Four-minute read
On Wednesday, August 21, the clerical regime’s parliament convened to vote on the proposed ministers of Masoud Pezeshkian‘s cabinet, with all nominees ultimately receiving the Majlis’ approval. The session, however, was less about democratic unanimity and more about the blatant orchestration of power by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, as illustrated by Pezeshkian’s own admissions.
Pezeshkian went as far as to admit that every significant decision, including the selection of ministers, was made in direct consultation with the “higher levels,” a clear reference to Khamenei. He confessed, “The proposed ministers were coordinated with all relevant committees, both ‘below’ and ‘above’ [referring to Khamenei]. I want to say that we coordinated before we came here. You should accept all of these individuals from us.”
Regarding Abbas Araghchi, the proposed Minister of Foreign Affairs, Pezeshkian highlighted Khamenei’s early approval, saying: “Dr. Araghchi was the first person whom the Leader approved even before we announced the names of the ministers. This wasn’t something we made up… don’t make me go into the details of the matter.”
Pezeshkian recounted how Abbas Salehi, the proposed Minister of Culture and Islamic Guidance, initially refused to join the cabinet until Khamenei personally picked up the phone and ordered him to accept the position. Similarly, the inclusion of Farzaneh Sadeq as the Minister of Roads was explicitly directed by Khamenei. Pezeshkian’s repeated references to Khamenei’s involvement—”Why are you forcing me to say things that shouldn’t be said?”—only serve to underscore the pretense of a parliamentary process, revealing it as merely a rubber stamp for decisions already made by the Supreme Leader.
Vetting #Pezeshkian’s Cabinet in #Iran Exposes Khamenei’s Grip and Regime Strifehttps://t.co/ZDQBgwc3zv
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) August 20, 2024
Vows of allegiance
During the four-day vetting process, several of the proposed ministers, even those not traditionally aligned with the so-called hardline faction, made strong declarations of their loyalty to the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
Mohammad Atabak, the proposed Minister of Industry, Mines, and Trade, explicitly referred to himself as a “soldier of the Velayat” [Supreme Leader] during his speech in parliament while Ahmad Meydari, the proposed Minister of Labor, was described by MP Rahmatollah Nowruzi as someone who has “complete faith in the Velayat-e Faqih.”
Abbas Araghchi, the proposed Minister of Foreign Affairs, who received broad support from the so-called reformist faction, made a strong declaration in his speech: “If you trust me as the Minister of Foreign Affairs, I, Seyed Abbas Araghchi, will be a soldier of the Velayat, a minister of the government, accountable to the parliament, and a guardian of the nation’s interests, representing them appropriately abroad.”
Mohammad-Reza Zafarghandi, the proposed Minister of Health, was supported by MP Ahmad Bigdeli, who passionately declared: “I swear by the blood of my martyr father that Zafarghandi has practical adherence to the Velayat-e Faqih,” further asserting the minister’s loyalty.
Mohsen Paknejad, the proposed Minister of Oil, began his speech by paying homage to IRGC Quds Force’s slain commander Qassem Soleimani, expressing wishes for Khamenei’s long life, and affirming that his actions would adhere strictly to the policies outlined by the Supreme Leader. Paknejad emphasized that his performance would be within the framework of Khamenei’s directives.
Vetting MPs and Ministerial Nominees Vie to Prove Loyalty to Khamenei Amid #Iran’s Domestic and International Criseshttps://t.co/pDAAesUMgq
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) August 18, 2024
Internal conflict
The parliamentary session was not without its moments of conflict. Tensions escalated during the session on Tuesday when MP Malek Shariati distributed pamphlets against Reza Salehi Amiri, Minister of Cultural Heritage, and Tourism. This led to a confrontation with the Speaker of the Parliament Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who tried to silence him. The altercation was marked by sharp exchanges, with Ghalibaf remarking, “I didn’t want to mention your name, but since you stood up, I had to. You knew the law, yet you acted otherwise. You were told not to distribute the pamphlets, but you still did it.”
The situation deteriorated further when another MP threatened physical action, saying, “We will flog him right here,” underscoring the chaotic and hostile environment of the session. The disorder reached a peak when Ghalibaf had to call upon Minister Salehi Amiri to proceed with his speech amid the uproar.
Taking on social media on Wednesday, MP Malek Shariati criticized Pezeshkian for leveraging Khamenei’s authority to secure parliamentary approval, warning that this strategy could backfire if ministers fail to deliver in the future, potentially placing the blame on Khamenei himself. Yet, despite such critiques, the parliament, dominated by hardliners and those loyal to Khamenei, gave its full support to the cabinet, revealing the farcical nature of the proceedings.
#Iranian Regime’s Parliament Clashes with Pezeshkian over Cabinet Pickshttps://t.co/WZEy7Tfm50
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) August 17, 2024
Social Impact
Pezeshkian’s administration, which he describes as fully aligned with Khamenei’s policies, was not born out of popular will but out of necessity for the regime to maintain its hold on power. Following the death of Khamenei’s loyal hand, Ebrahim Raisi and after the overwhelming boycott of the sham elections by the Iranian people—estimated at over 88%—and the subsequent appointment of Pezeshkian and his cabinet, reflect a deep disconnect between the regime and the populace. The protests and unrest that have continued across the country even as Pezeshkian’s cabinet was being confirmed indicate a society that has moved beyond the pretense of political engagement with the regime’s charades.
Khamenei’s direct control over the appointment of ministers, as openly admitted by Pezeshkian, underscores the fragile state of a regime that can’t afford even the slightest disagreement at the top. The notion of competing factions within the regime is exposed as a superficial dualism, masking the reality that true power remains concentrated in the hands of a few, with Khamenei at the apex.
The regime’s legitimacy, already severely undermined by widespread election boycotts, faces further erosion as the Iranian people increasingly see through the facade of governance and direct their demands not at reform but at the fundamental dismantling of the existing power structure. The cabinet formed under these circumstances is less a new beginning and more a continuation of the status quo, with all the limitations and challenges that it entails for a regime facing growing domestic and international pressures.