In June, facing a military defeat, the leaders of Iran muted their rhetoric and agreed to a truce with Israel, ending the “12-day war.”
A month later, a government largely controlled by ruling Muslim clerics has signaled another kind of truce – this time with its own people, and within a period of just 10 days.
On July 20, President Masoud Pezeshkian’s Cabinet sought to fast-track a sweeping internet censorship bill. Parliament passed it July 27. But, following public backlash, Mr. Pezeshkian abruptly withdrew it three days later.
The bill was “not designed to fight lies, but rather to eliminate independent narratives, restrict freedom of expression,” and target critics, wrote formerly jailed journalist Alireza Rajaei.
The rapid about-face signals that the government is learning to acknowledge the power of popular sentiment. And what popular sentiment wants is freedom of expression – the ability to access and share information and viewpoints in real time. (The Iranian leadership regularly blocks internet access, as it did during the June conflict and during times of upheaval such as the 2022 protests over women’s rights.)
The Islamic state’s reputation and legitimacy are shaky. Israel’s attacks laid bare defense weaknesses. International economic sanctions have made everyday life more expensive. And five years of severe drought have heightened hardships.
Iran is nearing “water bankruptcy,” according to Amir AghaKouchak, a University of California, Irvine, professor of engineering. But the roots of the problem are not just environmental; they are “deeply political and systemic,” he told CNN last week. “Iran’s water crisis cannot be separated from its broader governance crisis.”
Mr. Pezeshkian’s election a year ago came at a point when Iran’s ruling elite was largely distrusted. With promises of greater social and civic freedoms, the relative moderate was elected to renew Iran’s social contract.
Though Mr. Pezeshkian has occasionally appeared unable or unwilling to rock the boat, he recently spoke out about restrictive policies and past “imbalances.”
“Today, we are even prepared to hold dialogue with the opposition based on fairness and justice,” he said, indicating such outreach is essential to resolving national challenges. He has some backing for this view now. Even a conservative news outlet, aligned with a supporter of Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, called the offer “historic,” an opportunity to replace “zero-sum confrontations” with “political consensus.”
If genuine, this outlook could enhance civic engagement and enable Iranians to take a step forward on the path to restoring trust in the social contract between a government and its people.
