Tag: Iran

  • Iran After Ebrahim Raisi

    Iran After Ebrahim Raisi

    The Islamic Republic of Iran’s president and conservative Shia leader, Ebrahim Raisi, died in a helicopter crash. The tragic incident occurred on the border of Iran’s East Azerbaijan province, which is close to the Republic of Azerbaijan. Raisi was returning from the Republic of Azerbaijan, and reports indicate that bad weather and an outdated helicopter are considered the causes of the accident. An inquiry has been declared, with accusations of Israel’s involvement. Raisi, the country’s most notorious figure of the repressive regime, was well known for his conservative Islamism and was widely considered a likely successor to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khomeini. As president and in other important positions, Raisi strictly implemented severe punishments for blasphemy and actions against the regime, including several death penalties, earning him the nickname “The Butcher of Tehran”. Despite his repressive policies, many people, especially in Tehran, filled the mosques for special prayers. However, at the same time, fireworks were visible, and celebration videos spread on social media. What will happen to such a divided country after Raisi?

    As long as Iran remains an Islamic Republic under the supreme leadership of Shia Islamist Ayatollah Khomeini, no significant changes in administration are expected. Following Raisi’s death, Ayatollah Ali Khomeini addressed the nation, assuring that there would be no disruption to the state and government, and that people need not worry. He swiftly appointed Vice President Mohammed Mokhber to the presidential position shortly after the death was announced. This rapid appointment, a constitutional mandate, aimed to prevent any political instability in a country where less than 50% of the people vote, and there is visible discontent with the government. Just a few years ago, massive protests erupted in Iran after Kurdish Women, Mahsa Amini’s death for not obeying Islamic rules, and it’s considered as challenging the government. Raisi responded with his usual tough stance, he cracked it down with an iron fist and executed many protest-related individuals, actions which some people viewed as justice served. The government, recognizing the loss of Raisi, known for his harsh enforcement, understands the need to find a new strong leader soon. An election, required by the constitution to occur within 50 days, in tight control of  the regime will be carried out soon. Candidates must be approved by the elite council, and anyone not aligned with the supreme leader cannot contest. It is expected that even former president and popular leader in the West, Hassan Rouhani, will not be allowed to run due to the fact that he is now unfavorable for the elite council.

    The foreign relationships are not expected to change significantly after Raisi. There were some improvements during previous Rouhani’s period, including the nuclear deal with the United States, but Raisi has closed that chapter. Given the low chance of Rouhani’s return and the perceived lack of skilled leadership in the US, the relationship is unlikely to improve even after Raisi. Relations with Israel, their enemy state, are expected to worsen. Although there is no official proof, many believe that Raisi’s death is part of Israel’s ongoing efforts to target important Iranian figures. Iran’s connection to other countries is largely driven by Islamism, leading to continued support for Palestine, Hamas, political and military organizations in Iraq and Syria, the Houthis in Yemen, and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Due to the need to cope with Western sanctions, Iran’s relationship with Russia, China, and India has flourished under Raisi. Russia continues to have a strong relationship with the Islamic Republic, while China has emerged as a key partner and major oil importer. India, under Narendra Modi, also maintains a strong relationship with Raisi, with Modi being one of the first leaders to offer condolences on Raisi’s demise. This relationship is expected to persist, as Iran does not foresee any improvement in relations with the US. Regarding Europe, while it does not harbor the same level of animosity towards Iran as the US, it might seek to improve relations if a moderate Islamic leader comes to power. With Saudi Arabia, diplomatic relations have begun to develop, influenced by China’s interests. As Saudi Arabia reduces efforts to propagate Sunni Islamic beliefs and the Israel-Palestine conflict drags on, the likelihood of a deterioration in relations with Saudi Arabia seems low.

