Voices From The Arab Press: Iran’s New President

A weekly selection of opinions and analyses from the Arab media around the world.

This election marks the beginning of Pezeshkian’s presidency following the death of former President Ebrahim Raisi in a plane crash near the Azerbaijani border last May.

He assured the Iranian people of his unwavering support, calling for their unity, trust, and cooperation to navigate the challenging path ahead.

Although Pezeshkian does not explicitly oppose the theocratic framework of Iran, he has promised a shift in approach, particularly criticizing the stringent measures enforced by the morality police on women. He has consistently advocated for reducing international tensions and revitalizing active diplomacy. Domestically, Pezeshkian has vowed to overhaul the health system, enhance the quality of medical services, cut treatment costs, and bolster educational standards and women’s roles in society.

On the international front, the former health minister and cardiologist advocates for greater openness to the West and other progressive ideas. However, Iran faces significant challenges on the ground. Calls for change are growing louder amid widespread dissatisfaction with the deteriorating economy, exacerbated by enduring sanctions and escalating regional tensions. The ruling elite, spearheaded by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, remains firmly in control, casting doubt on the potential for substantive policy shifts under the new president.

Given this entrenched power structure, substantial changes in Tehran’s stance on critical issues like the nuclear program and support for regional militant groups such as the Houthis, Hezbollah, and Hamas seem unlikely. While the new president may influence the tone of domestic and foreign policies, his impact will undoubtedly be circumscribed.

The nearly even split in the election results between the hardliner and reformist candidates indicates that a significant portion of the electorate supports the hardline stance. In such a political climate, with the supreme leader holding ultimate authority, it is clear that Pezeshkian’s presidency will come with limited powers, while the real decision-making will continue to reside with Khamenei, the de facto head of state. – Abdel Latif El-Menawy

A MESSAGE TO KHALED MASHAAL

An-Nahar, Lebanon, July 2

Palestine permeates our daily existence, shaping the air we breathe. My brother Khaled Mashaal: I am writing to you from Kuwait, where I grew up, was nurtured, and educated. Those were different times, filled with a spirit and purity we cherished. In those days, you were known as a son of Kuwait, just as we saw ourselves as sons of Palestine.

I recently read your statement where you remarked, “Gaza has been completely destroyed, and this is the high cost of resistance. Everyone must engage in the fight, not just Gaza.”

As a fellow student from Kuwait who knows of your deep commitment to the Palestinian cause, permit me to address you: Gaza has indeed been obliterated, but the destruction of its infrastructure does not equate to the annihilation of its people. We have lost many lives, each one an entire world. Human lives cannot be measured against cement. As long as even one heart beats in Gaza, Gaza endures. As long as there is a will to liberate, Palestine survives.

Reconstruction, while challenging, is primarily a matter of financial resources, political negotiations, and regional and global interests. The true cost is the number of martyrs, the wounded, the disappeared, and the detained – they leave a deep mark even on the stones of silence. Those who fled to deserts and tents will return to rebuilt homes, and their spirit remains imprinted on every heart that beats for Palestine.

Brother Khaled, you speak about the cost of our struggle. It is true that those immersed in the struggle bear the brunt differently than onlookers. The people of Palestine understand their hardships deeply. You declared at the beginning of the conflict that every step had been calculated.

Was the toll as expected, or did it exceed estimations? Were our battle strategies based on inaccurate predictions? Were there misconceptions about the extent of Israeli brutality and the international support for this occupying force?

At pivotal historical moments, leadership requires discretion and decisiveness, always prioritizing the cause and its people. Your call for everyone, not just Gaza, to engage in the fight is both natural and logical.

However, I must ask: Was there initial coordination with your partners in the homeland for such a significant action as the one on October 7, which provoked the war we are now witnessing? Are they now being asked to partake in mitigating its consequences? Was there coordination with Arab allies who have continually supported Palestine despite attempts to sow discord between Arab stakeholders? What is your stance on regional leaders’ statements suggesting these events were necessary to disrupt ongoing regional dialogues and new understandings?

These issues threaten unity and propagate fear and caution, overshadowing our agenda. During crises, Israeli society unites around a common goal, enhancing its strength. Conversely, internal divisions weaken our cause. Persistent fragmentation within Palestinian ranks and the broader Arab community undermines our pursuit of statehood. If this continues, Palestine’s return becomes ever more distant.

We need not revisit past conflicts between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority or the tragic violence that transpired. However, the PA and Hamas, despite differing ideologically, must find common ground. From this point of agreement, we must build, one clause at a time, with genuine will, devoid of mere emotions and slogans. Frankly, as long as internal and Arab divisions persist, our path forward remains obscured.

Instead of uniting toward a common goal, we find ourselves split – some supporting the Palestinian Authority and blaming you for regional agendas, and others supporting you while criticizing the PA, even accusing it of aiding the occupier. Hence, internal reconciliation among us is crucial. Without it, there is no viable Palestinian state. May God grant you success and bring victory to Palestine, its people, and its land. May He soon bless us with a prayer in Al-Quds. – Jassim Boodai

THE ARAB LEAGUE: HEZBOLLAH TODAY, ISIS TOMORROW

Okaz, Saudi Arabia, July 5

In a surprising announcement, the Arab League’s assistant secretary-general, Hossam Zaki, declared that the organization is no longer classifying Hezbollah as a terrorist entity. This shift marks a significant change in the League’s stance and has already sparked considerable debate and controversy across the Arab world.

