Maximum Pressure Campaign

"Maximum pressure" is a label most associated with U.S. policy under the first Trump administration toward Iran and North Korea, though the underlying logic—stacking economic, diplomatic, and military instruments to force a capitulation—predates the phrase. The strategy assumes that severe, compounding costs will either bring the target back to the negotiating table on terms favorable to the sanctioning power or destabilize the regime enough to alter its calculus.

On Iran, the campaign began in May 2018 when President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and reimposed secondary sanctions targeting Iran's oil exports, central bank, and shipping sector. Treasury subsequently designated the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a Foreign Terrorist Organization in April 2019. The stated goal, articulated by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in his "12 demands" speech (May 2018), was a broader successor deal covering missiles and regional proxies.

On North Korea, the term described the 2017 push for UN Security Council Resolutions 2371, 2375, and 2397, which tightened caps on petroleum imports and banned key DPRK exports, paired with the "fire and fury" rhetorical posture before the Singapore and Hanoi summits.

Critics argue maximum pressure produced limited behavioral change: Iran resumed enrichment beyond JCPOA limits after 2019, and North Korea expanded its arsenal. Proponents counter that it constrained the target's resources and preserved leverage. The approach is debated in IR literature alongside concepts of coercive diplomacy (Alexander George) and economic statecraft (David Baldwin), and raises questions about humanitarian spillover, sanctions evasion, and the role of secondary sanctions in extraterritorial enforcement. Variants of the framework have since been invoked in U.S. policy discussions on Venezuela, Russia, and Cuba.