    The demise of Ebrahim Raisi, the “Butcher of Tehran”, is significant as it reveals the true state of Iran. While the nation mourns their popular leader, many videos and comments on social media celebrating his death show that the country is deeply divided, with the protests following Mahsa Amini’s death still resonating in people’s hearts. This situation also highlights the impact of American sanctions, as Iran still uses a Bell 212 helicopter for the president, indicating a lack of technological development despite accusations of developing nuclear technology. Conspiracy theories are rising concerning Iran’s internal and external enemies, with the decision to use the helicopter in bad weather and suspicions of Mossad’s involvement raising many questions. Although the loss of Ebrahim Raisi is a significant setback for the Islamic Republic, a new president will soon be elected, and reports suggest that Mojtaba Khamenei will succeed Ayatollah Khamenei as Supreme Leader, potentially pushing the Islamic Republic into dynastic politics.

  • Is Iran losing grip on Iraq?

    Is Iran losing grip on Iraq?

    Iraq is in the midst of a power struggle between two power houses: one is their neighbor, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the other is the United States. Both parties are heavily interested in this country, which is divided between Shia, Sunni Muslims, and Kurds, situated in a volatile location in the Middle East. After turbulent years under Saddam Hussein and a subsequent power vacuum, Iraqi politics became heavily influenced by Iran due to the rise of Shia-based political parties. The interests of Shia, Sunni, Iran, and the US  have led to the near disintegration of the state, with the country nearly fragmented and the northern Kurdish territory almost functioning as an independent nation. However, in recent years, it is noted that this Shia-majority country is shifting away from Iran-oriented politics. Many believe that Iraq is drawing closer to the US and distancing itself from Iran.

    Iraq operates as a federal parliamentary representative democratic republic. It follows a multi-party system where executive authority rests with the Prime Minister of the Council of Ministers, serving as the head of government, and the President of Iraq, who serves as the head of state. The Council of Representatives holds legislative power. Abdul Latif Rashid, an ethnic Kurd, currently holds the presidency, wielding significant executive authority. He appointed the Council of Ministers, functioning as the cabinet or government. Mohammed Shia’ Al Sudani, a Shia leader, serves as the current prime minister. Despite its democratic framework, Iraq exhibits signs of an increasingly authoritarian regime. But As regional tensions escalate, Washington will enhance its relationship with Iraq and may consider Iraq’s prime minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani as a potential intermediary in its dealings with Iran.

    Both the United States and Iraq find themselves in a period where they need each other. Al-Sudani recently visited Washington, DC, meeting President Joe Biden and other top US officials. From the White House, al-Sudani addressed the regional tensions and expressed his encouragement for all efforts to stop the expansion of the conflict area. Iraqi officials state that their country was among a handful informed by Iran of the attack on Israel, which followed an Israeli strike on the Iranian Embassy in Damascus. For the US, the Iran-Israel clash highlighted the necessity of maintaining US troops in Iraq for the time being and emphasized the need for the Iraqi government to do more to prevent Iraq from being used as a base of operations against the US and Israel by Iran and allied groups. More than 20 years after the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 aimed at removing former leader Saddam Hussein, 2,500 US troops are still stationed in the country, primarily undertaking counter-ISIL (ISIS) roles. Amid regional tensions, al-Sudani appears to prioritize Iraq’s domestic issues, and aims to attract investment in the country’s private sector. Iraq’s economy remains highly reliant on the United States and its financial infrastructure. Al-Sudani is advocating for fewer American restrictions on the Iraqi banking system, increased investments, and enhanced security ties.

    Iran-aligned groups, such as the militias that constitute the Islamic Resistance in Iraq (IRI), pose a threat to both Iraq and US troops stationed there, with many expecting them to become the next al-Qaeda. US troops became targets in the aftermath of Israel’s war on Gaza. There is reason to fear Iran-aligned groups in the country remobilizing if regional tensions expand.  Finding a balance between Iran’s influence and US interests is not easy, with al-Sudani pushed to call for a complete withdrawal of US troops in January, seemingly in response to some 53 US attacks on Iran-aligned groups in Iraq. It’s made clear that al-Sudani doesn’t want to provoke enmity with Iran either. However, his warming connection with the US suggests a weakening of Iran’s control over Iraqi politics. Iraq is set to hold elections in 2025, and the prime minister needs the support of his domestic backers as well as the US if he wants to renew his mandate.

