The Unresolved Consensus of Pezeshkian Under the Blade of Power and Crisis
The Unresolved Consensus of Pezeshkian Under the Blade of Power and Crisis
According to IranGate News Agency, the first year of Masoud Pezeshkian’s presidency in Iran was accompanied by unprecedented events and rapid internal and external developments. A year that many consider not the beginning of a managerial term but a tough and breath-taking test for a president who entered the arena of power with the slogan of national consensus but soon faced the complex realities of Iran’s governance structure.
One year has passed since Masoud Pezeshkian’s presidency.
The whirlwind of events for Mr. Pezeshkian in the past year was so intense that he might not have even seen the first anniversary of his presidency.
Mr. Pezeshkian stated that during the twelve-day war, Israel intended to assassinate him.
Simultaneously with the anniversary of his inauguration, in a meeting with political and social activists in Zanjan, he described his management period as follows: ‘We are in a bad situation; since the day we came, it’s been raining disasters non-stop, and just when we want to reach a shore, another one comes.’
Masoud Pezeshkian won the second round of the presidential election on July 6, 2024, and officially took executive power on August 1.
However, the first anniversary of his victory was overshadowed by news related to the ceasefire or the halt of the war between Iran and Israel and did not receive much attention in the media.
Due to the political atmosphere prevailing in Iran, perhaps few remembered the anniversary of his victory. At that time, most attention and speculation were focused on the prolonged absence of the leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Until finally, on the night of Ashura, he appeared in a mourning ceremony, putting an end to the speculations.
Apart from the wartime conditions in Iran, it is not an exaggeration to say that Masoud Pezeshkian’s story is unprecedented in the history of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Some call him the unluckiest president after the revolution and the government without a term. According to Iranian media, a government that died young very soon and before reaching a hundred days, and now has reached a point where his opponents wish for his martyrdom.
Abbas Abdi, one of Mr. Pezeshkian’s electoral supporters, believes the president only has until the end of the year for reforms and has only managed to help sustain the existing official policies for another year.
With one year passed since Masoud Pezeshkian’s presidency, most opponents and supporters agree that he was the best choice for the system, and if it weren’t for Ali Khamenei’s approval and support, his name wouldn’t have come out of the ballot box.
Mr. Pezeshkian, at a significant historical juncture in the Islamic Republic of Iran, became the connecting link between some reformists and conservatives with the slogan of consensus to gather them at one table.
Analysts believe that by dividing positions among groups and individuals loyal to the government, he not only turned some of his critics, especially reformists, into supporters but also made them partners in the government’s inefficiencies or the same imbalances in terms of poor economic and financial conditions, water, electricity, gas, gasoline shortages, and more.
With one year passed since the beginning of Masoud Pezeshkian’s presidency, the theoretical hypotheses and analyses of the election period have been set aside, and now, based on his stances, decisions, and performance, a clearer picture of his record can be drawn and judged.
The Omen That Went Bad
Masoud Pezeshkian is also known as the president who reads Nahj al-Balagha, someone who frequently referred to Nahj al-Balagha and the first Imam of the Shia during the election days and the first months of his tenure, although he gradually distanced himself from this rhetoric.
A review of Masoud Pezeshkian’s first year in office shows that evaluations of his performance encompass a wide range, from those who dubbed him the Iranian Gorbachev to critics who used the term ‘deceptive government.’
Supporters of Mr. Pezeshkian believed he was a surgeon with a knife in hand and had the ability to, with the system’s support, launch a new plan and surgically reform the structure of domestic and foreign policy and monopolization in the power structure and bring the train of the Islamic Revolution back on track.
He formed a cabinet with the slogan of consensus, a cabinet that, according to his supporters, was an effort for convergence of different factions and, as some observers put it, resembled a joint-stock company of parties and groups. Despite the support of reformists and moderate currents during the election, some key positions in his government were given to conservative figures.
His prescription for the country’s multiple crises is consensus. That’s why he wanted to solve the problems with consensus on gasoline, consensus on filtering, consensus on hijab and chastity, consensus on currency, consensus on FATF, consensus to resolve economic imbalances, and more.
During this period, he managed to temporarily delay the implementation of the hijab and chastity law with the decision of the Supreme National Security Council. In the field of filtering, despite many twists and turns, only WhatsApp and Google Play were unblocked, and the status of other platforms remains unclear. In May 2025, the FATF law also passed the Expediency Discernment Council.
Beyond these matters, Pezeshkian faces locks and closed doors that seem to have reduced his ability to maneuver executively.
His decisions and performance in recent months show that in facing some of these obstacles, he practically does not operate with open hands, and his powers in some areas are severely limited. Some analysts believe he is practically checkmated against unaccountable structures and parallel institutions.
Masoud Pezeshkian, at a Student Day ceremony among students at Sharif University, said that whatever we want to touch, they say don’t touch this. We have problems in electricity, problems in water, problems in gas, oil, gasoline, money—everything is full of problems. Wherever we touch, it hurts somewhere.
So far, with a quarter of Mr. Pezeshkian’s four-year presidency passed, it seems his entry into Pasteur has not been auspicious, and out of the three hundred and sixty-five days that have passed, probably few days have been pleasant for him.
From water and electricity shortages and air pollution to chronic economic problems and external pressures, these factors do not paint a bright outlook for stability and breakthroughs during his term.
The performance and events of the past year are reminiscent of his first day entering the presidency, a day when Mr. Pezeshkian, upon arrival at a ceremony broadcast live on television, did an istikhara with the Quran: ‘Enter the fire among the communities of jinn and men that have gone before you.’
According to people like Saeed Laylaz, an economist and figure close to reformists, Masoud Pezeshkian was approved to resolve economic imbalances and the super-crisis of public despair, but upon entering Pasteur, it became clear that not only could he not endure this heavy mission, but he also could not maintain even close figures like Mohammad Javad Zarif in negotiations with the pillars of power.
From the very first months, he faced a decline in supporters and close associates.
Pezeshkian and His Troubles
Masoud Pezeshkian’s performance cannot be assessed without considering the severe events that fell like an avalanche on his government.
In the past year, political and social turmoil was not only challenging but also, some observers believe, that Masoud Pezeshkian remained a symbol of incomplete transformation—a change that began but could not deepen and turn into a stable structure. He entered the arena with promises of consensus and hope, but ultimately, many of those promises remained mere slogans.
On the other hand, some analysts call this period Iran’s political laboratory, where it was tested whether a new structure could be created by combining reformists and conservatives.
The results showed that there is a deep gap between consensus and real impact. It was agreed, it was divided, but no serious movement occurred.
In conclusion, Masoud Pezeshkian intended to create tangible changes with the slogan of consensus at the start of his presidency, but ultimately found himself caught in the middle of political constraints. Neither did he find the opportunity to reform the structure, nor could he maintain sustainable support—a lesson that is both instructive and cautionary.