THE CRY for change could hardly be clearer. In the presidential election on July 5th, 16.4m Iranians voted for Masoud Pezeshkian, a reform-minded heart surgeon who wants talks with the West and women to have the right to dress as they choose. Just 13.5m Iranians voted for Saeed Jalili, a hardliner who advocates confrontation with Western “enemies”, enforcement of Iran’s conservative codes and preserving the system as it is. Even regime loyalists doubted his message. Mr Jalili attracted 8m fewer votes than did two hardliners who stood for president in 2021.
In acrimonious television debates, Mr Pezeshkian had called for negotiations with America that might slough off sanctions and rescue Iran from its “cage”. “Iran ghafas nist” (Farsi for “Iran is not in a cage”), retorted Mr Jalili, insisting the missiles Iran and its proxies have fired at Israel proved it had already broken free. Their opposing visions prompted fierce debates on the streets over whether to boycott an theocratic system or to vote to stem the tide of Talibanisation and escalation of tension with the West expected under Mr Jalili. In the end Iranians did both. They voted in large enough numbers to elect a reformer. (Mr Pezeshkian mobilised 8m more votes in the run-off than in the first round of voting.) But—with just under 50% of the electorate turning out to vote—Iranians still sent the message that they have lost confidence in the system. “Those who voted (for Mr Pezeshktian) or didn’t vote were one team driven by civil disobedience,” says Farhad Meysami, a former political prisoner, in a widely circulated social media post.