Unity Very Far Very Near

Unity is very far, very close.

Unity is very far, very close; anyone in some way breaks our hearts, a stranger separates, a stranger if breaks, there is no word.

Ask a friend why it breaks.

These verses were recited by Masoud Pezeshkian in defense of his cabinet as a response to critics.

A poem that, more than having the color of complaint or argument, had a sense of wonder and questioning within itself; as if the president not only wanted to ask some of his supporters why they had joined the critics’ side, but also went beyond to show that such an event is not understandable or imaginable to him.

But why and how some of Pezeshkian’s supporters have joined the critics’ side so quickly to the extent that they speak against the entirety of the cabinet, and why and how Pezeshkian has managed to turn some of his supporters into critics in this short period, as some sit beside, some turn to criticism, and some take on a silence filled with complaint.

It seems that the root of this issue lies in a different understanding that physicians have from politics. Although it seeks a kind of national convergence and speaks of Iran for all Iranians, when faced with harsh realities and conventional mindsets in action, it encounters challenges and reactions. In the not-so-distant future, his social capital may erode.

Analyzing this different situation at two levels of discourse and action, stating and implementing mindsets and realities, or any other formulation that can be applied, can be considered as the complexities of politics. Matters may seem very easy on the surface or at the level of mindset or speech, but in the field of action, they are very difficult and challenging.

It seems that politics, with all the bitterness, violence, and hardships it often carries, shares a common point with gentle love, which initially appears easy but becomes very challenging as difficulties arise. Many frustrations, halts, breaks, and fatigue on the path of politics, just like love, are mostly due to this initial ease and the onset of difficulties in the continuation of the work. From this perspective, among various patterns of change, whether revolution, reforms, or upheaval, created words by Hamidreza Jalaeipour, there is not much difference except that the dimensions of difficulties, frustrations, and consequences in revolution, upheaval, and reforms are respectively more extensive.

Physicians and their audience, whether supporters or opponents, are now engaged in the same duality of initial simplifications and increasing difficulties.

Physicians, in their perception of the political field, emphasize the necessity of national unity and reconciliation, reduction of internal conflicts and gaps, and strengthening of bonds. They believe that based on what they perceive as justice and fairness, this is achievable.

It seems that he considers this issue so natural and obvious in his mindset that he cannot imagine when the matter goes beyond mere words and reaches the field of action, various political and social forces come into conflict with it. These forces are not just the beneficiaries and exploiters of the current situation, but also many of the underprivileged, voiceless, marginalized, deprived, and critics who see themselves as representatives and challengers of their discourse and have the potential to rise up to criticize and even oppose him.

When physicians say that a stranger breaks no ground, it indicates that they are so realistic in the political arena that they know opposing forces and opponents of him and the exploiters of the scene and the pure actors will rise up in opposition and resistance to him, and such an event has been predictable for him.

The issue and question that perplexes physicians is why a friend breaks ground.

Here is where the difficulties of harmony show themselves, as following reality pulls the curtain from the window of the mindset.

Bringing everyone together and paying attention to all marginalized, minority, and voiceless forces is as easy during the election season as it is difficult for them to gain votes in establishing a government.

Just like ice melting in the heat of July and a tree left bare by the autumn wind, forces that have survived by their right, as described by physicians, continue to struggle with real obstacles.

These obstacles are generated by this detention, and the government and the president can somewhat moderate it, but it is clear that this moderation does not align with the electoral demands, desires, and slogans.

Therefore, supporters may find it hopeful to criticize or remain inactive, and they do not feel a difference between the new government and the old approach.

On the other hand, the cabinet also finds a mosaic-like composition in which different, diverse, and sometimes conflicting pieces are present, arranging them next to each other and presenting a structure of consensus from their outcome is very complex and sometimes unattainable.

Nevertheless, this very difficult and perhaps impossible mission is a necessary condition for any change in the current situation.

In fact, physicians have a model in mind in which the background and the result, or the input and output, are practically the same.

He sees national reconciliation as contingent on changing the current situation, yet his own situation is in conflict with national reconciliation.

Both opponents who do not accept it and supporters who demand more than what is seen in practice.

In this regard, perhaps the confrontation of physicians with their hardline opponents is simpler.

Because they have enjoyed many special privileges in the process of purifying the system, standing up to them is credible for the government. And if there is a challenge and resistance, which certainly exists, this challenge leads to more cohesion among supporters and public opinion mobilization, and there is not much cause for concern.

The current situation of physicians and his national reconciliation slogan can be likened to the initial situation of Hassan Rouhani in pursuing the JCPOA, where despite opponents and skeptics constantly criticizing him, in practice they provided credibility and legitimacy for Rouhani and his government.

Now, national reconciliation as the flagship project of the physicians to bring conflicting and diverse forces to agreement and understanding can be considered an internal JCPOA, where radical opponents’ attacks on it increase the government’s position and status.

Even in yesterday’s parliamentary session, this passivity and entrapment of prominent radical opponents were evident. They remained silent in the face of the slogan of unity and reliance on physicians regarding the seventh plan and general policies of the system. What can they say and which points will they oppose him?

Meanwhile, the disappointment of supporters in achieving their demands under this government, especially for ethnic and religious minorities, has discredited the government and will weaken and limit its social base, which was already limited and fragile in the elections.

Therefore, it seems that what should have more importance and priority for physicians and their discourse is not just gaining the trust of the parliament for ministers, which is also necessary, but maintaining the trust of the voters and presenting a suitable image in line with the slogan of Iran for all Iranians from the cabinet and the government’s approach at the societal level.

It is the same difficult yet common mission that physicians and their various supporters have ahead of them, like a romantic story that starts with an easy and romantic look but continues with difficulties, narrow paths, and sometimes tragedies.