    As for the US, Biden will have both domestic and regional concerns regarding Iraq. The Biden administration is seeking to counter Iranian influence in Iraq at a regional level. The US would seek commitments to ensure Iraq’s sovereignty by minimizing Iranian influence across all levels of decision-making, including politics, economics, and security. And the US will aim to persuade al-Sudani to cooperate with US allies in Erbil, the capital of the Kurdish region of northern Iraq. In the last six months, officials from the Kurdish regional government have made several visits to Washington, aiming to enlist the Biden administration’s support in mediating with Baghdad. The Kurdish leaders generally view Sudani favorably and see him as genuine in his efforts to resolve Baghdad-Erbil issues.

    Iraq, one of the oldest places of civilization, has the third richest oil reserve after Saudi Arabia and Iran. However, it’s true that the country has never fully utilized its potential. There are many blames attributed to the United States, who removed Saddam Hussein for his alleged weapons of mass destruction. Iran has also been blamed for pushing its interests and causing political turmoil in the country. Islamist organizations like Al-Qaeda and ISIS also played a role in the destruction of Iraq. There are many parties to blame, but ultimately, the people are the ones who suffer the most, and they witness the failing of their beautiful state. However, recent developments in politics, moving towards a more neutral stance and cooperating with the United States and its wealth, offer hope for improvements in Iraq.

  • Assessing the Israel-Iran War Fear: Perspectives and Predictions

    Assessing the Israel-Iran War Fear: Perspectives and Predictions

    The focal point of the Middle East conflict currently lies between two nations: Israel and Iran. Egypt is no longer an Arab superpower, and Turkey and Saudi Arabia show no interest in engaging in conflict with Israel. Other countries in the region lack the capability to challenge Israel. The only remaining powerhouse opposing Israel is Iran. Interestingly, Iran also lacks good terms with the United States. As animosity between Israel and Iran escalates, along with their leaders’ cries and calls for revenge, the world fears that war will break out. These countries have been embroiled in tensions for years, targeting each other’s officials. Iran funds and supports terrorist organizations, including Hamas, posing a threat to Israel. In response, Israel targets Iran’s top leaders, heightening tensions. The attack on Iran’s embassy in Syria further escalated tensions between the two countries. Subsequently, Iran launched around 300 drones and missiles at Israel, prompting Israel to retaliate with missile strikes targeting Isfahan, an important city for Iran. The breaking news alerts that followed stirred global apprehension, with people worldwide fearing that the region had taken a step closer to full-blown conflict.

    In Reality, no one will benefit from a catastrophic war at present. These countries possess a significant amount of artillery, and Israel possesses nuclear weapons, while Iran is accused of having nuclear bombs and high-impact weaponry. The war would be disastrous for the entire region. After World War II, there haven’t been collisions between major powers; instead, there have been instances of larger countries invading smaller ones, as observed in attacks like those on Ukraine or Gaza. Israel’s attack on Gaza is driven by a desire for revenge and is highly politically motivated, and they don’t need a full-scale war. If they were to attack Iran, there would be consequences, potentially involving the intervention of Iran’s closest allies, such as Russia and China. However, Israel is under intense pressure from its closest allies to restrain any response. Leaders from Washington, Paris, and London have openly expressed deep concern over the rapid escalation of a decades-long shadow war into a precarious exchange of direct strikes. For months, US diplomats have been engaged in intensive efforts to prevent Israel’s conflict in Gaza from expanding into a wider conflict, shuttling between regional capitals.

