Alex Vatanka

President Masoud Pezeshkian’s first year in office has been defined by Iran’s familiar political structural constraints, external crises, and a moderate-reformist base forever frustrated with his cautious pragmatism and unfulfilled promises. His July 2024 election was undeniably a setback for hardliners. Yet one year later, the assessment is sobering: While Pezeshkian has in some ways perhaps helped in slowing the hardline march, he has not made any fundamental difference in how the Islamic Republic is run. Every decision requires second-guessing Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s next move, and even as a president boxed in by the system with limited powers, he is constantly under the sword of Damocles.

The 12-day war between Iran, Israel, and the United States has ended, but the dust has not yet settled. Many official voices in Tehran are warning that the war can resume at any moment. Iran now faces deepening economic turmoil, political uncertainty, and hard choices about its nuclear future. The central question is whether the Islamic Republic will emerge stronger through nationalist mobilization or weaker, exposed by vulnerabilities it long sought to deny. No doubt, Iran’s leaders stand at a true crossroads.

Where is Ali Khamenei? That is the question on the minds of many Iranians and foreign observers in the aftermath of the 12-day war between Iran and Israel. As missiles rained down and retaliatory strikes escalated, one voice was conspicuously absent: that of the supreme leader of the Islamic Republic.

The United States is now at war with Iran, or at least something dangerously close to it. The June 21 US strikes on key Iranian nuclear infrastructure, including the underground Fordow facility, marked a dramatic escalation. Yet Washington has carefully avoided calling this a full-scale war.

As the Israel-Iran conflict intensifies, warnings are growing louder that the war could result in hazardous and destructive radiological spillover to much of the region. But the posturing of various key actors in the Gulf and beyond has opened the door to a broader political settlement between the United States and Iran that could end the hostilities before such a dangerous scenario comes to pass.

As the war between Iran and Israel continued, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei delivered a speech on June 17, framing the conflict as an “imposed war” and calling for national unity. But instead of using this moment to explore diplomatic off-ramps, particularly as President Donald Trump signaled the possible direct participation of the United States in the war on the side of Israel, Khamenei opted for posturing over negotiation and left the Iranian people even more fearful about the future.

MEI’s experts react to the Israeli strikes on Iran’s nuclear program and the consequences for the wider region.

Photo: Khamenei/AFP/XGTY via Getty Images

Since mid-April, diplomacy between Tehran and Washington has shifted into overdrive. After a seven-year freeze, Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has made a stunning, if not entirely surprising, reversal: He has greenlit a new nuclear deal if U.S. President Donald Trump accepts Tehran’s basic red lines. While the fourth round of talks between the two countries last weekend in Oman contained no apparent breakthrough, both sides seem determined to continue negotiating.

This week, US President Donald Trump makes his inaugural visit to the Middle East since the start of his second term, traveling to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates on May 13-16. Amid the heightened focus on US policy toward the Middle East, MEI’s experts take stock of Trump’s trip to the Gulf, how his administration has shaped its approach to the wider region in its first several months, and how regional actors are responding to the policies coming out of Washington.

Iran appears to be reorienting its approach to diplomatic engagement with its neighbors and the West by prioritizing the economic benefits of cooperation. A possible withdrawal of support for the Houthis is the latest significant potential outcome of Iran’s shifting stance. The following are five factors to watch for as a Tehran under duress reformulates its policies.

On April 12, the United States and Iran wrapped up their first round of renewed diplomatic talks in Muscat, with round two set for April 19, in Rome. In the interim, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi is in Moscow to coordinate with the Russians. But the real breakthrough will not come from nuclear talks alone — it will require confronting the region’s most explosive fault line: the Iranian-Israeli standoff. Russia claims it can help.

It is no surprise that both Iran and the United States have approached their first diplomatic engagement in four years with wariness. There are plenty of reasons to be skeptical about the probability of the negotiations culminating in a deal. But it would be a mistake to assume that the conditions in 2025 are the same as existed in 2015. Time is not on the Iranians’ side now and changes afoot in the Middle East and the broader global community give Iran an incentive to move toward an agreement, assuming that Washington is sincere and realistic in its negotiations with Tehran.

This article is published as part of the Perry World House workshop “U.S.-Iran Relations Under Trump 2.0: Lessons Learned and Likely Scenarios.”

President Masoud Pezeshkian might be the loneliest man in Iran. Just eight months into his term in office, he is already losing the support of those who once championed him. While the Iranian presidency is a thankless job, Pezeshkian is not helping his own case.

After decades of managing tensions through careful balancing, Turkey and Iran now find themselves increasingly at odds following recent shifts in the regional balance of power. With Ankara emboldened and Tehran on its back foot after the fall of the regime of Bashar al-Assad, the struggle for influence between the two neighbors and long-time rivals is escalating in both Syria and Iraq and could spread well beyond their borders.