Iran’s president, Masoud Pezeshkian, has recently made a bold declaration: Tehran can no longer serve as the country’s capital. At the core of his argument is a deepening water crisis that has drained the city’s reservoirs to perilous lows.
Tehran depends on several major dams whose capacity has dropped dramatically — for instance, the Amir Kabir reservoir stands at just a fraction of its usable volume.
Long-term drought, falling rainfall, and excessive groundwater extraction have combined to weaken Tehran’s water security to the point where supplying the city is becoming economically unviable.
Tehran’s Ground Is Sinking
Water alone is not the only problem. Parts of Tehran are physically sinking — a phenomenon known as subsidence — driven largely by overpumping of groundwater.
In some areas, the land is reportedly sinking by as much as 30 centimeters each year. This not only damages infrastructure, but also makes the long-term habitability of the city more precarious.
Overpopulation, Pollution, and Congestion
Tehran has swelled into a megacity burdened by overcrowding, heavy traffic, and severe air pollution. These issues have long plagued urban planners, but they now reinforce the argument that Tehran is no longer sustainable as the political and administrative heart of Iran.
With the city consuming an enormous share of national water resources and struggling under the weight of its own population, its future viability is being questioned.
Strategic Risks
Another piece of the puzzle is Tehran’s geographical vulnerability. Located in a seismically active zone, the city sits near fault lines, posing a serious risk in the event of a major quake.
Coupled with the environmental stress of mismanaged resources and a rapidly shifting climate, these risks make a compelling case for relocating the capital.
The New Proposed Capital: Makran
The proposed site for Iran’s new capital lies in the Makran region, on the southern coast along the Gulf of Oman.
This area offers several strategic advantages: coastal access, which could boost trade; a lower risk of severe earthquakes compared to Tehran; and, potentially, more sustainable resource management thanks to its proximity to the sea.
President Pezeshkian frames the relocation not only as an environmental necessity but also as an economic opportunity.
By shifting the political and economic center toward this less developed region, Iran might stimulate new growth, reduce the strain on Tehran, and reorient development toward its southern coast.
Trade-offs and Challenges
Moving a capital is never easy, and critics are already voicing concerns. The Makran region is underdeveloped, and building a full-fledged seat of government there would demand vast resources.
Some also warn about environmental fragility: while the coast offers water access, it may also be exposed to climate risks like rising temperatures and variable rainfall. Moreover, the projected costs are enormous — possibly reaching tens of billions of dollars.
An Inevitable Decision
Despite the scale of the task, Iran’s leadership frames the move not as a choice but as an imperative. Pezeshkian has said that with Tehran’s water system under extreme stress, continuing to rely on it is no longer feasible.
He emphasizes that this is not a temporary fix but a long-term strategy to reshape Iran’s development along more sustainable lines.
A Move Forced by Crisis
Iran’s push to relocate its capital reflects a broader reckoning with environmental, demographic, and infrastructural challenges. Tehran, once the unassailable heart of political and economic life, now struggles under the weight of drought, sinking land, overcrowding, and pollution.
By looking toward Makran, Iranian leaders are betting on a future where growth is more balanced, risks are redistributed, and sustainability is woven into the very foundation of governance.
Whether that vision becomes reality will depend on political will, financial capacity, and the ability to manage new ecological risks — but for now, the move seems driven by necessity more than ambition.