    Though Iran and Israel initiated a drone shower against each other, it occurred on a small scale, merely considered as threats. The direct confrontation began with Israel’s attack on the embassy of Iran, resulting in the deaths of top diplomats. In retaliation, Iran struck Israel using drones. The US received information from Iran before they attacked Israel, which significantly reduced fatalities. Although the scale of the Iran attack was surprising, analysts noted that Iran exhibited some restraint by warning the US. If it deployed its weapons differently, it could cause more harm. As the conflict continues, Israel conducted an attack with missiles in the Iranian city of Isfahan. Isfahan is a historic cultural center and a military hub, hosting several important facilities, including a major airbase and factories linked to drone production and a uranium enrichment plant.

    Tehran had issued a warning that any Israeli counterattack would provoke a stronger retaliation, with President Ebrahim Raisi stating on Wednesday that even the slightest strike would elicit a “Massive and harsh” response. Within hours, the US confirmed the attack as an Israeli strike and reiterated its longstanding call for restraint. The US Secretary of State, Antony Blinken said that they are committed to Israel’s security and they are also committed to de-escalation”. By Friday night, officials in Iran and Israel had merely stated that multiple drones had been shot down; neither country had admitted who had authorized the strike. However, Iran and Israel appear to have cooled down now. Some speculate that the uneasy pact of silence offered the only slim hope that the latest round of dangerous attacks might have temporarily ceased.

    Actually, these attacks between these countries are demanded by their administrations, which face protests from their people. For the Islamic Republic of Iran, they can present that they are only voicing support for Islam and Palestine. This is important because the country faces backlash from the population about stringent Islamic rules. So it is necessary for them to present a stance against Israel, although they know they are not capable of a full-scale war against Israel. If the war continues, it’s not certain that Russia and China will not cooperate with them, because Russia does not want to fight with Israel and China gives importance to its economy; they would face pressure from the China Sea if they entered into war. Therefore, the political stalemate once again spared the world. It appears that the likelihood of a full-scale war is nonexistent.

  • Is Iran’s Attack On Israel A Well-Staged Political Drama?

    Is Iran’s Attack On Israel A Well-Staged Political Drama?

    Iran wants to do anything to secure its image. They were humiliated by the attack conducted by Israel on their consulate in Syria. An attack on their embassy is a big humiliation and a violation of international laws, in which Israel doesn’t have an interest. The Iranian government said they will seek vengeance. Though no country in the Middle East is ready or capable of fighting with Israel, Iran knows it. But Iran did it. They flew almost 300 drones and missiles to Israel on April 14th. Iran’s attack on Israel was obstructed by the US, UK, and Israel. But the following events make Iran’s attacks dubious as well-planned political drama. There is news coming that the attack was carried out after informing neighboring countries and Turkey. Iran said they are stopping further attacks after, and they said they balanced the humiliation they got from the consulate attack. For Israel, they gained something to present to the world after experiencing the huge negative impact of the continuing attack on Gaza. For the US and UK, they can say they protected Israel, which is important for the elections coming in these countries. So Iran’s attack on Israel is a win for all.

    Since the formation of Modern Israel, tensions have existed between Israel and its Muslim neighbors, leading to a lot of wars. Though there was a brief period of peace in the last decade, which led to relations between Israel and prominent Arab countries reaching an all-time high. Credit for this goes to Donald Trump, who worked out these relationships. However, the Hamas attack on October 7th turned all scenarios upside down. When Israeli people’s anger flared up due to failures in governance and safety, as well as Hamas’ capture of Israeli citizens as hostages, Israel started an attack on Gaza. When this attack on Gaza continues after several months, it seems that the situation in the Middle East is becoming less volatile, which is interesting, considering the suffering of people in Gaza. Hamas leaders may find refuge in Qatar, and Hezbollah is reluctant to intervene. Neighboring countries are not ready to participate, and Islamic leaders like Saudi Arabia and Turkey are not overly interested in these issues. However, attacking a consulate and killing officials severely damaged Israel’s reputation, and the killing of aid workers probably set Israel back. On this occasion, Iran’s drone missiles were flown to Israel. Everyone, including the US, was aware of Iran’s attack on Israel. Iran actually seized the opportunity to make a counter-attack on Israel, becoming a Muslim country still capable of fighting against Israel. Israel can use this to show the world that there is a threat to them. Though Israel easing restrictions and Iran stating they will not fight further, all seems settled.

