Iran has elected Masoud Pezeshkian as president, an unexpected victory for the country's reform camp amid deep social discontent, economic hardship and a regional war.
According to local authorities, Pezeshkian received 16.3 million votes, with voter turnout at 49.8 percent. His rival Saeed Jalili, a former nuclear negotiator for the hardline right-wing movement, received 13.5 million votes.
Pezeshkian, 69, managed to defeat several rivals, all of whom were staunchly conservative, although many analysts called him a “token reformer” and a “second-tier candidate” within the low-profile pool of candidates.
He is probably the most moderate of the candidates. From 1997 to 2005, he served as Minister of Health under Iran's last reformist president, Mohammad Khatami. He was supported by Khatami, together with other reformist politicians.
Pezeshkian has also been a member of parliament since 2008, a member of the Islamic Consultative Assembly and deputy speaker of parliament. He desires to ease social restrictions resembling Iran's strict hijab law and improve relations with the West, which could include resuming nuclear talks with world powers.
Fundamental changes unlikely?
The recent Iranian president can have to cope with whoever takes over the White House in November, increasing the risks for each Tehran and Washington, in addition to the Middle East as an entire, as Iran comes closer than ever to the flexibility to supply nuclear bombs and continues to support proxy groups fighting Israel.
The Iranian president has a specific amount of influence on foreign policy and military issues and is the country's public ambassador. But the ability and most vital decisions in Iran ultimately lie with the supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, and never with elected institutions resembling the Revolutionary Guard.
“While the election could lead to a shift in the priorities, tone and tactics of Iran's domestic and foreign policy, a fundamental change in the status quo is unlikely,” Sina Toossi, a senior non-resident fellow on the Center for International Policy, told CNBC.
“The basic principles that guide Iran's strategic decisions, particularly with regard to the United States and Israel, are firmly anchored in the broader framework set by the Supreme Leader and influential bodies such as the Revolutionary Guard,” he said.
Pezeshkian's victory “could open up opportunities for renewed diplomatic relations and somewhat more progressive domestic policies. However,” Toossi said, “even with a reform-minded president, the extent of change would be limited by the overarching power structures and strategic imperatives that shape Iran's political landscape. Therefore, any real change would likely be gradual and incremental rather than transformative.”
The elections in Iran took place after the unexpected death of former President Ebrahim Raisi in a helicopter crash in May.
The elections in Iran are not considered free or fair, since the country's ultra-conservative Guardian Council ultimately decides who’s allowed to face for election. Around 61 million eligible voters in Iran were capable of vote, but many announced a boycott because voters were left with no real alternative.
The council approved only six presidential candidates from an inventory of 80, and all female candidates were disqualified. Of the six approved candidates, five were hardline conservatives and three were sanctioned by Western governments.
image credit : www.cnbc.com