Iran International
In his first televised interview as President, Masoud Pezeshkian attempted to maintain the persona of a relatively candid politician but carefully sidestepped major issues and questions.
Pezeshkian made only brief mention of the Islamic Republic’s foreign policy, including its significant dispute with the West over its nuclear program—a conflict that has positioned Iran as a nuclear threshold power but has also impoverished the nation economically. The president merely acknowledged, in a single sentence, that the economic crisis was tied to both domestic and foreign factors.
Notably, Pezeshkian refrained from mentioning Israel, the United States, or the Middle East crisis, thereby avoiding the usual ideological rhetoric against "the enemies."
Five weeks into his presidency, Pezeshkian was somewhat candid in listing the symptoms of Iran's current challenges but stopped short of addressing the fundamental causes. He highlighted issues such as delayed payments to wheat farmers, energy shortages, environmental crises, and the underpayment of teachers and nurses—symptoms of the country’s deeper problems.
While he emphasized the need for national accord, Pezeshkian did not discuss the importance of media freedom or the release of political prisoners. He spoke of respecting diverse opinions but overlooked the harsh sentences handed out for even mild criticism of the clerical government.
Rouydad 24, a major reformist-leaning news website in Tehran, published a critical analysis of Pezeshkian’s interview, stating, "The president's first address to the public can hardly be described as a success in terms of appeal, though it wasn't a failure either. He candidly addressed some of the country's most pressing issues, focusing on justice, while skillfully avoiding topics related to problems surrounding the concept of freedom."
Pezeshkian also failed to mention the recent death of Mohammad Mir-Mousavi, an Iranian citizen who died from beatings while in police custody in Lahijan. He skirted around issues such as the hijab mandate and severe internet restrictions, insisting that such policy matters are under discussion and that experts will devise solutions. This led Rouydad 24 to conclude that the president’s remarks were "short on freedom."
On foreign policy, Pezeshkian largely avoided the topic, neglecting both its role as a primary cause of Iran’s economic woes and its reinforcement of the regime’s anti-Israel and anti-West rhetoric. Although Pezeshkian is scheduled to attend the UN General Assembly in New York later in September, he offered no hints about any specific diplomatic plans.
He did emphasize the importance of engaging the Iranian diaspora, who could potentially invest billions of dollars in the country, helping to alleviate the current fiscal crisis. However, he failed to address the regime’s policies that have driven millions of the most educated and financially capable Iranians out of the country.
Unlike Cuba where classic cars are almost exclusively American-made imports before the country’s 1959 Revolution, there are around 7,000 classic American, British, and other cars in Iran most of which date back to the 1960s and as late as the Islamic Revolution of 1979.
To the enthusiasts, these cars and vintage imported home appliances such as fridges evoke nostalgic memories of the 1970s oil boom and huge imports of luxury items.
While Western exporters and manufacturers rushed to get a market share in the 1970s Iran with a booming economy and open-door economy, things drastically changed in 1979 when a coalition of Islamist clerics and anti-West leftists took over the country.
Many classic and vintage cars have been meticulously restored and are often displayed in various cities at special events organized by enthusiasts’ clubs. Almost none, however, are in active use because of a 2007 pollution ban and fuel restrictions resulting from fuel rationing.
Owners of a few hundred of these cars have managed to obtain “historical” plate numbers that allow them to drive them at special events or to sell them on but many can neither be used nor sold.
The Islamic Republic also has a Classic Car Museum where the luxury and several truly one-of-a-kind cars belonging to the former royal family are on display. These include a gilded Pierce Arrow A built for the founder of the Pahlavi Dynasty, Reza Shah, and a gilded Chrysler K-300 made for his son Mohammad-Reza Shah.
In the 1970s, the streets of major Iranian cities were lined with Cadillacs, Chevrolets, Mercedes, Jaguars, Alfa Romeos, and other luxury cars, while ordinary citizens drove their affordable, locally assembled Paykans (Hillman Hunters), purchased on credit with small monthly payments.
Many luxury foreign cars pre-dating the Islamic Revolution were shipped to the country during the oil boom of the 1970s by students studying abroad and government officials. These people were allowed to ship a car home tax-free when they returned home, for personal use or to sell at a good profit. In the late 1970s, those who traveled to Europe could also buy a car and drive back to avoid full import taxes.
In May 2022, Iran's Motorcycle and Automobile Federation became the 30th country to register its vintage cars with the Federation International des Vehicules Anciens (FIVA), a partner of UNESCO with consultative status, making it possible for the owners to use the federation’s international identification facilities for global registration of vintage cars in Iran.
