How Iran, Suffering Under Sanctions, Diversified Its Economy 8%

By Patricia Cohen0% Robert Gebeloff0%

4/13/2026, 9:02:15 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 7 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Hasty Generalization, and Pessimism Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 20.8% saturation with 284 hits. Analysis detected 579 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,366 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 24.7% and a BS Rank of 8% (20,167 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 92.10% of the article peer group.

For nearly 50 years, Iran has been treated as an outlaw, earning a spot as one of the most heavily sanctioned countries in the world for its nuclear and weapons programs, its support for terrorism, its human rights abuses and more. 
But despite persistent efforts by the United States, the European Union, Britain and the United Nations Security Council to choke off Iran’s international trade and freeze assets, the country has managed to keep doing business with much of the world, a New York Times analysis shows. 
The nation has exchanged goods with more than 170 nations since 2019, even as international restrictions have fueled inflation, soaring unemployment and civil unrest. 
Overall trade is down, but the country has imported much needed food, electronics and auto parts while it sells oil, gas, construction materials, specialty foods and thousands of other products. 
Sanctions hobbled Iran’s economy, but they have not broken its back. 
“The expectation is that sanctions have isolated Iran from global trade but that is not entirely the case,” said Esfandyar Batmanghelidj, chief executive of the Bourse & Bazaar Foundation, a research organization based in London. 
“Iran’s trade has grown more complex over time in response to sanctions.” 
The war with the United States and Israel has conspicuously shifted the country’s prospects. 
Iran’s blockade of shipping traffic in the Strait of Hormuz has interfered with its own ability to access critical goods and conduct trade. 
Israeli and American missiles have pounded the country, destroying infrastructure including electricity facilities, transportation, factories, military bases and schools. 
The possibility of more devastating damage looms if a two-week cease-fire does not hold. 
Yet trade data over the past 30 years may offer clues about the shape-shifting power of the Islamic Republic’s 94-million-person economy. 
Its ability to adapt under the strain of sanctions and other disruptions could signal how it would operate going forward. 
China has been Iran’s savior 
Precise trade figures are difficult to obtain. 
Most analysts distrust official government statistics, and Iran’s partners often omit or understate the value of commodity transactions. 
Even so, what’s clear is that China has stepped up as Iran’s primary trading partner, accounting for a steadily growing share of Iran’s imports and exports over the past two decades. 
During the pandemic, Beijing vowed to invest $400 billion in the country in the coming decades in exchange for a steady supply of oil. 
In 2024, it purchased 90 percent of Iran’s oil exports, according to the International Energy Agency. 
China also accounted for roughly a quarter of Iran’s non-oil exports from 2019 to 2024, according to data compiled by Harvard University’s Atlas of Economic Complexity, purchasing billions of dollars of Iranian chemicals and metals. 
Payments are made in renminbi, China’s currency, avoiding the use of dollars and the need to involve American banks, which are often the primary entities used to help enforce sanctions violations. 
China, in return, appears to provide nearly 30 percent of the commodities that Iran imports, selling everything from furniture to sunflower seeds. 
There is another crucial layer of trade between the nations not recorded in official statistics. 
Both countries have engaged in a complicated barter system that involves secret financing channels. 
Iran ships oil to China and in return, Chinese state-backed construction companies have built airports and other infrastructure. 
This hidden system of trade extends elsewhere in the world, experts said, in part to avoid running afoul of sanctions. 
The shadow activity involves shell companies and frontmen that mask the identity of the actual buyers, the use of non-Iranian banks and diversions through other countries that are used to conceal the fact that Iran is involved. 
Iran is no longer purely reliant on oil 
Twenty years ago, petroleum accounted for nearly 80 percent of Iran’s export ledger, but that figure shrunk over time as Iran’s economy diversified. 
The shift began accelerating when the United States, under President Barack Obama, imposed a new round of harsh sanctions that forced Iran into a tailspin. 
“The Iranian economy didn’t start really struggling until about 2012,” Mr. 
Batmanghelidj said. 
“The rise in trade from 2000-2012 was associated with a rise in living standards and the growth of Iran’s middle class.” 
The sanctions primarily targeted Iran’s oil trade and discouraged Western companies from doing business with Iranian counterparts. 
That pushed Iran to develop more trade in other areas, and with new partners, a pattern that is continuing, trade data shows. 
Some of the sanctions were lifted after the Iran-U.S. nuclear deal in 2015. 
But since 2019, when President Trump reimposed sanctions against companies doing business with Iran, the pattern resumed. 
During that time, Iran has exported more than $120 billion in non-petroleum commodities, the Harvard data shows  a figure roughly on par with the total exports of Costa Rica, Ecuador or Croatia. 
Iran is helped by its access to several trade corridors, both overland and by water. 
It borders seven countries, including Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and Turkey and has Caspian seaports in addition to occupying one side of the Hormuz strait that has been a central feature of the current war. 
Both Turkey and Iraq are key customers of Iranian goods. 
With China, these three nations have accounted for more than half of Iran’s non-oil export trade since 2019. 
Kuwait is a major buyer of Iranian cement and sheep. 
Bulgaria, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan import large quantities of packaging material. 
Most of the imported saffron in Spain comes from Iran. 
Iran makes more of what it needs, but it’s unclear to what extent 
One response to sanctions over the years has been to produce more things at home. 
