integrating The Robin Approach and Causal Layered Analysis at the Parliament of the World’s Religions

    February 3, 2026

    The Futures Cone Reimagined: A Framework for Critical and Plural Futures Thinking

    February 3, 2026

    Envisioning the Futures of Language Education in the Era of Artificial Intelligence

    February 3, 2026

    Two Decades of the Futures Triangle (2003–2024): A Critical Review of Theory, Method and Practice

    February 3, 2026

    The River of Dharma: Visions for Transforming River–City Futures

    January 28, 2026

    The Journal of Futures Studies,

    Graduate Institute of Futures Studies

    Tamkang University

    Taipei, Taiwan 251

    Tel: 886 2-2621-5656 ext. 3001

    Fax: 886 2-2629-6440

    ISSN 1027-6084

    Tamkang University
    Graduate Institute of Futures Studies
    © 2026 ThemeSphere. Designed by ThemeSphere.

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.