    While Israel’s top general, Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi, provided the clearest confirmation yet since the attack that Israel would retaliate, the likelihood of a full-scale war appears to be diminishing. There will be targeted attacks from Israel to Iran or its allies. As two countries, Israel and Iran do not share a land border, but Iran’s closest allies, Syria and Lebanon, are neighbors of Israel. However, attacking these neighbors is not a good idea for Israel now. There is doubt that the US or UK will not stand with this idea, and there is discontent against Netanyahu in Israel, a prolonged war will only escalate this. Attacking Syria will draw Russia and the US directly into the warfare, leading to a devastating situation. Iran is sure that airstrikes against Israel will not work out; they are well prepared for it. Moreover, Iraq will not always cooperate with Iran to use their sky as a pathway for missiles. Attacking through the sea is almost impossible, but they can intercept Israel-linked ships from the Persian shore or Arabian sea with the help of Houthis. Iran is already holding an Israel-linked ship for violating the rules.

    The war on social media and targeted killings will continue. Israel, the US, and the UK will support the campaign against Iran, while Iran will aid terrorist organizations fighting against Israel. This pattern is likely to persist, as per analysis of a new world order. In modern times, starting a war is easy, but ending it is incredibly difficult. A possible deadlock and a perpetual war will be the result of modern war. The Ukraine war serves as a good example of this. Russia cannot progress further, even though they have been severely impacted economically and politically, despite their experience in warfare and possession of high artillery. Economic setbacks are not tolerable in modern politics, which are highly intertwined with business interests. Therefore, the likelihood of further escalating tensions into a full-scale war between Israel and Iran is low.Yet, the drama, Iran’s attack on Israel was well-staged and appealing.

  • Israel’s Attack on Syrian Consulate: Further Escalation of Tensions?

    Israel’s Attack on Syrian Consulate: Further Escalation of Tensions?

    The recent phase of the Israel-Hamas conflict began with Hamas’s attack on Israeli civilians, sparking an ongoing cycle of violence. With the death toll now exceeding 30,000, tensions between Israel and Hamas, essentially a proxy conflict involving Iran, have reached a critical point. Targeting Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, two major supporters of Hamas, Israel has escalated its military activities in Syria. The reported Israeli airstrike on Iran’s embassy in Syria, which claimed the lives of senior commanders among its casualties, is a noteworthy show.  On this occasion, There is concern that if Iran bypasses intermediaries like Hezbollah and Hamas, it may resort to direct warfare, potentially involving Syria and Lebanon in a wider conflict.

    Israel has a history of targeting Iran’s military installations and its proxies in Syria, but the recent attack on the consulate marked the first direct strike on Iran’s expansive embassy compound. Since Egypt’s peace agreement with Israel, Iran has emerged as a leading voice among Islamic communities seeking retribution against Israel. Many Muslims worldwide perceive Iran as the foremost advocate for Muslim solidarity and retaliation against Israel. While tensions have been high, direct warfare between the two nations has been avoided in recent years. However, the latest incident has raised concerns about the potential for Iran to enter the conflict directly.

    Observers note that the Israel-Hamas conflict is transcending local boundaries, with Israel conducting operations into Lebanon and Syria to target Hezbollah, an organization linked to Hamas. Additionally, there have been renewed attacks by Iranian-backed militias on U.S. and Israeli targets in Iraq. Recent Israeli strikes in Syria have resulted in significant casualties among Syrian forces and Hezbollah, marking the highest death toll since the Israel-Hamas conflict began in October.

