Iran International
As Americans head to the polls on Tuesday, many in Iran are closely watching the election, with some hoping Harris will pursue rapprochement and ease economic hardship while others count on Trump to renew maximum pressure and degrade the ruling system.
Many who voted for Massoud Pezeshkian in the June presidential election did so largely due to his central promise to address economic issues through diplomacy and the lifting of US sanctions.
Noting Iranians' keen interest in the US election, former Foreign Ministry spokesperson and ex-ambassador to Baku, Seyed Abbas Mousavi, posted on X: "Our valuable experience over the past 45 years shows it hardly matters who wins the election. Unless Iran or the United States shifts its core foreign policy principles, there is little chance for lasting reconciliation or a comprehensive solution to Iran's problems."
Iranians are looking to the new US president to bring them prosperity and security—an expectation they might otherwise hold for their own president. However, they likely understand that Pezeshkian is in no position to resolve these issues. Even former President Hassan Rouhani once expressed hope that a US president could help alleviate Iran’s financial troubles. Ahead of Iran’s 2017 presidential election, Rouhani likened the world to a village, with the US president as its chief, suggesting that Iran’s problems could be addressed by engaging with this “village chieftain.”
However, many Iranians completely opposed to the Islamic Republic, prefer the presidency of Donald Trump, hoping that his tough stance toward Tehran can fatally weaken the political and military establishment and lead to its downfall.
Although Iranian officials often pin their hopes on a US president to help solve the country’s challenges, they are too proud—or ideologically restrained—to openly seek American goodwill. They prefer a resolution that doesn’t compromise their dignity. Rather than directly calling on the United States to lift sanctions, Iranian presidents, including former President Ebrahim Raisi and his successor Massoud Pezeshkian, have instead promised “to have the sanctions lifted,” carefully avoiding mention of who would actually lift them to sidestep acknowledging dependence on the US.
Iranians proudly assert that Iran is one of the world’s oldest nations. Whenever neighboring countries challenge its sovereignty—such as by claiming ownership of the three Persian Gulf islands—Iranian media, officials, and citizens remind them that while Iran boasts thousands of years of documented history, most of its neighbors lack even a century as established states. As a testament to this heritage, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi held a grand celebration in Persepolis marking 2,500 years of Iranian monarchy, with leaders from over 100 nations in attendance.
Iranian officials, including former Presidents Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hassan Rouhani, have frequently reminded not only their regional counterparts but also US officials that Iran is home to a rich civilization spanning several millenia. Despite the Islamic Republic’s poor record on human rights, its leaders often highlight that the world’s first known human rights charter was inscribed in stone by none other than Cyrus the Great. Conveniently, however, they overlook the fact that while Iran is an ancient nation, the Islamic Republic itself is less than half a century old.
This distinction should alert the new US president to a key demand voiced by Iranians in the streets: the need to differentiate between Iran as a nation and the Islamic Republic as a regime. When responding to actions by the Islamic Republic, US and other Western officials should take care not to attribute those actions to Iran and its people, if they wish to avoid deeply offending them.
Over the past 45 years, whenever the Islamic Republic and the United States sought to blame each other for their strained ties, the US cited "Iran’s" 1979 seizure of the US embassy and the 444-day hostage crisis, while the Islamic Republic pointed to the US-backed 1953 coup against Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh.
Notably, the Islamic Republic overlooks that it outlawed Mossadegh’s supporters shortly after the 1979 revolution and quickly renamed a Tehran street dedicated to him by the people. It also tends to forget that in March 2000, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright offered a statement of regret, though some argue her wording fell short of a full apology.
While Iranian officials frequently speak of “having the sanctions lifted,” the only concession they seem prepared to offer is a return to the 2015 nuclear deal, which is effectively defunct. They also avoid mentioning that US demands include ceasing support and funding for militant groups like Hamas and Hezbollah and ensuring that Iranian-backed proxies stop threatening US interests and allies in the region.
Before 1979, Iran was the United States' closest ally and largest trade partner in the Middle East. Returning to that level of friendship and cooperation seems nearly impossible now. The looming threat of a broader regional conflict makes resetting ties even more unlikely, especially with forces both inside and outside Iran determined to prevent any rapprochement.
Khamenei’s silence is particularly striking given that Donald Trump—a former president who withdrew from the 2015 JCPOA nuclear deal and imposed “maximum pressure” sanctions, nearly bankrupting the Islamic Republic and pushing it to the brink of collapse—is once again a strong candidate.
At this juncture, Khamenei is in an unprecedentedly weak position. Over the past year, Iran’s economic crisis has worsened, with the currency now worth just 1/10,000th of its value under the monarchy. His strongest regional proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah, have been significantly weakened. Israel has dared to launch an air strike with impunity and there is no end in sight to US sanctions.
