Will There Be a Change in “Hardliner” Policy?
An editorial in Hammihan Online discussed the misguided belief among the “hardliners” that they could conduct an election limited to intra-group competition. It noted that after Raisi’s death, internal divisions among the “hardliners” had intensified, with each faction vying for the presidency, thereby igniting a comprehensive conflict and revealing new incriminating information against one another.
The editorial added that despite their differences, the “hardliners” shared a common objective: to secure the presidency through low voter turnout. Consequently, none of the factions encouraged public participation in the electoral process. They believed that under the prevailing circumstances, characterized by minimal voter engagement, no alternative force could threaten their dominance. However, the announcement of the candidates’ names delivered an unexpected shock, making them realize the precariousness of their position.
The editorial noted that initial polls provided the “hardliners” with a semblance of confidence. Nonetheless, subsequent polls indicated a rapid surge in support for Masoud Pezeshkian, contrasting with the stagnation or decline in popularity of the primary “hardliner” candidates. This shift prompted whispers of strategic withdrawals to consolidate support, although it was clear that the leading figures were unwilling to abandon their quests for power, each considering themselves the rightful victor.
The editorial discussed a recent shift in “hardliner” tactics, targeting medical professionals in their campaign efforts. This, it argued, stemmed from their realization that they were likely to lose the election, whether or not they formed a coalition. Acknowledging public disillusionment with “hardliner” politics, the editorial noted that many voters, including previous supporters of the faction, were now inclined to back Masoud Pezeshkian as a means of escaping the current political quagmire. In response, the “hardliners” resorted to fabricating scenarios and making accusations to create a tense and charged atmosphere.
The editorial raised the issue of the treatment of Dr. Mohammad Fazli during a “Cultural Roundtable” debate and the dissemination of videos labeled “Rouhani’s Third Government” as indicative of these tactics. It observed that past experiences had shown such actions to be counterproductive, serving only to tarnish the electoral process rather than yielding favorable outcomes for the “hardliners.”
Finally, the editorial argued that those engaged in the electoral process should capitalize on this opportunity, urging them not to let individual and factional interests undermine national welfare. It emphasized that the current election presented a significant chance for Iranian society to break the existing political deadlock by electing a unifying president with proven competence and public trust.
The People Are Still Part of the Equation
An editorial by Abbas Abdi in Etemad newspaper questioned whether a “hardliner” candidate would ever exhibit enough honesty and bravery during an election to openly oppose the vetting of candidates, the morality police, veiling, censorship, employment discrimination, invasions of privacy, lawlessness, pseudoscience, government-imposed pricing, and personal clothing regulations. It noted that “hardliners” avoid discussing regional policies, Palestine, foreign aid, and their ambitious slogans during elections. Instead, they promise to lift sanctions, despite having previously claimed sanctions were a blessing. They strategically remain silent or distort their positions until after elections, at which point they revert to their previous stances, imposing their agendas on the public.
The editorial argued that such a day of honesty is unlikely to come, as the “hardliners” are acutely aware that the majority of the populace does not agree with their beliefs, values, or behaviors. This fundamental disconnect is the primary reason for their lack of a sustainable future. The editorial found it puzzling that the “hardliners” could maintain hope for the future amidst such political hypocrisy. It suggested that the only path to their social survival would be an honest reconstruction of their beliefs based on genuine ideals. Without this transformation, they would need to cling to power and defend their positions forcefully, which would only accelerate their downfall and entrap them in a cycle of political demise.
The editorial emphasized that the upcoming elections represent a unique opportunity for the ruling faction. It urged them to transition from a policy of monopoly to one of inclusion and pluralism, from coercion to choice and mutual respect, from superstition and pseudoscience to rationality and scientific thinking, from costly measures to balanced and incremental ones, from tension to peace, from media suppression to media freedom, from prioritizing individual and group interests to focusing on national interests, and from using religion as a tool for coercion and exclusion to embracing it as a message of compassion and mercy. It argued that for decades, religion has been misused as a tool for gaining power, causing significant harm.
The editorial added that the election is an opportunity to restore moral and religious values within society. It pointed out that religious messages have been so politicized that they have become tiresome to the public who are now skeptical of moral and justice-oriented messages from religious traditions. This skepticism is evident in their lack of engagement with ethical teachings from Nahj al-Balagha, despite these messages slowly gaining acceptance. In contrast, the dishonesty of the “hardliners” and their supporters has become increasingly apparent and distasteful.
The editorial discussed the historical neglect of Imam Ali and Nahj al-Balagha, noting that despite the “hardliners’” grand festivals, they have ignored these teachings, resulting in public disillusionment. The editorial highlighted the mistaken belief of the “hardliners” that they had permanently removed the public from the political scene, allowing them to freely express their opinions without accountability. However, the public has been observant, and this has not gone unnoticed.