    Tehran has vowed a strong response to the consulate attack. Earlier reports from Iran’s ambassador to Syria, Hossein Akbari, indicated that five to seven individuals, including diplomats, tragically lost their lives. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps confirmed the deaths of seven Iranian military advisors, including senior commander Mohammad Reza Zahedi, from its elite Quds Force. Israel typically refrains from commenting on its military actions in Syria, but The New York Times reported that four unnamed Israeli officials acknowledged Israel’s responsibility for the attack.

    Iran’s U.N. mission swiftly condemned the strike on their embassy, denouncing it as a “Flagrant Violation” of international law and the U.N. Charter. They stressed the threat it poses to regional peace and called for condemnation from the U.N. Security Council, asserting Iran’s right to respond decisively. Hezbollah echoed this sentiment, promising retaliation against the perpetrators.

    A number of Muslim countries denounced the incident, including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq, Jordan, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, and even Russia. Though it raised concerns about rising tensions, the U.S. state Department did not expect this to have an impact on negotiations to release Israeli captives held by Hamas. 

    The UN expressed deep concern but deferred comprehensive remarks for later. Ali Vaez, a senior adviser at the International Crisis Group, noted the significance of the strike in targeting both individuals and the location.

    Israel typically refrains from commenting on its targeted assassination strikes, although Iranian media openly acknowledged the loss of high-ranking figures. Last year, Israel targeted Sayed Reza Musawi, the IGRC head of logistics in the Levant, among others. In the recent strike, Brig Gen Mohammad Reza Zahedi and his deputy, Gen Haji Rahimi, were killed, along with Brig Gen Hossein Amirollah, the chief of general staff for the al-Quds force in Syria and Lebanon.

    Iran has pledged retaliation following Israeli airstrikes that demolished the Iranian consulate in Damascus, resulting in the deaths of at least 11 people. However, the likelihood of a full-scale war between Iran and Israel remains low at present. While both nations have been involved in numerous conflicts in the past, they currently appear to prefer targeted strikes over outright warfare. Some experts speculate that Israel may expand its operations to Lebanon, Syria, and possibly Yemen, but a direct conflict with Iran appears improbable. Iran is unlikely to deploy troops to Lebanon or Syria, as both countries are suffering by Israel. Consequently, the conflict is expected to persist as a proxy war characterized by targeted killings.

  • Iran Legislative Elections 2024: Polls Open for “Ceremonial” Election

    Iran Legislative Elections 2024: Polls Open for “Ceremonial” Election

    The Islamic Republic of Iran is now holding elections for the legislative assembly and the Assembly of Experts. Sixty-two million eligible voters are ready and willing to carry out their civic duties on Friday. Starting at 8:00 a.m. local time, the event is scheduled to last for ten hours. However, historical trends suggest that voting hours may be extended until midnight, just as they have in prior elections. 

    The candidates are obtained by passing through high refinement processes. There are a lot of criteria to contest in the election. Interestingly even though there are tight restrictions to contest, About 15,200 individuals are running for the 290 seats, which is unusual. Candidates face disqualification if found actively supporting the Shah, endorsing political parties or organizations considered illegal, facing charges related to anti-government activities, converting to another faith, renouncing the Islamic faith, being convicted of corruption, treason, fraud, bribery, involvement in drug-related activities, or violating Sharia law. Additionally, candidates are ineligible if they played a role in the pre-1979 government, possess significant land holdings, have a history of drug addiction, hold convictions for actions against the state, or have been charged with apostasy. These stringent criteria underscore the complex eligibility standards aimed at ensuring the suitability and alignment of candidates with the Islamic principles and the state’s interests.

