What Iranians hope for from a new US president

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.