Moderate Pezeshkian Makes It to Iran Presidential Run-off

Iranian presidential candidate and reformist Massoud Pezeshkian reacts to the crowd outside a polling station where he cast his vote in the presidential election in Tehran on June 28, 2024. (AFP)
Iranian presidential candidate and reformist Massoud Pezeshkian reacts to the crowd outside a polling station where he cast his vote in the presidential election in Tehran on June 28, 2024. (AFP)
TT
20

Moderate Pezeshkian Makes It to Iran Presidential Run-off

Iranian presidential candidate and reformist Massoud Pezeshkian reacts to the crowd outside a polling station where he cast his vote in the presidential election in Tehran on June 28, 2024. (AFP)
Iranian presidential candidate and reformist Massoud Pezeshkian reacts to the crowd outside a polling station where he cast his vote in the presidential election in Tehran on June 28, 2024. (AFP)

In an election campaign dominated by hardliners, Iranian presidential hopeful Massoud Pezeshkian stood out as a moderate, backing women's rights, more social freedoms, cautious detente with the West and economic reform.

Pezeshkian narrowly beat hardline Saeed Jalili for first place in Friday's first round vote but the two men will now face a run-off election on July 5, since Pezeshkian did not secure the majority of 50% plus one vote of ballots cast needed to win outright.

Pezeshkian, a 69-year-old cardiac surgeon, lawmaker and former health minister was up against candidates who more closely reflect the fiercely anti-Western stance of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, the country's ultimate decision-maker.

And yet the mild-mannered Pezeshkian narrowly won Friday's vote and made it to the run-off in the election to pick a successor to Ebrahim Raisi, who was killed in a helicopter crash in May.

His chances hinge on attracting votes from supporters of current hardline parliament speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, who finished third in the first round, and encouraging a young disillusioned population hungry for change but disenchanted with the country's political, social and economic crisis to vote for him again in the run-off.

Although he advocates reforms, Pezeshkian is faithful to Iran's theocratic rule with no intention of confronting the powerful security hawks and clerical rulers.

His views offer a contrast to those of Raisi, a Khamenei protege who tightened enforcement of a law curbing women's dress and took a tough stance in now-moribund negotiations with major powers to revive a 2015 nuclear deal.

Pezeshkian's election campaign gained momentum when he was endorsed by reformists, led by former President Mohammad Khatami, and when he appointed former Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, a key figure in crafting the nuclear deal, as his foreign policy adviser.

Implicitly referring to the appointment of Zarif, who hardliners accuse of selling out Iran in order to reach the deal, Khamenei said on Tuesday: "Anyone who is attached to America will not be a good colleague for you".

In 2018, then-US President Donald Trump ditched the pact and reimposed sanctions on Iran, calling it "a horrible one-sided deal that should have never, ever been made." His move prompted Tehran to progressively violate the agreement's nuclear limits.

If Pezeshkian does go on to win, this would hinder Iranian hardliners who are opposed to the revival of the pact.

However, under Iran's dual system of clerical and republican rule the power to shape key state policies including foreign and nuclear affairs ultimately rests with Khamenei.

As a result, many voters are skeptical about Pezeshkian's ability to fulfil his campaign promises.

"Pezeshkian's power as the president to fulfil his campaign promises is zero," said Sholeh Mousavi, a 32-year-old teacher in Tehran, before Friday's first round of voting.

"I want reforms but Pezeshkian cannot improve the situation. I will not vote. "

Pezeshkian, the sole moderate among the six candidates who were approved by a hardline watchdog body to stand, has pledged to foster a pragmatic foreign policy and ease nuclear tensions with the West. Two hardline subsequently candidates pulled out.

A CRITIC LOYAL TO KHAMENEI

At the same time, Pezeshkian promised in TV debates and interviews not to contest Khamenei's policies, which analysts said risks further alienating the urban middle class and young voters. These groups no longer seek mere reform and instead now directly challenge the country's regime as a whole.

As a lawmaker since 2008, Pezeshkian, who is an Azeri ethnic minority and supports the rights of ethnic minorities, has criticized the clerical establishment's suppression of political and social dissent.

In 2022, Pezeshkian demanded clarification from authorities about the death of Mahsa Amini, a woman who died in custody after she was arrested for allegedly violating a law restricting women's dress. Her death sparked months of unrest across the country.

But at a Tehran University meeting earlier this month, responding to a question about students imprisoned on charges linked to anti-government protests, Pezeshkian said "political prisoners are not within my scope, and if I want to do something, I have no authority".

During the Iran-Iraq war in 1980s, Pezeshkian, who held roles as both a combatant and a physician, was tasked with the deployment of medical teams to the front lines.

He was health minister from 2001-5 in Khatami's second term.