The editorial argued that dividing the public into factions is not a responsible approach, as there is a common understanding among the populace. This is reflected in the significant support for Pezeshkian from traditional “hardliner” voters who have become disillusioned with the dominant faction’s power-seeking and dishonesty. The editorial noted that the public is aware of the false claims and immoral tactics employed by the “hardliners,” which only harm public perceptions.
The editorial concluded that the only hope is for the “hardliners” to learn a lesson from the election results and abandon the notion that people can be excluded from political and social life. The public cannot be removed, and those politicians who oppose the people’s will are destined to disappear. The people are likened to a flowing river that may experience fluctuations but will never run dry, with the potential for flooding on a dry day.
The Specter of a Diminished Iran Looms Large
An editorial in Jahan-e Sanat criticized the six candidates approved by the Guardian Council to run for president, questioning their ability to effectively address the nation’s challenges. It noted that the candidates were given a platform to communicate their plans for governing, but their speeches revealed a significant danger lurking for Iran and its people. The editorial argued that these candidates, whether intentionally or not, presented the task of executive administration as a trivial endeavor, ignoring the complexity and severity of the issues facing the country.
The editorial added that the candidates either lacked the opportunity or were not permitted to discuss the accumulated political and economic crises in a substantive manner. It suggested that the candidates’ superficial understanding and inadequate solutions for overcoming these crises would only lead to more troubling times. Despite recent bitter experiences, the candidates continued to simplify and minimize the severity of the problems, particularly the issue of inflation, which has severely impacted millions of Iranian wage earners.
The editorial discussed the candidates’ promises to tame inflation and other issues, offering grand but unrealistic solutions like distributing gold and meat to citizens and implementing ambitious plans. It emphasized that Iran’s problems are deeply rooted and require significant structural reforms. The editorial argued that Iranians have become disillusioned with empty promises, recognizing that previous leaders have been trapped by the same unfulfilled commitments.
The editorial noted that the selection process for candidates was structured to exclude genuinely sincere and qualified individuals. Among the six candidates, there was no one with a clear understanding of the structural causes of the 45% inflation rate since 2017. The candidates either ignored these underlying issues or lacked the capability to address them effectively. The editorial highlighted that inflation in Iran is largely driven by the budget deficit, a problem that no president has been willing to tackle due to the entanglement of the budget in rent-seeking politics and corruption.
The editorial pointed out that none of the candidates paid sufficient attention to the devastating loss of purchasing power among millions of workers and employees, nor did they acknowledge the potential consequences that could arise from this crisis. It stressed that the candidates failed to present clear plans for foreign policy, particularly in terms of regulating relations with the West. The editorial criticized the candidates’ reductionist approach and simplistic solutions, warning that this mindset poses the greatest danger to Iran’s future.
Candidates’ False Promises to the People
An editorial by Mostafa Hashemitaba in Arman Melli newspaper criticized the election debates, noting that some candidates make unbelievable economic promises that appeal to the public. It highlighted that people enjoy hearing such promises, leading candidates to feel they can succeed by emulating Ahmadinejad’s approach with offers like meat at home, gold subsidies, and 100 million toman cards.
The editorial noted that the candidates failed to address the future and living conditions of Iran, ignoring issues stemming from extravagance, rent-seeking and the exploitation of natural resources such as gas, gasoline, and forests. It argued that true development is impossible under such conditions and requires a shift from a negative to a positive economic situation, passing through what it termed as “zero development.” The editorial emphasized that candidates often disregard the future of Iran, focusing instead on making appealing but unrealistic promises.
The editorial added that the public is more concerned with their immediate lives and struggles. It provided an example of a taxi driver working tirelessly from morning to night, dealing with issues like gas, tires, insurance, and taxi rates. Such individuals, it argued, have little time to think about foreign policy or cultural and artistic issues, prioritizing financial stability and basic necessities instead. The editorial suggested that this focus on daily survival leads people to accept the unrealistic promises made by candidates, who avoid making genuine commitments and fail to address the country’s underlying problems.
The editorial criticized the candidates for making false promises and ignoring the truth. It pointed out that the country’s infrastructure is in danger, yet the candidates have not adequately addressed this issue. While a few candidates have acknowledged the need to prioritize Iran’s condition over mere slogans, the majority continue to overlook critical issues. The editorial argued that if Iran’s condition is poor, so too will be the condition of its people.
The editorial discussed how nothing substantial has emerged from the election debates so far. It noted that most candidates, with a few exceptions, are not concerned with realistic goals or statistics. Instead, they make grand promises to win public approval and votes. The editorial emphasized that while all relevant statistics and information are known, some candidates disregard them entirely, focusing instead on saying what they believe will garner support from the public.
The editorial concluded by highlighting the need for candidates to address real issues and make honest commitments. It called for a shift in focus from empty promises to genuine solutions, emphasizing that the well-being of Iran and its people depends on addressing the country’s fundamental problems and infrastructure challenges. The editorial urged candidates to consider the long-term future of Iran rather than resorting to populist tactics.