But when it came to American cars, besides imports, several models of Cadillacs, Buicks, and Chevrolets were assembled in Iran by Iranian manufacturers in the 70s.
Buick Sky Lark sedan, for instance, was assembled by General Motors Iran (now Pars Khodro) between 1975 and 1979. The same company also rolled out its first Chevrolet Nova in 1976.
It was nearly two decades and a revolution later that Japanese, German, Korean, and French companies began producing Nissan, Mazda, Mercedes Benz, Kia, Hyundai, Peugeot, and Renault in Iran.
The UN sanctions imposed on Iran since 2005 brought these to a standstill. Despite the lifting of these sanctions in 2016, European and East Asian manufacturers have avoided investment in Iran and only Chinese car manufacturers have been active in the country.
At the center of this storm is the newly installed Pezeshkian administration, which has sent mixed signals about its intentions, further exacerbating the public's concern.
Abdolnaser Hemmati, the Minister of Economy, has tried to calm the waters, stating in a televised interview that no shocking economic measures should be taken, as society cannot bear the brunt of a gasoline price hike or other economic shocks. He emphasized that “any decision to raise gasoline prices must take into account its inevitable inflationary effects.”
But how long can the government spend billions of dollars, selling the cheapest gasoline at around 2 cents a liter or less than 10 cents a gallon, especially when it must import some of it to make up for the shortfall in domestic production.
Yet, Hemmati's words stand in contrast to those of the head of government, Massoud Pezeshkian. In a meeting just days earlier, the new president made it clear that he sees no logic in continuing to subsidize gasoline. “There is no logic in buying gasoline at the open market dollar rate and selling it at a subsidized price,” he said, questioning whether the current policy could continue. His comments only deepened the sense of uncertainty and fear that a price increase might be imminent.
These contradictory remarks have left Iranians wondering what to expect. On one hand, Mohammadreza Aref, First Vice President, reassured the public that the government would not make “any hasty decisions” regarding a gasoline price increase. On the other, Pezeshkian's previous statements, including those made during his election campaign, indicate a belief that the current subsidy system is untenable. In a conversation with Ali Khamenei's website, Pezeshkian argued that Iran’s energy imbalance, where gasoline is purchased for billions of dollars and sold at a fraction of its cost, cannot continue indefinitely.
Pezeshkian’s inconsistent messaging, particularly during the election debates, has only added to the confusion. While he initially supported removing subsidies and raising prices to 250,000 rials (about 42 cents) per liter, he later backtracked, saying that his remarks were taken out of context and that, in governance, such decisions must be left to experts. However, these contradictions have done little to quell public fear, especially given Iran’s recent history.
The specter of past fuel protests looms large. Under Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the quadrupling of fuel prices led to widespread unrest, with angry citizens setting fire to gas stations in Tehran. Similarly, Hassan Rouhani’s decision to triple gasoline prices sparked protests across the country, resulting in the deaths of nearly 1,500 people as the government suppressed dissent.
Currently, rationed gasoline is sold at 15,000 rials (2.5 cents) per liter, while non-rationed gasoline is sold at 30,000 rials (5 cents) per liter. For many, who earn less than 200 dollars per month a large increase could push an already struggling population to the brink.
Some believe that the Pezeshkian administration’s indecision is not just a political misstep; but it is a recipe for disaster. The country’s economic situation is dire, and people’s livelihoods are hanging by a thread. Rouydad24 news website in Tehran wrote on Saturday that “Any sudden price hike could lead to irreparable damage.”
As economic expert Mehdi Robati noted in a recent tweet, “Analyses based on the increase in gasoline prices and seeing this issue from a one-dimensional perspective are a banana peel under the feet of the Islamic Republic and will not bring any benefit to the country.”
Moreover, public trust in the government is at an all-time low. Many Iranians believe that if there were no fire, there would be no smoke—meaning if the government truly had no plans to raise gasoline prices, there would be no reason to discuss it. Instead, as reported by Rouydad 24, it appears that some advisors are attempting to prepare the public: shock them with the prospect of a significant price hike, only to then offer a gradual increase as a “compromise.”
This strategy is unlikely to succeed. The anger is palpable, with people expressing their discontent on social media. One viral video shows a farmer lambasting Pezeshkian’s comments, saying, “It’s not logical for you to increase gasoline prices and make us villagers and farmers poorer and more desperate by the day.”
Observers say the contradictions within the Pezeshkian administration are more than just political blunders—they are fuel for a fire that, if ignited, could engulf the nation in unrest once again.