Pezeshkian lost his wife and one of his children in a car accident in 1994. He raised his surviving two sons and a daughter alone, opting to never remarry.



Sudan's Relentless War: A 70-Year Cycle of Conflict


Army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan (left) and RSF leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti, pictured during their alliance to oust Omar al-Bashir in 2019 (AFP)
Army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan (left) and RSF leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti, pictured during their alliance to oust Omar al-Bashir in 2019 (AFP)
TT
20

Sudan's Relentless War: A 70-Year Cycle of Conflict


Army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan (left) and RSF leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti, pictured during their alliance to oust Omar al-Bashir in 2019 (AFP)
Army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan (left) and RSF leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti, pictured during their alliance to oust Omar al-Bashir in 2019 (AFP)

While world conflicts dominate headlines, Sudan’s deepening catastrophe is unfolding largely out of sight; a brutal war that has killed tens of thousands, displaced millions, and flattened entire cities and regions.

More than a year into the conflict, some observers question whether the international community has grown weary of Sudan’s seemingly endless cycles of violence. The country has endured nearly seven decades of civil war, and what is happening now is not an exception, but the latest chapter in a bloody history of rebellion and collapse.

The first of Sudan’s modern wars began even before the country gained independence from Britain. In 1955, army officer Joseph Lagu led the southern “Anyanya” rebellion, named after a venomous snake, launching a guerrilla war that would last until 1972.

A peace agreement brokered by the World Council of Churches and Ethiopia’s late Emperor Haile Selassie ended that conflict with the signing of the Addis Ababa Accord.

But peace proved short-lived. In 1983, then-president Jaafar Nimeiry reignited tensions by announcing the imposition of Islamic Sharia law, known as the “September Laws.” The move prompted the rise of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), led by John Garang, and a renewed southern insurgency that raged for more than two decades, outliving Nimeiry’s regime.

Under Omar al-Bashir, who seized power in a 1989 military coup, the war took on an Islamist tone. His government declared “jihad” and mobilized civilians in support of the fight, but failed to secure a decisive victory.

The conflict eventually gave way to the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement, better known as the Naivasha Agreement, which was brokered in Kenya and granted South Sudan the right to self-determination.

In 2011, more than 95% of South Sudanese voted to break away from Sudan, giving birth to the world’s newest country, the Republic of South Sudan. The secession marked the culmination of decades of war, which began with demands for a federal system and ended in full-scale conflict. The cost: over 2 million lives lost, and a once-unified nation split in two.

But even before South Sudan’s independence became reality, another brutal conflict had erupted in Sudan’s western Darfur region in 2003. Armed rebel groups from the region took up arms against the central government, accusing it of marginalization and neglect. What followed was a ferocious counterinsurgency campaign that drew global condemnation and triggered a major humanitarian crisis.

As violence escalated, the United Nations deployed one of its largest-ever peacekeeping missions, the African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID), in a bid to stem the bloodshed.

Despite multiple peace deals, including the Juba Agreement signed in October 2020 following the ousting of long-time Islamist ruler, Bashir, fighting never truly ceased.

The Darfur war alone left more than 300,000 people dead and millions displaced. The International Criminal Court charged Bashir and several top officials, including Ahmed Haroun and Abdel Raheem Muhammad Hussein, with war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Alongside the southern conflict, yet another war erupted in 2011, this time in the Nuba Mountains of South Kordofan and the Blue Nile region. The fighting was led by Abdelaziz al-Hilu, head of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement–North (SPLM–N), a group composed largely of northern fighters who had sided with the South during the earlier civil war under John Garang.

The conflict broke out following contested elections marred by allegations of fraud, and Khartoum’s refusal to implement key provisions of the 2005 Naivasha Agreement, particularly those related to “popular consultations” in the two regions. More than a decade later, war still grips both areas, with no lasting resolution in sight.

Then came April 15, 2023. A fresh war exploded, this time in the heart of the capital, Khartoum, pitting the Sudanese Armed Forces against the powerful paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF). Now entering its third year, the conflict shows no signs of abating.

According to international reports, the war has killed more than 150,000 people and displaced around 13 million, the largest internal displacement crisis on the planet. Over 3 million Sudanese have fled to neighboring countries.

Large swathes of the capital lie in ruins, and entire states have been devastated. With Khartoum no longer viable as a seat of power, the government and military leadership have relocated to the Red Sea city of Port Sudan.

Unlike previous wars, Sudan’s current conflict has no real audience. Global pressure on the warring factions has been minimal. Media coverage is sparse. And despite warnings from the United Nations describing the crisis as “the world’s worst humanitarian catastrophe,” Sudan's descent into chaos remains largely ignored by the international community.