Three-minute read
The recent revelations by Masoud Pezeshkian, the newly appointed president of Iran’s regime, have triggered a wave of backlash within the corridors of power in Tehran. In a desperate bid to secure parliamentary approval for his cabinet, Pezeshkian inadvertently pulled back the curtain on the regime’s sham democracy, confirming that every member of his cabinet was pre-approved by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and the regime’s security apparatus. This rare moment of transparency has provoked outrage and criticism from various factions within the regime, further highlighting the deep-seated authoritarianism at the heart of Iran’s clerical dictatorship.
During his speech in the parliament on Wednesday, August 21, Pezeshkian made the startling admission that his entire cabinet list had been vetted and approved by Khamenei. “I gave the entire list to the Leader. Everyone came here with coordination and agreement,” he declared, laying bare the fact that the parliament’s role in the approval process was merely performative.
This admission did not sit well with many within the regime. Hossein Shariatmadari, the editor-in-chief of the Kayhan newspaper, was quick to condemn Pezeshkian’s remarks. He called them “unrealistic claims” that had been eagerly seized upon by the regime’s “sworn enemies” to discredit the notion of democracy in Iran. Shariatmadari demanded that Pezeshkian retract his statements, warning that they had provided a “pretext and excuse” for critics to “undermine the republic’s democracy, the parliament’s authority, and even the president’s powers.” He further criticized Pezeshkian for what he described as a “misinterpretation” or “misstatement” of the Supreme Leader’s role in the cabinet selection process.
Pezeshkian’s Cabinet Is Testament to #Khamenei’s Unquestioned Authority Over #Iran’s Governancehttps://t.co/vyebHqPZc0
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) August 22, 2024
The backlash extended beyond Kayhan. The state-run website Entekhab noted that Pezeshkian’s final defense of his cabinet, with its heavy emphasis on Khamenei’s approval, had angered opponents and critics who accused him of “exploiting” the Supreme Leader’s authority to push his cabinet through. The Javan website, an IRGC-run newspaper, reported on the criticism from the spokesperson for the Parliament’s Security Commission, who rebuked Pezeshkian for implying that the ministers required Khamenei’s endorsement to be viable candidates.
This criticism was echoed by MP Malek Shariati, who took to social media to express his concerns about Pezeshkian’s strategy. Shariati warned that leveraging Khamenei’s authority to secure parliamentary approval could backfire if the ministers fail to deliver in the future, potentially placing the blame on Khamenei himself.
Meanwhile, the Jamaran website highlighted a critical note from Manan Raisi, MP from Qom, who questioned whether the vote was for Pezeshkian’s cabinet or “the Leader’s cabinet.” Raisi condemned Pezeshkian’s rhetoric, stating that his approach was inappropriate and unworthy of the office he holds. Similarly, Vatan-e Emrooz published an editorial titled “Improper Use of the Leader’s Name,” which attributed the parliament’s unanimous confidence vote to Pezeshkian’s repeated emphasis on his coordination with Khamenei. The editorial described Pezeshkian’s approach as a “grave mistake” and called for “rectification.”
Vetting #Pezeshkian’s Cabinet in #Iran Exposes Khamenei’s Grip and Regime Strifehttps://t.co/ZDQBgwc3zv
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) August 20, 2024
However, Ali Motahari, a former Deputy Speaker of Parliament, defended Pezeshkian’s remarks, arguing that they were not an exploitation of Khamenei’s name but rather a “transparent and truthful” account of reality. Motahari stated, “Pezeshkian informed the representatives that certain ministers were specifically endorsed by the Leader, so they should be aware of this when casting their votes. In my opinion, it is appropriate to avoid any behind-the-scenes dealings.”
Pezeshkian’s emphasis on his coordination with Khamenei represents a stark shift from previous administrations, underscoring the increasingly desperate state of a regime that can no longer tolerate even the slightest dissent amidst mounting challenges at home and abroad. While it has long been evident that Khamenei wields ultimate authority over all aspects of governance, earlier administrations have either subtly acknowledged this or occasionally clashed with the Supreme Leader’s pervasive influence. The heightened antagonism during the vetting process, coupled with the ongoing infighting among the regime’s tightly controlled parliamentary factions, government, and judiciary, reveals a fractured and increasingly intolerant system. This internal discord only serves to highlight the regime’s vulnerability as it faces escalating domestic unrest and growing international pressures.