Pezeshkian’s election could become a burden for Israel
The letter of support Iranian President-elect Masoud Pezeshkian sent to the secretary general of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, on July 8 was seen by Israelis as a reinforcement of their already strong conviction that the reformist president’s election will not result in any change in the Islamic Republic. Responding to Nasrallah’s congratulatory message, Pezeshkian pledged continued support to the Resistance Axis backed by Iran in the region.
“The Islamic Republic of Iran has always supported the resistance of the people in the region against the illegitimate Zionist regime,” Pezeshkian wrote. “Supporting the resistance is rooted in the fundamental policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran and will continue with strength.”
In response to these comments, an Israeli researcher posted on her X account, “If anyone here dreamed that the new Iranian president Pezeshkian would bring about a change in the militant policy of the Iranian regime that strives to destroy Israel, this letter is for you.”
SIGN UP FOR THIS WEEK IN THE MIDEAST NEWSLETTER
While the Israeli response to Pezeshkian’s election was understandably skeptical, the global reaction might differ. The international community, notably the West, is in no hurry to lay its trust and optimism in the incoming Iranian president, considering previous disappointments with Iranian behavior under earlier pragmatic presidents. For example, both the nuclear and ballistic missile programs saw significant progress under President Mohammad Khatami (1997–2005). Iran’s supported regional network of non-state groups was also expanded under pragmatist President Hassan Rouhani (2013–2021). Nonetheless, the new president will likely be given a chance.
The possible appointment of Abbas Araghchi, a former nuclear negotiator and deputy foreign minister, as Pezeshkian’s foreign minister has already raised some hopes for re-engaging Iran in diplomatic dialogue with the West to find a political solution to the nuclear issue—or even to the growing tension between Iran and the United States in the Middle East. On the other hand, the election of contender Saeed Jalili, the most extremist candidate in the presidential elections, could have helped Israel persuade the world community that there is no purpose in engaging with Iran and that additional pressure should be used against the Islamic Republic.
It is indeed highly improbable that the incoming Iranian president can or will change the Islamic Republic’s attitude toward Israel or its backing of its network of regional proxies. Not only are the president’s powers largely confined to domestic affairs, but the engagement of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)—particularly the Quds Force—in regional affairs significantly inhibits the president’s capacity to intercede. It is, therefore, not surprising that President Rouhani’s term was marked by rivalries and tensions between his government and the IRGC.
In a leaked audiotape released shortly before the end of Rouhani’s term in 2021, then Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said the IRGC calls the shots, overruling many government decisions and ignoring advice. “In the Islamic Republic, the battlefield rules,” Zarif said in a three-hour taped conversation that was part of an oral history project documenting the current administration’s work. “I have sacrificed diplomacy for the battlefield rather than the field servicing diplomacy.”
With that in mind, Pezeshkian’s views on Israel mirror the current consensus among Iranian decision-makers. After voting in the first round of the presidential election, the reformist candidate told journalists he hoped his country would try to have friendly relations “with all countries except for Israel.”
Israel’s attitude toward Iran: from skeptical hope to complete distrust
Twenty-seven years ago, the election of a reformist president in Iran raised significant expectations in Israel. At a discussion held in the Knesset on May 28, 1997, then Foreign Minister David Levy responded to Khatami’s election as president, stating that a momentous transition was taking place in Iran that needed to be followed closely. Levy emphasized that Iran’s foreign policy was largely dictated by the supreme leader, who opposed relations with the West, but also expressed hope that the long-awaited change would soon be felt thanks to Khatami, who was “a person with education and knowledge in various fields who is familiar with the Western world.”
He concluded, “We would be very happy to see Iran join the regional effort to reduce tensions, stop terrorism, and seek ways of cooperation and peace…Perhaps we will soon see the change that we all expect.”
