Iran International
President Massoud Pezeshkian’s call for “unity” and “national reconciliation” has collided with Iran’s power structure, becoming a one-way street in which concessions flow to hardliners while the president gains little in return.
Since taking office, Pezeshkian has softened his language, accommodated rivals in key appointments, and defended compromise as the price of stability.
Hardliners, however, have treated reconciliation not as mutual restraint but as opportunity—using it to settle scores, reclaim positions, and advance policies that run directly against his campaign pledges.
That imbalance was underscored last week by reformist daily Sharq, which warned that Pezeshkian’s conciliatory posture had become “a one-way road" for his political rivals.
“In private, hardline MPs admit fuel prices must rise; in public, they posture as defenders of the poor,” the paper wrote, adding that critics who decry internet filtering or strict hijab enforcement often exploit the same issues for political gain.
Taking advantage
Pezeshkian’s invocation of vefaq—the Arabic term for unity or accord—was meant to signal cooperation with constructive actors. Moderates now argue it has been interpreted as surrender rather than partnership.
Even explicit backing from the Supreme Leader has done little to shield the government.
According to Sharq, hardliners routinely reframe his remarks to suit their own narrative, while parliamentarians amplify public anxiety by exaggerating crises such as fuel price hikes, spreading unsubstantiated claims, and calling for prosecutions that weaken state institutions.
A review of daily statements published on parliament’s official website, icana.ir, shows a steady stream of alarmist rhetoric and political point-scoring, reinforcing the impression of a faction more invested in spectacle than governance.
Compromise or surrender?
Rouydad24 this week extended the critique to Pezeshkian himself, questioning his repeated claims that he is resisting hardliner pressure.
The outlet cited his appointment of Saghab Esfahani as vice president for energy consumption optimization as evidence of retreat.
“A president who reached office by promising honesty and resilience,” it wrote, “now repeats the language of resistance while compromising his ideals simply to remain in office.”
For a society long scarred by unfulfilled promises, such language signals repetition, not resolve.
Hardliners, Sharq concluded, offer no credible solutions to Iran’s mounting crises. Their relevance is sustained through vendettas, institutional erosion, and the exploitation of public grievance.
Columnist Zohreh Farahani argued in a December 16 commentary that real governance requires courage, accountability, and respect for the rule of law, suggesting that all were absent from the current administration in Tehran.
The result is a deepening political deadlock, he asserted. Reconciliation has moved in only one direction, leaving Pezeshkian weakened, moderates increasingly disillusioned, and Iran’s power balance as rigid as ever.
