National Consensus and the Ruler's Companions

In the opening chapter of this series, titled Masoudnameh, we discussed the imperative of maintaining the president’s authority and dignified firmness, drawing upon the timeless wisdom of the Qabusnameh. Now, another pressing concern emerges—one inextricably linked to the standing of the presidency and its perception in the eyes of the nation: the echoing words of those in the leader’s immediate orbit, which inevitably cast their reflection upon the face of the administration.

This time, our guide is the illustrious statesman and grand vizier of Iranian history, Khwaja Nizam al-Mulk Tusi, and his masterwork, the Siyasatnama (The Book of Government). In Chapter Seventeen, Nizam al-Mulk imparts a nuanced, indispensable warning regarding the companions and confidants of the monarch—a lesson that reads as though composed for our present day:

“When people wish to know the character and disposition of a ruler, they judge him by his companions: If his confidants are good-natured, generous, patient, chivalrous, and refined, they know that the ruler is benevolent, virtuous, and upright in conduct. But if his companions are sour-faced, pretentious, dismissive, arrogant, miserly, indulging in impossibilities, and conceited, they know that the ruler himself is ill-tempered, harsh, and reckless... Furthermore, each companion holds a specific station; they must be self-disciplined, well-mannered, and devoted to the sovereign.”

Nizam al-Mulk astutely recognized that those surrounding a ruler serve as a mirror of his persona, ethics, and policies. The public, rightly or wrongly, attributes the speech and conduct of these confidants to the leader, constructing their overarching view of the apex of power. In our modern era, while courtiers no longer exist in their traditional sense, family members and the closest circle of the nation's chief executive—particularly those active in public discourse—occupy a comparable role. Their statements reverberate across the public domain and are instantly affixed to the president's name and credibility.

Recently, comments by Yousef Pezeshkian, the president’s son, on social media platform X provoked a wave of intense criticism and public dismay. In response to divisive slogans and controversial symbols chanted by some stadium spectators—actions that directly undermined Iranian national unity and territorial integrity—he trivialized the incident as mere "excitement and venting of youthful energy," cautioning against "labeling." Whatever his intentions, such a reductionist view on matters so deeply tied to national identity and territorial integrity—coming from someone whose familial proximity amplifies his voice—did nothing to soothe public sentiment. Instead, it rubbed salt into an open wound inflicted by separatist currents against our beloved homeland. The sharp backlash from citizens across social media reflected genuine grievance, with many rightly asserting that displaying foreign flags and chanting anti-national slogans cannot be dismissed as mere youthful indulgence.

Mr. President, you entered office under the banner of "National Consensus" (Vefagh-e Melli). You know well that realizing this promise requires genuine empathy, reverence for shared national bonds, and the scrupulous avoidance of anything that fosters division. Careless remarks from your inner circle, even if motivated by personal goodwill, can unravel these threads of solidarity and compromise the administration’s unifying mission. Such statements risk giving the public the impression that national red lines are blurred among those closest to power, or that public sensitivities are disregarded—a perception that, as Nizam al-Mulk warned, is swiftly generalized to the ruler's own character.

Governance in Iran, with all its intricate challenges, demands heightened vigilance in speech and action—not only from the chief executive, but from all who stand in his shadow. The Iranian people expect the president's inner circle to be exemplary guardians of the national interest, territorial unity, and public peace of mind. Through self-restraint and dignified composure, they should reinforce the stature of the presidency rather than feeding the flames of discord with hasty remarks and ill-conceived defenses.

May this sincere counsel, rooted in ancestral wisdom and present-day concern for Iran, be heeded with the gravity it warrants. For the echoes from the halls of Pasteur Street will, inevitably, be recorded in the enduring ledger of your administration’s legacy.