However, during the last three decades, it has become evident that an Iranian president, no matter how reformist or pragmatic, has limited capacity to alter Iranian policy on issues concerning Israel’s national security. Furthermore, the confrontation between the two countries has escalated significantly. Iran’s nuclear progress, its development of sophisticated weapons systems such as long-range missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), its growing regional involvement, and its continued support for terrorist organizations—including Hezbollah, Hamas, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad—all pose a strategic threat to Israel’s national security.
As a result, Israel, particularly under Benjamin Netanyahu’s premiership, has increased its efforts to rally the international community against the Islamic Republic. Under these conditions, hardline presidents like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Ebrahim Raisi, who openly called for Israel’s destruction, became assets to Israel. In contrast, more pragmatic presidents were viewed as a burden and a challenge that could make it more difficult to persuade the rest of the world to join the campaign against Iran and to avoid pursuing diplomacy with Tehran.
It is, therefore, no surprise that Prime Minister Netanyahu was quick to denounce President Rouhani shortly after his election in the summer of 2013. Speaking to the United Nations General Assembly in the fall of 2013, Netanyahu dismissed the new Iranian president’s charm offensive, saying, “Rouhani doesn’t sound like Ahmadinejad, but when it comes to Iran’s nuclear weapons program, the only difference between them is this: Ahmadinejad was a wolf in wolf’s clothing; Rouhani is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.”
Where do things go from here?
Pezeshkian’s election comes at a time of rising concern in Israel about Iran. Israel’s hawkish opposition, Knesset member Avigdor Lieberman, argued on June 5 that Iran is planning a holocaust for Israel in the next two years. “We are in the midst of an Iranian extermination program,” the Yisrael Beytenu party chairman said, arguing that if Iran is allowed to create a “nuclear umbrella,” it will use the deterrence it has obtained to launch a devastating strike. Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak was quoted in Ha’aretz in mid-June warning that, in six months to a year, Iran will launch a multifront war of attrition against Israel aimed at its collapse and then annihilation. These statements come against the background of Iran’s continued implementation of the “unification of the arenas” strategy against Israel since October 7, 2023, as well as reports of alarming progress in its nuclear program.
Senior Iranian officials, led by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, have recently stated that the end of Israel is near, adding to Israel’s rising concerns about Iran’s intentions. At the anniversary ceremony commemorating the death of the founder of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Iran’s leader stated that the Hamas attack against Israel on October 7, 2023, dealt a decisive blow to the “Zionist regime,” a blow from which there is no recovery. In a meeting with Hamas’s leader on the sidelines of President Raisi’s funeral, Khamenei said, “The divine promise to eliminate the Zionist entity will be fulfilled, and we will see the day when Palestine will rise from the river to the sea.”
These statements are interpreted in Israel as an expression of a shift in Iran’s mindset, as well as a possible indication that the Iranian leadership believes the ongoing campaign in Gaza and Israel’s weakening have created ripe conditions for the realization of its ideological vision of Israel’s destruction. Under these circumstances, the world might be willing to give the next president a chance, but Israel may be more anxious about the potential of needing to confront the Iranian menace alone.
Raz Zimmt is a senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies and the Alliance Center for Iranian Studies at Tel Aviv University. He is also a veteran Iran watcher in the Israeli Defense Forces. Follow him on X: @RZimmt.
Further reading
Fri, Jun 21, 2024
Don’t be fooled by the ‘reformist.’ Iran’s presidential election won’t bring fundamental change.
IranSource By Holly Dagres
The only way out of this conundrum is if Iranians take their destiny into their own hands.
Thu, May 9, 2024
The nuclear fatwa that wasn’t—how Iran sold the world a false narrative
IranSource By
Tracking the supreme leader's comments over the past two decades demonstrates that he never issued a fatwa against building a nuclear weapon.
Tue, Apr 23, 2024
This round of Iran-Israel escalation is over, but the next could be just around the corner
IranSource By
The continuous campaign between Iran and Israel is unlikely to end, and the precedent set by their direct military engagement has become another option on the confrontation table.
Image: FILE PHOTO: Iran's President-elect Masoud Pezeshkian speaks during a gathering with his supporters at the shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, in south of Tehran, Iran July 6, 2024. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS