“With the election of the reformist candidate Masoud Pezeshkian as president,” the New York Times advised dreamily, “Iran may see a softening of its absolutist foreign policy and even an opportunity for a new diplomatic opening.”
After all, among those who sought Iran’s presidency, Pezeshkian was – in the descriptions of the nation’s leading media – a “low-profile moderate” (Reuters), “reformist lawmaker” (CNN), “reformist candidate” (Associated Press), “reformist president” (Wall Street Journal), and “little-known reformist and cardiac surgeon” who pledged “more social freedoms and engagement with the West” (Washington Post).
Pezeshkian played along with that notion for a skeptical Iranian public that has been disappointed by “moderate” presidents in the past and for an all-too-eager Western punditocracy. Promising to lead “all Iranians,” he said upon his victory, “I have come… to seek lasting peace and tranquility and cooperation in the region, as well as dialogue and constructive interaction with the world.”
As poet Alexander Pope wrote in 1733, “Hope springs eternal in the human breast…” But hope is, well, just that – and those hoping Pezeshkian will spearhead a government that better serves its people at home and pursues more peace and warmer relations with the world are bound to be sorely disappointed.
The new president won a runoff against “hardliner” Saeed Jalili, suggesting to casual observers that Iranians have ushered in a new era of moderation. But Iran is no democracy and Pezeshkian’s win came only after the unelected Guardian Council allowed just six of 80 aspiring candidates to run. Moreover, the council has close ties to unelected Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who has the final say on all major decisions and who shows no signs of moderating either his own hardline anti-Western views or the regime’s increasingly brazen expansionist efforts across the region.
Besides, beyond his campaign pledges of moderation and reform at home and abroad, what do we know about Pezeshkian?
Well, he’s a long-time military and government official and “loyal servant” of Khamenei who helped impose the requirement that women wear the hijab at hospitals and universities, supported the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, denounced public protest, justified government-imposed internet blackouts, and vowed to continue the policies of his hardline predecessor, Ebrahim Raisi. While campaigning, he pronounced his allegiance to Khamenei’s policies and said he’s “melted” into his leadership.
As for pursuing peace in the region, the newly-elected president reaffirmed the anti-Israeli efforts of Iran and the terrorist proxies in its “axis of resistance,” calling the Jewish state an “illegitimate Zionist regime.”
Nor would Pezeshkian be the first “moderate” Iranian president to disappoint those hoping for real change in Tehran.
Remember Hassan Rouhani, who served two terms starting in 2013 and who promised not only a better economy but fewer limits on cultural activities, more engagement for women in public life, and respect for the rights of citizens? When a fuel price hike in November of 2019 ignited protests across the country, he spearheaded a “brutal [government] crackdown” that led to hundreds of deaths and thousands of arrests and which was accompanied by “an unprecedented Internet blackout.”
Or remember Muhammad Khatami, who served two terms starting in the late 1990s and who came with an “outspoken commitment to civil society, social justice, the rule of law and expanded freedom?” On his watch, the regime banned dozens of newspapers, confiscated satellite dishes, and increased public executions and the stoning of women. Legally, women remained second-class citizens.
Notwithstanding President Biden’s efforts to ease U.S.-Iranian tensions and revive the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, the administration seems to view Iran’s election with refreshingly clear eyes. “We have no expectation these elections will lead to fundamental change in Iran’s direction or more respect for the human rights of its citizens,” a State Department spokesperson told CNN, noting that the election itself was “not free or fair.”
Interestingly, despite the hopeful spin it put on Pezeshkian’s election, the New York Times seems to understand the same thing. After suggesting Pezeshkian’s ascension could presage a “softening” of Iran’s foreign policy and “an opportunity for a new diplomatic opening,” the Times acknowledged, “Most of the Iranian president’s powers are confined to domestic issues. It is Mr. Khamenei, as the country’s highest political and religious official, who makes all of the major policy decisions, particularly in foreign affairs and Iran’s nuclear program.” The paper also volunteered that the IRGC “oversees all of Iran’s military matters” and is “closely aligned” with the Supreme Leader.
Yes, hope really does spring eternal among the West’s intelligentsia, even when the evidence provides no reason for it.
About the Author: Lawrence J. Haas
Lawrence J. Haas is a senior fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council and the author of, most recently, The Kennedys in the World: How Jack, Bobby, and Ted Remade America’s Empire (Potomac Books).