The League has long served as the cornerstone of Arab unity, the sanctuary to which nations turn when crises escalate and hope dwindles. We might recall the pivotal role the League played post-1967, particularly at the Khartoum Summit, which succeeded in mending wounds, fostering unity, and supporting the reconstruction of armies shattered by the war. After the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait, the Arab League provided a crucial platform for legitimizing Kuwait and endorsed vital political and military efforts for its liberation.

A brief historical overview of the Arab League underscores its significance in Arab affairs. Established in 1943, the League was an Arab initiative spearheaded by Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen to foster collaborative Arab action. Many other Arab nations were still under British and French occupation or guardianship at the time. The inaugural meeting in Alexandria included delegates from these founding countries, marking the birth of the Arab League.

A closer examination of the League’s history reveals its tenacity in addressing myriad issues plaguing the Arab world, starting with the Palestinian cause. The League played a decisive role in recognizing the Palestinian Authority, even amid significant conflicts such as the 1948 Palestine War, the Tripartite Aggression, the 1967 Setback, the War of Attrition, Black September, the 1973 October War, the 1978 peace treaty with Israel, the 1975 Lebanese Civil War, the 1980 Iran-Iraq War, and the 1991 occupation of Kuwait [Editor’s Note: The Iraqi occupation of Kuwait began in 1990].

While some criticize the League’s economic and cultural initiatives as lackluster, it has steadfastly refused to be a voice for terrorist organizations. Imagining figures like Al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden, Al-Zarqawi, or Al-Baghdadi at the League’s meeting table is not only inconceivable but an affront to Arab history. The notion of Hassan Nasrallah speaking on behalf of Lebanon, given his role in the bloodshed of Syrians and Lebanese, rather than from his secluded stronghold, is equally abhorrent. It is disturbing that some seek to rehabilitate these terrorist groups that have wreaked havoc across the Arab world.

Throughout its history, the Arab League has staunchly opposed threats to Arab security and any attempts to usurp the role of central Arab states. Al-Qaida, ISIS, and Hezbollah have never been permitted to partake in Arab political action through the League. These organizations remain isolated, parasitic entities with no place in legitimate Arab discourse.

The League has consistently supported the independent security and political actions of Arab countries to defend against transient terrorist threats. Furthermore, the League has played an instrumental role in countering foreign states’ attempts to influence Arab decisions, a testament to the collective resolve of Arab nations against such infiltration. In summary, the Arab League’s enduring commitment to Arab unity, security, and sovereignty cannot be overstated. It has navigated numerous crises and consistently protected Arab interests against internal and external threats, remaining a pivotal institution in the Arab world. – Mohammed Al-Saeed

AN UNHEARD VOICE FROM GAZA

Al Bilad, Bahrain, July 4

The human suffering experienced by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip is profound and overwhelming, particularly for civilians, women, and children. This suffering is not confined to the immediate horrors of death but also extends to those who have been grievously wounded, some losing limbs, and to the deep psychological scars that will undoubtedly burden a generation of children who have endured this tragedy.

The anguish is palpable, with citizens voicing their desperate pleas against the killing, starvation, and displacement imposed by Israel. These anguished voices demand an immediate end to the conflict, pointing fingers at both Tel Aviv and the Hamas movement as responsible parties in the current crisis.

However, many voices among the Gazans criticizing and rejecting Hamas often go unheard, deliberately obscured by media narratives that attempt to downplay their significance, portraying them as mere temporary complaints. There are calls to continue the fight, asserting that perseverance will lead to victory and that this is a historic opportunity to liberate the land and defeat the occupation.

Proponents of this perspective argue that the sacrifices, including tens of thousands of deaths, are the natural price all people pay on the path to liberation and dignity. This “revolutionary” narrative presents a significant cognitive and historical fallacy, simplifying an extremely complex situation.

Liberation and resistance are not solely achieved through armed struggle; there are also civil methods and multiple approaches to building an independent state in line with international legitimacy resolutions. While it is true that an extremist Israeli government currently rejects the concept of a Palestinian state, promotes more settlements, and dismisses regional and international peace initiatives, the operation carried out by Hamas on October 7, 2023, did not pave the way to Jerusalem. Instead, it resulted in a disaster greater than the catastrophe of 1948.

When weapons are wielded without reason, strategy, and policy, they are blind instruments of destruction, not construction. Many individuals, far removed from the conflict, sit behind the comfort of their screens, enjoying songs and dancing to the Palestinian dabke, waving the keffiyeh. Others raise their fists in solidarity, chanting for the continuation of the resistance, only to return to their safe and stable lives. Meanwhile, the true and heavy price is borne by the people of Gaza.

Those intoxicated by the allure of armed resistance should humble themselves and listen to the profound suffering of grieving families whose dreams and children have been torn from their arms and cast into the blazing inferno of Israeli retaliation by Hamas’s actions. – Hasan Almustafa