The recent election of Masoud Pezeshkian as Iran’s second reformist president marks a significant shift in the country’s political landscape. Due to the accidental death of his conservative predecessor Ebrahim Raisi in a helicopter crash, early elections were prompted. Pezeshkian’s victory, with 54.8% of the vote in a runoff against hardliner Saeed Jalili, signals a potential change in both domestic and international policies. However, the election was marked by low voter turnout and widespread public apathy, which weakens Pezeshkian’s mandate.
Pezeshkian has made it clear that he intends to pursue a more diplomatic approach with the West, particularly the United States, in an effort to lift the crippling sanctions that have stifled Iran’s economy. Unlike his predecessor, Pezeshkian is open to engaging with the U. S. and is serious about negotiating a deal that could revive the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). This indicates a significant shift towards diplomacy, as Pezeshkian positions his government as a continuation of President Rouhani’s administration, which successfully negotiated the original nuclear deal.
However, the road to lifting sanctions is fraught with challenges. The success of these negotiations will depend not only on Pezeshkian’s efforts but also on the broader diplomatic process and the willingness of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to approve any proposed deal. While Khamenei previously permitted negotiations in 2021 that nearly resulted in an agreement, it remains to be seen whether he will support Pezeshkian’s efforts to re-engage with the West.
Above all, the outcome of the upcoming U.S. presidential election will have a significant impact on the U.S.-Iran relations. If former President Donald Trump, who unilaterally withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal in 2018, wins the election, it is unlikely that his administration will pursue a revival of the JCPOA. On the other hand, President Joe Biden has made efforts to restore the deal, holding six rounds of negotiations with Iran in Austria few months after coming to the power. However, these talks have so far been unsuccessful, as Iran seeks maximum sanctions relief while offering minimal concessions in return.
Pezeshkian’s commitment to serious negotiations with the U.S. aims to create a more favourable environment for diplomatic engagement. However, the success of these efforts will depend on the willingness of the U.S. administration to re-enter the deal and the broader geopolitical dynamics that influence U.S.-Iran relations. Pezeshkian’s administration will have to carefully navigate these external factors to achieve meaningful progress in lifting sanctions and improving Iran’s economy.
Pezeshkian’s campaign further promised easing social restrictions, particularly those affecting women’s rights. He has openly called for greater social freedoms, equal rights for women, and freedom of expression. He was a vocal critic of the government’s response to the Woman, Life, and Freedom movement following the death of Jina Mahsa Amini in 2022, which sparked widespread protests against the compulsory hijab law. While the laws are passed by the Parliament, their implementation falls under the government’s jurisdiction, giving Pezeshkian the ability to influence how these laws are enforced. He also pledged to abolish the morality police, marking a significant departure from the Raisi policies.
One of the greatest domestic challenges facing Pezeshkian is improving Iran’s stagnant economy, which has been throttled by years of sanctions imposed primarily by the United States. For him, the membership in the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) is crucial for addressing economic woes and improving international relations. He argues that overcoming unjust sanctions and improving Iran’s position in international trade are necessary steps for economic recovery.
In terms of foreign policy, he plans to enhance relations with neighboring countries, particularly Arab nations. He has lauded the rapprochement initiative with Saudi Arabia undertaken by Raisi and views it as a vital step towards regional stability and economic collaboration. Pezeshkian intends to continue and deepen these diplomatic efforts, emphasizing mutual benefits and security cooperation.
In addition, his perspective on Iran’s involvement with the proxy network in the Middle East, known as the ‘Axis of Resistance’, suggests a more cautious approach. While recognizing the strategic importance of these alliances, he advocates for diplomacy and support for oppressed populations, aligning with Iran’s principles but potentially signalling a shift from more aggressive postures. He focuses on strategic planning to combat the Zionist regime as a central element of Iran’s foreign policy, envisioning dedicated working groups to address the Palestine issue and promote a regional and Islamic approach to resolving it.
Pezeshkian’s views on China reveal a nuanced understanding of the challenges and opportunities within this bilateral relationship. Acknowledging China as a critical economic partner, particularly during periods of heightened Western sanctions, he has expressed concerns about the unequal benefits this partnership has yielded. He criticized the way China has exploited Iran’s international isolation for disproportionate advantage, often neglecting reciprocal commitments especially in the 25-year cooperation accord.
He further intends to maintain the warm relations with Russia and emphasized the significance of cooperation within various regional and international frameworks, including the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, BRICS, and the Eurasian Economic Union. He highlighted that the comprehensive cooperation agreement between Tehran and Moscow had been finalized, with Iran prepared to sign it during the upcoming BRICS summit. His views align with the Rouhani administration’s balanced foreign policy approach, engaging with East and West, rather than the strong pro-China and pro-Russia orientation of the Raisi government. He also advocates against a single-option approach.
In Iran’s theocratic system, the president’s power is limited compared to that of the supreme leader. Despite this, the president can influence the domestic agenda, choose cabinet members, and have some sway in foreign policy. Pezeshkian’s loyalty to the supreme leader means that he cannot pursue reforms that challenge the vision, goals, and values of the Islamic Revolution. The ultimate authority rests with Khamenei, who has the final say on all major policy decisions.
It is notable that reformists in Iran do not aim to undermine the country’s governance system and generally accept the core principles of the Islamic Republic. They endorse the political authority of the clerical class and advocate for an Islamic society. However, they often oppose the imposition of Islamic principles through coercion, preferring instead an open society that allows for freedom of expression and other social freedoms.
Even in the past, a reformist President has brought a little to no practical reforms in Iran. Mohammad Khatami served as Iran’s first Reformist President from 1997 to 2005. Throughout his presidency, he introduced a new political lexicon centered on reform, promoting concepts such as “civil society,” “dialogue of civilizations,” and “Islamic democracy.” Despite his significant popular support, he remained steadfast in his loyalty to Supreme Leader and the Islamic political system established in 1979.
History shows that ideological dictatorships rarely relinquish power voluntarily, and Iran has been no exception. Although Khatami eloquently advocated for reform and democracy, his presidency yielded minimal concrete achievements in these areas. Instead of embodying reform, Khatami was involved in some of the regime’s most severe human rights abuses. Moreover, during his tenure, the leadership of the Islamic Republic maintained strict control over the press and society.
For Pezeshkian, it was easier to advocate for the social reforms and women rights from outside of power. But in reality, one’s hands become tied and locked when he comes into the power especially in a theocratic state like Iran. Attempting to enact changes could face resistance from conservative parliamentarians and opposition from the Supreme Leader. The low voter turnout in elections reflects widespread disillusionment with the government, potentially leaving those who voted for change disappointed if promises were merely electoral rhetoric.
Pezeshkian’s success in achieving his goals will depend on his ability to navigate the complex political landscape of Iran. He must balance the expectations of his voters, who demand social and economic reforms, with the demands of the clerical establishment, which seeks to maintain the principles of the Islamic Republic. This delicate balancing act will determine the success of his presidency and the future direction of Iran.