Head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization Says It Will Not Seek Anything Beyond Its Authority
Mohammad Eslami praised late President Ebrahim Raisi for significant progress in Iran’s nuclear industry over the past three years, attributing this to Raisi’s special efforts and diligence.
Eslami highlighted that the first major step taken by the 13th government, in line with the transformation document, was the Atomic Energy Organization’s preparation of its program document, announced by the president. This initiative led to over 300 scientific and technological achievements being registered in 2022 and 2023, averaging one every one and a half days.
During a press conference with the government spokesperson, Eslami stated that the research-oriented approach of the Atomic Energy Organization under the 13th government facilitated these advancements, transitioning from research to industrialization. He noted that nuclear technology is now impacting people’s lives through energy and non-energy applications.
Eslami emphasized the goal of generating 20,000 megawatts of electricity, aligning with global efforts to expand nuclear power for clean and sustainable energy. The CUP summit’s resolution to increase nuclear power’s share to 25% was mentioned as part of this agenda.
Eslami revealed that employment in these projects has grown from 300 in 2021 to over 5,000 people, reflecting the expansion of Iran’s national industry to build nuclear power plants.
Three Iraqi Militia Groups Collaborate With the IRGC
Three Iraqi Shiite militia groups — Harakat al-Nujaba, Kata’ib Hezbollah, and Kata’ib Seyyed al-Shohada — announced their readiness to deploy forces to Lebanon in the event of a conflict between Hezbollah and Israel. This declaration was accompanied by statements from Iran’s ground forces commander, affirming that the so-called resistance forces would not stand idle in such a scenario. Tehran appears to have decided to utilize these Iraqi militias to bolster Lebanon’s capabilities.
These groups constitute three of the four main factions in Iraq’s coordination council of resistance groups. The fourth faction, Ansar al-Awfiya, completes this council. Among them, Harakat al-Nujaba stands out, having evolved from the Imam Kazem’s battalions during the Syrian civil war. Established in Baghdad in 2004, it publicly split from Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq in 2013, a move prompted by differences between Akram al-Kaabi and Qais Khazali.
Despite this split, both factions maintain cordial relations. According to a source close to Hashd al-Shaabi, the formation of Harakat al-Nujaba was overseen by Qassem Soleimani and initially funded with $10 million from Hezbollah in Lebanon. Soleimani directed the group to focus solely on military activities, disapproving of Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq’s shift towards politics.
Poll Shows 65% of Iranians Could Boycott Upcoming Elections
According to the latest survey by the Gamaan Institute on Iranian attitudes towards the imminent 1403 elections, approximately 65% of participants stated that they did not participate in the country’s previous presidential elections and do not plan to vote in the upcoming electoral contest.
The survey, conducted over three days from Khordad 28 to 30, 1403 HS, targeted literate individuals aged 19 and above, covering about 90% of Iran’s adult population. Only about 22% of respondents expressed readiness to vote in the presidential elections on June 28, while 12% remain undecided.
Interestingly, despite the election being imminent, 34% of those surveyed are still unaware of the exact date.
Compared with the Khordad 1402 elections, the survey reveals a consistent trend: 85% of those who did not participate previously do not plan to participate this year either. Conversely, 6% of non-voters from the previous election have now expressed intent to vote.
In terms of candidate preferences among likely voters, Masoud Pezeshkian and Saeed Jalili are leading, with Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf following closely. Among undecided voters, Masoud Pezeshkian appears to be the favorite. Additionally, about 15% of those undecided indicated a likelihood of casting an invalid vote.
The Gamaan Institute’s report further highlights that over 67% of non-participants cited opposition to the entire Iranian republic system as their reason for abstention, with 18% also referencing the perceived lack of presidential authority. Approximately 8% cited the disqualification of their preferred candidate as their reason for not participating.
Among those inclined to vote or still undecided, motivations vary: around 50% cited political participation and the desire to improve conditions, 38% mentioned choosing the right candidate and supporting the system, and 8% cited personal reasons such as fulfilling legal requirements.
Lawmaker Calls for Unifying Revolutionary Front
Mohsen Zanganeh, the representative of Torbat-e Heydarieh in the Islamic Consultative Assembly, disclosed in an interview with Tasnim news agency’s parliamentary reporter that 140 representatives of the assembly have jointly drafted a statement urging consensus among candidates of the revolutionary front in the upcoming presidential elections.
Highlighting concerns among revolutionary forces nationwide, Zanganeh emphasized the risk of vote division among the four front-aligned candidates. He pointed out that recent surveys indicate a tight competition among them, warning that failure to unify could undermine their shared goals of service and continuity in the revolutionary front.
According to Zanganeh, the statement aims to consolidate the entire revolutionary front’s support behind a single candidate, enhancing their collective impact. He stressed the necessity for practical steps to bolster electoral enthusiasm and organize the current political landscape. Without consensus, Zanganeh argued, the revolutionary front’s exceptional potential to advance Iran’s development may go unrealized.
