The death in custody of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini in 2022, days after the morality police arrested her for an alleged breach of dress code, triggered monthslong protests.

Pezeshkian replaced the ultraconservative Ebrahim Raisi, who died in a helicopter crash in May.

During election campaigning, he had vowed to “fully” oppose police patrols enforcing the mandatory hijab headscarf, as well as easing long-standing internet restrictions.

Relations with the West

At his news conference, Pezeshkian briefly touched on other topics including Iran’s fraught relations with the United States and the 2015 nuclear deal.

“We do not want to fight with America if it respects our rights,” he said. “It is not us who are hostile (to the Americans). We have not built military bases around their country,” Pezeshkian added, referring to U.S. bases in the Gulf and in Iraq.

Iran and the United States have had no diplomatic relations since 1980, the year after the Islamic Revolution that toppled its Western-backed Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi.

‘Disarm Israel’

He also insisted on Iran’s right to maintain its missile program, which has drawn Western criticism, as a deterrent against its arch-foe Israel.

“They (the West) want us not to have missiles, that is fine, but you need to disarm Israel first,” he said, adding that otherwise “they can drop bombs on us whenever they want, like in Gaza.”

  • Telodzrum@lemmy.worldEnglish
    17·
    3 months ago

    That’s fun and all, but the office of the President is very weak in Iran. What does the Supreme Leader say?

  • Eiri@lemmy.caEnglish
    9·
    3 months ago

    Am I… Agreeing? With something an Iranian President said?

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.comEnglish
      81·
      3 months ago

      If be a lot more sympathetic to Iran if they weren’t actively participating in Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

      • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
        8·
        3 months ago

        I have a bit more sympathy for the president, since his decisions can all be vetoed by the ayatollah, and he broadly seems to be trying to move Iran in the right direction

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    81·
    3 months ago

    Later:

    Iranian morality police and religious hardliners call xor the arrest of President Pezeshkian

    Edit: I’m leaving it because it’s more amusing that way

  • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.worldEnglish
    81·
    3 months ago

    Conservatives will say absolutely anything that serves them in the moment. Never ever believe the word of a conservative. Never.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.comEnglish
      4·
      3 months ago

      US presidents are highly constrained in how they can use their power. Why would you expect Iranian presidents to be any different? They have even less power on paper because Iran also has a Supreme Leader.

    • IndustryStandard@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      82·
      3 months ago

      And roll over for Israel? Very convenient.

      Iran agreed to the nuclear deal. America ripped up the agreement.

      • GiveMemes@jlai.luEnglish
        34·
        3 months ago

        Trump ripped up the agreement***

        When the two major parties have massively different diplomatic policies we have problems like this a lot.

        It can also be good sometimes tho like when Jimmy Carter became president and started cracking down on the junta in Argentina and flying out victims and stuff.

        • IndustryStandard@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
          71·
          3 months ago

          We do not apply the same generosity of isolating a president from country policy when it comes to Iranian presidents. But leaving Trump aside there are many other instances where America screwed over Iran.

          • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
            2·
            3 months ago

            We do for the ayatollahs though, because they are the ones who actually make the decisions, same goes for Russian presidents and CCP general secretaries

        • OBJECTION!@lemmy.mlEnglish
          93·
          3 months ago

          Trump ripped up the agreement***

          That’s true, but also let me just say this.

          Whenever the US does something bad, you can’t just blame it on the whole US, you have to look at the specific people responsible for it, right? But what about when another country, like Iran, for example, does something bad? Do we say, “Oh well obviously you can’t blame Iran in general for it?” Very rarely. Often, people go so far as to not only paint an entire government negatively off a bad action, but to paint and entire culture and people that way, going back even to previous, unrelated governments that governed previous generations, completely different structures doing completely different things. Post-9/11, you saw people painting the entire Muslim world as warlike religious fanatics, even going back to Mideval times. People sometimes fail to make a distinction between the USSR and modern Russia. And likewise in China, I’ve seen people before trying to argue that China is inherently domineering based on ancient history.

          When we’re taught history in school, all of our country’s decisions are taught with the full context and perspective, we’re taught what people were concerned about and why they did it and who were the ones who actually did it, and the conclusion for bad stuff is that it was an unfortunate necessity, or a mistake, or the product of a few bad apples in an otherwise positive project.

          You are right, of course, that it was Trump who pulled out of the deal. But I think it’s important to understand that that nuance is only really seen from the inside, that from the perspective of Iran, for example, it’s just the US being fickle, and that if we expect the world to be understanding of that sort of nuance to our government’s actions, it’s important to apply the same sort of nuance any time we look at the actions of other countries.

          • GiveMemes@jlai.luEnglish
            22·
            3 months ago

            Except that Iran isn’t a democracy in practice or really by any stretch of the imagination. Maybe in the 80s, but when a country has a leader with complete and total authority, it really doesn’t matter.

            We blame Putin for the actions of Russia bc he has supreme authority over Russia. We cannot blame a single president for the same, as 1, they don’t have supreme authority in most matters, and 2, unlike Russia the US is actually a representative democracy, whether or not you like the options available.

            In essence, I disagree with the premise that this is the norm. It’s not only visible from the inside. If people don’t care enough to find out, that’s a different problem, but in general, diplomatic officials tend to know abt this kind of stuff because it’s their job to.

            • OBJECTION!@lemmy.mlEnglish
              41·
              3 months ago

              Whether a country is democratic or not doesn’t really have anything to do with it. Every country, including non-democratic ones, has different factions and inner workings.

              We cannot blame a single president for the same

              Is this a typo? You just said that Trump was responsible for pulling out of the Iran deal, which is true, and which he had the power to do unilaterally.

              • GiveMemes@jlai.luEnglish
                12·
                3 months ago

                Nuance. Trump did have that power. He did not, by any means, have power over the entirety of US policy. The fact that the Republicans had significant congressional control also gave him, but actually them, more overall power, but still not absolute by any sense of the imagination. Absolutely every country has different factions and inner workings, but in countries where there is a supreme authority, those are by and large null and void. The US does not have any one supreme authority (except money maybe lol)

                I’m basically saying that we can only blame the people that had the power and that took the action in question, or, alternatively, the people with power over them.

                • OBJECTION!@lemmy.mlEnglish
                  21·
                  3 months ago

                  Absolutely every country has different factions and inner workings, but in countries where there is a supreme authority, those are by and large null and void.

                  That’s not true. Even in dictatorships, the person at the top still has people who they need to keep happy in order to stay in power. Nobody gets to or stays at the top on their own, what happens is that they’re supported in that position by whatever interests they represent. If someone comes to power in a military coup, for instance, they have to keep the military happy or they’ll get replaced.

                  More to the point, it’s not just about who gets blame or credit for stuff, it’s about understanding the mechanics of a system, and the history, and the various material factors and interests that go into decision making.