100 days in office Pezeshkian’s success story
By Rezvaneh Rezaeipour
Staff writer
100 days of active, effective, and comprehensive diplomacy
By Esmaeil Baghaei
Spokesperson for Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs
The 100-day mark of the incumbent government offers a valuable opportunity to reflect on the efforts and achievements of Iran’s diplomatic apparatus in safeguarding national interests, sovereignty, and the dignity of the nation.
The government assumed office under challenging circumstances. Domestically, the country had lost both its president and foreign minister unexpectedly before the end of the regular four-year term. Regionally, West Asia was in turmoil due to ongoing genocide in Palestine, escalating Israeli aggressions in Lebanon, and persistent threats against Iran. This volatile situation has since only grown more complex.
Crisis response, diplomatic endeavors
In the wake of a terrorist attack on a high-ranking guest shortly after the presidential inauguration — an attack that violated Iran’s territorial integrity and sovereignty — the government’s diplomatic strategy required precision and unwavering effort. This assault by the Israeli regime was not merely a heinous act aimed at eliminating a prominent Resistance figure but also a provocative attempt to undermine the government’s stated goal of strengthening regional and international relations.
Navigating such challenges demanded multilayered strategies, meticulous planning, and optimal use of opportunities. The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) presented the administration with its first major diplomatic stage, where it could leverage the extensive media coverage and the presence of world leaders to advance an active, comprehensive, and impactful diplomatic agenda.
Discussions at the UNGA spanned all five continents, highlighting Iran’s commitment to global engagement. Notable milestones included initiating talks with three European nations after a two-year hiatus to address sanctions relief, the JCPOA, and other mutual concerns, such as Ukraine and regional developments in West Asia. While Iran’s responsible approach could have opened a new chapter in Iran-Europe relations, some European actors, influenced by the destructive policies of the Israeli regime, failed to seize the opportunity.
Regional diplomacy, cooperation
Building on past initiatives, such as the late president Raisi’s neighborhood policy, the incumbent government prioritized its regional neighbors during diplomatic engagements at the UNGA. These efforts laid the groundwork for subsequent visits by the foreign minister to regional capitals amid heightened tensions following the defensive Operation True Promise 2.
High-level engagements with Persian Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) members, Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, and Jordan underscored Iran’s enduring commitment to fostering regional harmony and collective security. These initiatives sought to mobilize regional solidarity against destabilizing plots in West Asia, such as the elimination of Palestine.
Starting the regional tour in Lebanon — a resistance hub against Israeli expansionism — and Syria — a key pillar of the Resistance Axis — was a significant gesture. The timing, just days after the assassination of Hezbollah’s secretary-general and Iran’s Operation True Promise 2, demonstrated unparalleled coordination between diplomacy and operational realities.
Leveraging media for diplomacy
The foreign minister’s strategic use of media during visits to Lebanon and Syria was a testament to Iran’s commitment to transparent diplomacy. Despite the inherent risks and brief visits, every opportunity was utilized for interviews and media engagements, emphasizing Iran’s principled stance and steadfast support for the legitimate resistance of Palestinians and Lebanese against occupation. Notably, an interview with Italy’s state broadcaster (RAI 3) from Lebanon further underscored the role of media in amplifying Iran’s diplomatic message globally.
Expanding diplomatic horizons
Iran’s active diplomacy extended beyond the region. Meetings with counterparts from Europe, Asia, Africa, and Latin America during the UNGA highlighted the administration’s foreign policy vision. Phone calls with world leaders and participation in international summits, such as the BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia, played a crucial role in advancing Iran’s national interests and security.
Joining BRICS as a full member marked a significant achievement within these 100 days. The government’s determination to leverage BRICS’ vast political, security, economic, and financial potential underscores its commitment to strengthening Iran’s regional and global standing and forging ties with emerging powers.
Upholding sovereignty, national security
In an era of escalating threats, with Israel waging an unjust war supported by the US and some Western allies against the region, Iran’s diplomatic apparatus has prioritized safeguarding national sovereignty and security. Ending the genocide in Gaza, halting aggressions against Lebanon and Syria, and countering regional destabilization remain paramount.
Iran has also maintained focus on longstanding issues like its nuclear program, border security, counterterrorism, and consular services for expatriates, while engaging international organizations, to advance its foreign policy goals. In these 100 days, Iran’s diplomacy has shown vigilance and pragmatism, addressing complex challenges while identifying opportunities to protect national interests and security. Guided by Iran’s material and spiritual strengths, its proven resilience against threats, and its commitment to justice and sovereignty, this diplomatic path will continue steadfastly. National cohesion and unity remain essential for achieving these goals.