The country has developed an extensive manufacturing sector that produces automobiles, steel, iron, electronics and pharmaceuticals, as well as a thriving business in food products. 
“They’ve made a concerted effort at being self-reliant,” said Kislaya Prasad, academic director of the Center for Global Business at the University of Maryland. 
Sanctions have made it much more difficult for Iran to import materials it needs for production like machinery and replacement parts. 
European countries used to account for more than half of reported Iranian imports in the mid-1990s. 
Today, they make up less than 20 percent. 
The United Arab Emirates provides electronics; India ships large quantities of rice; and Brazil sells Iran soybeans and maize. 
In several ways, American efforts to block imports to Iran have been more damaging than efforts to curb Iran’s oil exports, the biggest single source of its trade revenue, Mr. 
Batmanghelidj of the Bourse & Bazaar Foundation said. 
He added that the diversification of Iran’s economy was not the result of government policies. 
“Companies managed to find export opportunities,” he said. 
Measuring the magnitude of trade with Iran’s partners, though, involves some guesswork. 
“Many assume that trade data should be highly accurate because shipments are recorded at ports of export and import, and because governments have strong incentives to monitor trade for taxation and regulatory purposes,” said Sebastian Bustos, a research fellow at Harvard who helped develop the atlas project. 
“While these controls do exist, the reality is that global trade data remain incomplete and poor in quality,” he added. 
“This problem is worse for developing countries, and even more in countries facing sanctions.” 
What’s next? 
If the Strait of Hormuz remains paralyzed and fighting escalates, especially after negotiations this weekend between fell apart, Iran’s postwar economy could take years or possibly decades to recover. 
Even if a peace deal eventually comes together, rebuilding the economy will take time given the extensive damage that has already been done to housing, schools, factories, research universities, transportation hubs and more. 
Tehran has been insisting on an end to sanctions as part of any deal. 
But if the sanctions continue, the process of repairing the damage while also providing essential goods and services will be longer and more painful. 
And it’s unclear the extent to which Iran has further isolated itself by attacking some of its regional trade partners during the conflict. 
But while the United States and others can squeeze Iran’s economy, what Tehran has demonstrated with its blockage of the Strait of Hormuz, is that it, too, can inflict economic damage that reverberates across the globe. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 1.8%Patricia Cohen: 1.6%The New York Times: 1.7%Confirmation Bias1.8%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.8%The New York Times: 2.1%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 1.3%The New York Times: 0.6%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.5%The New York Times: 0.6%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 1.1%The New York Times: 2.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 20.8%Patricia Cohen: 10.6%The New York Times: 5.8%Framing Effect20.8%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 1.2%The New York Times: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.2%The New York Times: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 1.5%Patricia Cohen: 1.4%The New York Times: 2.7%Optimism Bias1.5%This article: 4.9%Patricia Cohen: 4.1%The New York Times: 3.5%Pessimism Bias4.9%This article: 6.8%Patricia Cohen: 8.2%The New York Times: 9.4%Negativity Bias6.8%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 1.3%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 1.1%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.1%The New York Times: 0.9%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 1.1%The New York Times: 1.1%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 1.1%The New York Times: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.9%The New York Times: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 4.8%The New York Times: 4.0%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 1.2%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 1.0%The New York Times: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.1%Patricia Cohen: 3.9%The New York Times: 2.7%Hasty Generalization5.1%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.8%The New York Times: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.2%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 2.9%The New York Times: 3.4%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.4%The New York Times: 0.4%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 1.6%Patricia Cohen: 7.2%The New York Times: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)1.6%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.5%The New York Times: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 1.0%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 8.9%The New York Times: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 2.1%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 4.8%The New York Times: 3.8%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.5%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Patricia Cohen: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

1366 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers17%attributed speech1,129writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 46 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageEsfandyar Batmanghelidj • 35 words • 0.0% coverageEsfandyar Batmanghelidj • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageEsfandyar Batmanghelidj • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageEsfandyar Batmanghelidj • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageKislaya Prasad • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageEsfandyar Batmanghelidj • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageEsfandyar Batmanghelidj • 15 words • 0.0% coverageEsfandyar Batmanghelidj • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageSebastian Bustos • 47 words • 0.0% coverageSebastian Bustos • 20 words • 0.0% coverageSebastian Bustos • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverage
0%flagged-word coverage
132 attributed words56% of attributed speech48% writer coverage

No manipulation-pattern hits were found in this speaker's attributed words or the writer's voice.

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.