Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said on Tuesday that he would not resign and insisted that his government was fully aligned with the country’s armed forces. “If I resign, I will announce it officially. I will not resign, and I will stand firm,” Pezeshkian said, according to the Iranian newspaper Entekhab. “We are fully coordinated with the military forces,” he added, rejecting attempts to portray the supreme leader, the government and the military as following different policies.
The statement, released in a preview of a four-part televised account of his government’s first two years, was necessary because the resignation story had become more than a passing rumour. It was being used to question whether Pezeshkian still possessed meaningful authority at the precise moment Iran is weighing further escalation against a diplomatic exit from its five-month war with the United States. Left unanswered, the allegation risked turning him into a lame-duck president in the eyes of Iran’s bureaucracy, its armed forces and foreign interlocutors.
The immediate trigger was a video circulated on Monday featuring Mohammad-Bagher Kharrazi, a hardline cleric and a relative of Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei by marriage. Kharrazi claimed that Pezeshkian had resigned or threatened to resign 28 times and that Khamenei had warned his next resignation would be accepted. He also alleged that Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi had been excluded from negotiations and that changes were being prepared at the Supreme National Security Council. No evidence was produced for any of these claims, which cannot be independently verified. Under Article 130 of Iran’s constitution, a president’s resignation must be submitted to and accepted by the supreme leader, giving Kharrazi’s purported warning particular political weight.
Pezeshkian’s office responded unusually quickly. Communications official Mehdi Tabatabaei called the resignation claim “baseless and an outright lie,” while presidential adviser Ali-Asghar Shafieian said Kharrazi had no contact with the supreme leader and was known for making unusual assertions. Pezeshkian’s own formulation then answered the wider accusation point by point: he was staying, he was not defying Khamenei, and he was not operating separately from the armed forces.
The rumour nevertheless found an audience because it attached itself to a real and increasingly public contest over policy. Resignation stories have followed Pezeshkian since late 2024, surfacing around disputes over talks with Washington, the dismissal of his economy minister, enforcement of the mandatory-hijab law and restrictions on the internet. On May 31, London-based Iran International, citing an unnamed source, reported that he had submitted a resignation letter because Revolutionary Guard commanders had taken over major decisions. The presidency and the Guard-linked Tasnim agency denied that report, and it was never independently confirmed.
What is verifiable is the factional struggle surrounding Pezeshkian. The Associated Press reported this week that ultra-hardliners associated with the Paydari movement want to pursue “total victory” and reject negotiations, while Pezeshkian and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf view military pressure as leverage for an eventual agreement. Twelve of the Supreme National Security Council’s 13 members backed an April ceasefire arrangement; the sole dissenter is widely believed to have been Paydari leader Saeed Jalili.
That fight has spilled into the open. Hardliners have organised nightly rallies against negotiations, while state television has cut off remarks by Pezeshkian and Qalibaf about diplomacy. Pezeshkian had already accused the broadcaster of creating the impression that “the military are on one side, and the government is on another.” On Monday, the presidium of the Assembly of Experts declared hopes for an agreement with Washington futile and branded calls for peace that amounted to “capitulation” an “unforgivable betrayal” — hours after Pezeshkian described the Islamabad memorandum with the United States as a product of collective decision-making, IranWire reported.
The president’s authority also matters beyond Tehran’s factional politics. In June, Khamenei said he had authorised the US-Iran memorandum after receiving assurances from Pezeshkian, who, as head of the Supreme National Security Council, accepted responsibility for protecting Iran’s interests, Reuters reported. That arrangement has since frayed. Washington now says talks are under way, while Iran denies any direct negotiations and says it is discussing a temporary Strait of Hormuz shipping route with Oman, according to Reuters.
There is no public evidence that Pezeshkian is about to leave office. His announcement is therefore best read as a bid to stop hardline opponents from defining his political status for him. By declaring that he will remain and that the civilian and military leadership are coordinated, Pezeshkian is trying to preserve both domestic authority and the credibility needed to negotiate. The deeper conflict, however — over whether Iran should seek a deal or continue the war — remains unresolved, ensuring that the resignation question is unlikely to disappear for long.