Iran's message of friendship relayed to region
By Alireza Enayati
Iran’s ambassador to Saudi Arabia
The continuation of Iran’s regional and neighbor-focused policies has become a top priority under the incumbent government. Over the past 100 days, intensive diplomatic meetings and consultations, especially given the current regional context, have been conducted by the president, the first vice president, and the foreign minister with their counterparts. These interactions represent key aspects of Iran’s foreign relations and emphasize the expansion and deepening of ties within the framework of neighborhood policy.
A qualitative leap is evident in the government’s agenda. The leap in question is a shift in Iran’s focus from bilateral relations to multilateralism and regional cooperation. The aim is to integrate bilateral interactions into broader regional frameworks. In this context, for the first time in decades, the foreign ministers of Iran and the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries convened a meeting in Doha. Beyond bilateral discussions, the attendees addressed supra-bilateral issues, marking a significant step toward regional collaboration.
The Persian Gulf countries, both northern and southern, possess the capabilities, capacities, and resources to engage in dialogue and cooperation in political, economic, cultural, social, and other domains. This bilateral and regional collaboration also includes a third dimension: the Islamic world. Iran, Saudi Arabia, and other regional countries can form significant partnerships within this sphere.
In the past year, we have witnessed the Israeli regime’s aggressive assaults on Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and even Iraq, along with its violations of Iranian sovereignty. These actions have been met with appropriate responses. In response, Iran has held regular and structured dialogues with Saudi Arabia. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) convened four times at various levels, with some sessions initiated directly at Iran’s request.
At the recent OIC meeting, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman called for Israel to refrain from attacking Iran, signaling a positive development in Tehran-Riyadh relations. Iranian first vice president’s meeting with the Saudi crown prince sent a constructive message about the two nations’ evolving ties and emphasized that their strained relationship is reversible. We hope that regional countries will continue to engage in systematic and sustainable cooperation across bilateral, regional, and Islamic domains, as well as in condemning the aggressions of the Israeli regime.
Special diplomatic moves during decisive 100 days
By
Seyed Abbas Mousavi
Former diplomat
The incumbent Iranian government began its tenure during a critical period, necessitating swift and impactful diplomatic actions to address escalating crises. The terrorist operation carried out by the Israeli regime at the start of Masoud Pezeshkian’s administration created conditions that significantly shaped its foreign policy direction and required immediate measures. West Asia, already strained following Operation Al-Aqsa Storm, placed Iran on a direct trajectory toward military tensions, making the region a central focus of the current government’s strategic agenda.
The assassination of Ismail Haniyeh, Hamas’ political leader, prompted rapid, simultaneous actions on both the military and diplomatic fronts. The government’s diplomatic measures aimed to neutralize Tel Aviv’s objective of extending the war’s scope to Iran and leading Tehran into a strategic miscalculation. This goal was pursued through a comprehensive diplomatic strategy, spearheaded by the foreign minister’s consultations in Arab capitals. These efforts not only kept Arab states away from the conflict but also redirected their diplomatic stance towards alignment with Iran.
While the administration initially planned a broad agenda focused on lifting sanctions, resuming stalled regional and Western dialogues, and revitalizing its role in major regional and international organizations, it was forced to shift course. Under the pressures of Israel’s deliberate escalation, the government had to allocate significant resources, especially in foreign policy, to mitigate the tensions strategically engineered against Iran.
In such a challenging environment, the incumbent government utilized all available diplomatic and political tools to navigate the crises. The current situation demonstrates its success in reducing tensions and redirecting them toward diplomatic processes, underscoring the effectiveness of its strategic approach.
Pezeshkian, his gov’t: Two separate brands
By Mohammad Mohajeri
Conservative political activist
When Masoud Pezeshkian served as a member of the parliament or a presidential candidate, he communicated in one way, but once he assumed the presidency, his actions adapted to the demands of time and circumstance. By nature, Pezeshkian is what one might call a justice-seeker. Morally, he is unlike many conventional politicians — he avoids lies, lacks deceitfulness, and has no hidden agendas. His principles are deeply rooted in his study and practice of Nahj al-Balagha — a collection of writings and sayings attributed to Imam Ali (PBUH).
When entering politics and governance, Pezeshkian strived to remain true to his ideals, but the reality of political life often clashes with his foundational beliefs. This creates a paradox — sometimes even contradictions — in his approach. For instance, the failure of his “unity” theory to gain traction in the political arena is not entirely his fault. The problem stems from the nature of politics itself and, more importantly, from politicians who see politics as a practice devoid of ethics and justice.
It could be said that during the first 100 days of his presidency, Pezeshkian has lived faithfully to his ideals and, in this regard, has achieved success. However, his administration has not fully implemented his vision. In other words, the “Pezeshkian brand” is not entirely aligned with the “Pezeshkian government’s brand”.