Khamenei’s analysis of US elections through the novels of John Steinbeck and Howard Fast
Since Khamenei became Supreme Leader in 1989, the US has held eight presidential elections. Drawing on novels he has read, Khamenei has condemned the US for suppressing leftist groups and has repeatedly labeled both Democratic and Republican presidents as “fools” and “clowns.”
The first US presidential election during Khamenei’s leadership took place in November 1992, though he made no specific comments on it.
The second election, in November 1996, pitted Democrat Bill Clinton against Republican Bob Dole. During the campaign, Khamenei met with Iranian media leaders, where he sharply criticized American democracy. Referencing his favorite leftist author, Howard Fast, Khamenei analyzed the US elections. Drawing on Fast’s novels, likely The Immigrants, he condemned what he called the repression of leftists, socialists, and communists in the US, stating, “Some of his novels have been translated into Persian—read them to see the shocking accounts about leftists!”
In the same meeting, he encouraged attendees to read John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath, saying, “Read it to understand that the so-called center of democracy, praised by those with bad taste in Iran, couldn’t even tolerate leftists, as they believed Marxism challenged the American capitalist system.”
A month after the election, on December 6, 1996, Khamenei again discussed US elections with students, citing a leftist American author, probably Howard Fast, to analyze the election process.
The next US election during Khamenei’s leadership was on November 7, 2000, which saw George W. Bush win. By this time, Khamenei had shifted his approach, remarking in May 2000, “I’m not quoting any fanatical Muslim writer; I’m quoting Westerners themselves. I prefer not to name authors, but American writers explain how elections for city councils, Congress, and the presidency operate. Anyone observing it will see that public opinion has nearly no role.”
In July, he again addressed US elections in a meeting with officials, noting he had told President Mohammad Khatami that “in Western democracies, a group comes to the ballot boxes and votes as the party directs, and that’s the end of it!” He continued, “Here [in the Islamic Republic], people love their officials; it’s not just a voting relationship.”
In September 2000, speaking with Basij students, Khamenei referenced American books he’d read, saying, “Read these American books on media roles and the nature of elections—see how city and governor elections operate. When it comes to presidential and congressional elections, money plays the main role, while people are sidelined; there’s no true democracy.”
In December 2000, Khamenei addressed those upset with his criticism of American democracy: “These aren’t our words, nor are they biased or uninformed. They’re based on Western literature’s prominent figures who acknowledge it—yes, in public, they claim people’s votes count, but in reality, they don’t.”
In the early 2000s, as Khamenei ramped up his attacks on US democracy, he was tightening his grip on Iranian politics, media, and elections, increasing the focus on ideological and political loyalty and bolstering the influence of hardliners.
From accusing Americans of racism to critiquing Occupy Wall Street
In his 2012 Nowruz speech, Khamenei referenced Obama’s 2008 election: “The current US president came in with a message of change, implying the situation was so bad it required change.” Calling Americans “racist,” he said, “They didn’t want to vote for a Black man but did, hoping for change.”
Referring to the Occupy Wall Street movement, Khamenei said, “The Occupy Wall Street movement started in US cities. Is this a good situation? It’s simple math. Americans accepted change, meaning the situation is bad, but nothing has improved. America is struggling.”
A week before the election, he again discussed US politics with students, saying, “Isn’t it disgraceful that presidential candidates try to please Zionists and prove their loyalty? Each tries to show more obedience to the Jewish and Zionist communities, which have trapped them.”
Khamenei’s consistent view on US political parties
The next US election took place on November 8, 2016, with Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton as the main candidates. Khamenei had already weighed in on the upcoming election in his 2016 Nowruz speech, remarking, “In a few months, the US will change its administration, but there’s no guarantee the next one will honor past commitments. The candidates are competing in anti-Iran rhetoric.”
On May 14, 2016, he responded to Trump’s campaign threats to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal, stating, “We won’t violate the agreement, but if they tear it up, we’ll burn it.”
Two weeks before the election, Khamenei commented on the US debates: “Look at their presidential election; it’s down to two people. Watch their debates and how they treat each other! One of these two will become president.”
After Trump’s victory, Khamenei remarked, “America is America; neither party has ever benefited us. We don’t mourn or celebrate.”
Khamenei’s last notable comment on US elections came on November 20, 2022, when he told citizens in Isfahan, “Since the revolution, every US president has fought us. Some have vanished into history’s trash heap, while others are still alive. From Carter, Clinton, and Obama to Reagan, Bush, and the ‘previous fool’—and now this ‘dazed and confused fellow’ who claims he’ll save Iran.”