In late August, President Donald Trump announced an "economic D-Day" against Iran, signalling a pivot from military engagement to relentless financial pressure. This new approach follows years of sanctions that began with the 1979 revolution and were intensified after the U.S. withdrew from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
The latest measures, under the banner of Operation Economic Fury, coordinate Treasury sanctions on Iranian financial flows with a naval blockade of Iranian ports. By targeting third‑country intermediaries still doing business with Iran, the U.S. seeks to widen the blast radius of its sanctions.
However, the economic shockwaves may go beyond the intended regime. Trade routes that support irreplaceable medicinal plants, continuous with local species used in Indigenous healing practices, run through nations such as Iraq, Turkey and even the United Kingdom. When these corridors freeze, Indigenous peoples who traditionally trade or harvest plants may face shortages that threaten their health, cultural knowledge and economic resilience.
Water rights—an essential pillar of Indigenous sovereignty—could also be strained. Many border regions depend on shared aquifers and river systems that support livestock, gardens, and spiritual practices. Sanctions that limit industrial output or cut foreign investment in water infrastructure may reduce water flow, exacerbating drought and undermining Indigenous agriculture.
In the United States, Native American reservations rely on trade networks that extend across state lines, exchanging goods such as cedar roots, sage or shellfish. U.S. sanctions and the re‑assertion of pressure on foreign partners may inadvertently disrupt these barter systems, threatening food security and the transmission of traditional ecological knowledge.
Other nations, including China and Turkey, have shown a reluctance to fully comply with U.S. sanctions, finding ways to secure Iranian goods through shadow vessels or commercial fronts. While this flexibility mitigates the immediate impact on Iran, it can deepen uncertainty for the Indigenous economies that navigate these complex trade webs.
The intention of “economic pressure” as a tool of diplomacy is clear, but the lack of a comprehensive strategy that includes indigenous perspectives means risks remain unchecked. It is crucial that U.S. policy frameworks consider the cultural, ecological, and economic ties that Indigenous peoples maintain with the lands they steward.
For Indigenous communities worldwide, the politics of international sanctions cannot be untangled from the stewardship of their sacred lands and shared waters. A more inclusive, culturally sensitive approach to sanctions could protect those on the frontlines of climate change, biodiversity loss, and trade disruption, ensuring that the quest for national security does not come at their expense.