    And Islamic Republic’s election is very interesting because of its lower turnouts. And this time there are a lot of reasons for the lower turnouts. People’s interest in this ceremonial election is very low, questioning even the essence of democracy. A low turnout, reflective of a populace disenchanted and losing hope. The aftermath of Iran’s severe crackdown on protesters, resulting in numerous casualties, injuries, arrests, and even death penalties, has cast a shadow over the political and social milieu. Consequently, the atmosphere has grown more repressive, fostering widespread dissatisfaction among the public. Millions of Iranians, according to many observers, have given up on the idea that the country’s governing mullahs can pull out of an economic catastrophe brought on by a confluence of corruption, incompetence, and U.S. sanctions. Many Iranians may stay at home due to popular outrage about declining living conditions and widespread corruption, even if establishment loyalists are expected to favor hardline candidates.In recent months, the cost of staples including bread, pork, rice, and dairy products has soared. About 40% is the official inflation rate. Over 50% is what analysts and insiders estimate. Since the presidential elections in 2021, the national currency has depreciated sharply against the dollar on the open market. Housing costs have risen, motorists’ fuel quotas have been reduced and prices for internet services increased. The economic pain, blamed by the ruling conservatives on the former administration, has earned the government criticism from all sides. And in the weird political landscape of Islamic Republic, people doesnt have another option, just vote to satisfy the authority’s watch dogs, or be brave and stay out of polling.

    Recent polls conducted by the state television channel indicate a projected national turnout of 41.5%, while a survey from Ispa, a semi-official polling agency, estimates a slightly lower turnout at 38.5%. The conservative establishment’s decision to exclude moderates and reformists from standing within the regime’s ranks during President Ebrahim Raisi’s 2021 election contributed to a turnout below 50%—a departure from the trend observed since the 1979 Islamic revolution.

    Critics, particularly reformists, characterize the elections as “meaningless, non-competitive, unfair, and ineffective in the administration of the country.” This sentiment underscores the prevailing disillusionment with the current state of Iran’s governance. The Twitter hashtags #VOTENoVote are being actively disseminated on social media by Iranian activists and opposition groups, who contend that a high voter turnout will validate the Islamic Republic. Hardliners and subdued conservatives who all pledge allegiance to Iran’s Islamic revolutionary ideals will face off in Friday’s poll, which has been boycotted by mainstream moderates and conservatives and dubbed an “unfree and unfair election” by reformists.   On the international front, U.S. spokesperson Matthew Miller underscored that a significant portion of Iranians harbors no expectation of a free and fair electoral process. He further highlighted the long-standing perception of Iran’s political system as featuring undemocratic, non-transparent administrative, judicial, and electoral systems. The global awareness of these systemic issues amplifies the stakes of the ongoing elections, casting a critical spotlight on Iran’s political trajectory and the public’s perception of its leadership.

    In this occasion call for boycotts , The Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has been in power for more than 30 years, urged Iranians to cast ballots on Thursday. He claimed that abstaining from voting “would not solve anything”. State media broadcast numerous election specials and launched new channels to feature candidates in an effort to boost voter turnout and excitement in the lead-up to the polls. State media broadcast numerous election specials and launched new channels to feature candidates in an effort to boost voter turnout and excitement in the lead-up to the polls. Though a state-affiliated polling firm is predicting a 41% turnout for the parliamentary elections. 

    In the current electoral proceedings, the landscape is such that the outcomes may not instigate any substantive alterations within the nation, nor do they appear poised to address consequential political ramifications. Despite this, the election holds a heightened degree of fascination, primarily due to its potential role in determining the successor to Khomeni. This figure, vested with the comprehensive authority to shape policies and function as the country’s commander in chief, presides over a nation characterized by a volatile stance towards its neighbors and the United States.

    It is noteworthy that the Parliament, in the broader context, wields limited influence over foreign policy and Iran’s nuclear agenda. The prevailing sentiment is one of disinterest and non-participation, characterizing this electoral episode as yet another Asian drama that seems to mock the essence of democracy. Perhaps, this lukewarm response can be interpreted as a reflection of people’s resentment towards the challenges of life, the formidable economic situation, and the widespread protests that ensued following the tragic demise of Mahsa Amini. Just another electoral act for the sake of an election, nothing more.