Scions of Iran’s revolution call for reset with the world

Hamzeh Safavi, a soft-spoken professor of Middle Eastern studies at Tehran University, is not unique among Iranian intellectuals in calling for a fundamental reassessment of how the Islamic republic engages with the world.

What is more surprising, perhaps, is that the 44-year-old is the son of Major General Yahya Rahim Safavi, a senior military adviser to Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and former chief Revolutionary Guards commander.

From the grandchildren of the Islamic republic’s founder Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to the children of a former president, it is not unheard of for the heirs of regime loyalists to express unorthodox views.

But Safavi’s positions, which have been widely aired in Iranian media, reflect a broader debate unfolding not only in public but within well-connected political circles, as a growing number of pragmatists call for sweeping changes.

At the heart of their position is that, in the wake of the bruising 12-day war Israel launched on Iran in June, the Shia theocracy must moderate its hardline ideological tenets of hostility towards the US and Israel to prevent future conflicts.

Iran “must decide whether it wants to be a force that challenges or supports” regional security and the global order, Safavi told the Financial Times in his library-like office.

 He cited the example of China, which “while critical of the US and holding revisionist views, still operates within internationally recognised frameworks”.

Views like these go further than Iran’s reformist officials such as President Masoud Pezeshkian, who has argued for resuming nuclear talks with the US despite the conflict — which Washington briefly joined — yet still echoes the republic’s decades-long stance that Israel is a “usurper”.

But Safavi is not alone among the scions of the Islamic republic in arguing for an overhaul. Faezeh Hashemi, a former member of parliament and the daughter of the late former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, has advocated for reforms including the restoration of diplomatic ties with the US.

“I believe we must first re-establish diplomatic relations with the US, then negotiate over our differences and pursue our national interests just like any other country,” she said in an interview in her apartment.

Although her father was one of the founders of the Islamic system in 1979, she said, “ideally Iran should move towards a secular system. But even if that’s not currently achievable, we must still take meaningful steps towards substantial change.”

 Among the most controversial views, however, is to suggest that Iran should be open to advocating for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — something which could in theory potentially open the door to recognising the state of Israel.

“If I were a decision maker, I would have joined the plan endorsed by Saudi Arabia, which conditions recognition of Israel on its acceptance of a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders,” Safavi said.

“Israel will never accept the two-state solution, but Iran would demonstrate it has no intention of undermining the internationally recognised order.” Safavi, who is loyal to the Islamic republic, emphasised that he spoke in a personal capacity and that such a suggestion does not imply that Iran would officially recognise Israel.

“In the short term, Iran cannot recognise Israel because it remains part of the Islamic republic’s identity. In the long term, no one knows. Recognition is impossible under Ayatollah Khamenei’s leadership.”

He also suggested that while supporting Middle East proxy forces such as Shia militant group Hizbollah, another tenet of Iran’s foreign policy, was not wrong, it has become an issue in its relations with Sunni states.

“It became problematic when Arab states perceived it as Shia domination,” he said. “Iran should engage in dialogue with regional states to show that these forces are meant to curb Israel, not threaten shared interests.”

 Such nonconformist views reflect the robust culture of protest and dissent that exists in Iran, despite its authoritarian structure. Hassan Khomeini, the grandson of the Islamic republic’s founder, has previously sided with political reformists, while his brother Ali is considered to be more aligned with hardliners.

Hassan Younesi, a lawyer and the son of a former intelligence minister, is loyal to the system yet openly critical of its policies, including judicial decisions. Last month, he warned on X that the republic was at risk of becoming “a reminder of the totalitarian systems of former communist parties”. But there are limits to what can be said.

Hashemi has twice been imprisoned for her controversial views, and there is no indication that the supreme leader or the veterans of the Revolutionary Guards are prepared to embrace the sorts of changes she advocates.

 Indeed, the real test of these competing visions will come after Khamenei, as Iran’s political landscape braces for the eventual succession of the 86-year-old supreme leader. “All power struggle in Iran is for that day and politicians are already lining up,” said a reformist analyst. “The suggestions are not for today. They are for tomorrow.”

Safavi highlighted the need for inclusive governance that extends beyond the traditional political elite. He advocates for tackling corruption, particularly related to the evasion of US sanctions, and more freedoms.

Yet many Iranians worry that the country’s future is being sacrificed in an endless ideological confrontation with global and regional powers — at the cost of severe economic hardships in the country of 90mn. “

The majority of society wants for Iran to become a normal country integrated into the global order,” Hashemi said. She said many regime insiders, from reformists to conservatives and even some hardliners, agreed with her in private and “express the same opinions . . . even if they don’t dare to speak out publicly”.