Mohammad Javad Zarif: The Diplomat Between Two Images

From “Architect of Openness” to a Strategic Burden on Iran and the Axis of Resistance

Mohammad Javad Zarif is presented in Western discourse as “the moderate face of Iran” and “the rational diplomat” capable of speaking the language of the world. Yet this image, which he built during his years as Foreign Minister (2013–2021), collides with a political, security, and strategic record weighed down by failures and contradictions.

Was Zarif truly a reformer within the system, or merely a smooth marketer of policies that proved disastrous, harming Iran and the Axis of Resistance?

1. Zarif and the Nuclear Deal – From Promise of Salvation to Total Collapse

The JCPOA – July 14, 2015

Zarif presented the nuclear deal as a historic breakthrough that would end Iran’s isolation, lift sanctions, and open the doors of the global economy. But subsequent events exposed the fragility of this wager:

• May 8, 2018: The United States unilaterally withdrew under Donald Trump, despite Iran’s full compliance according to IAEA reports.

• Washington not only failed to honor its commitments but used the deal as an intelligence and political tool to tighten pressure later.

Sanctions Instead of Relief

During Zarif’s tenure:

• More than 1,500 new sanctions were imposed under the “maximum pressure” policy (2018–2021).

• On July 31, 2019, Washington sanctioned Zarif himself, a scene that epitomized the futility of trusting the West.

The core accusation emerged:

Was Zarif the architect of sanctions relief, or—unwittingly—one of those who facilitated their tightening?

2. The Assassination of Soleimani and al-Muhandis – The Collapse of the Diplomacy Illusion

January 3, 2020

The United States assassinated General Qassem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis in Baghdad.

This came at the height of Zarif’s talk of “de-escalation” and opening indirect negotiation channels.

• The event dealt a crushing blow to Zarif’s theory that U.S. behavior could be restrained through diplomacy.

• For the Axis of Resistance, the assassination proved that American hostility is structural, not tactical.

3. April 2021 Leak – An Unintended Admission of Failure

In April 2021, an audio interview was leaked in which Zarif admitted:

• “Diplomacy was sacrificed for the battlefield.”

• The United States was the real player that disrupted his negotiation tracks.

The leak:

• Was used in the West to portray Iran as a divided state.

• Harmed the unity of Iran’s narrative.

• Exposed the limits of Zarif’s influence within the system and weakened his credibility as a “policy architect.”

4. Security Breaches – Fakhrizadeh and Natanz

November 27, 2020

The assassination of nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh inside Iran in a complex Israeli operation.

April 2021

A major sabotage operation at the Natanz nuclear facility.

Although direct responsibility was security-related:

• Zarif’s rivals argued that the climate of openness and negotiation he promoted created a false sense of safety.

• His focus on appeasing the West came at the expense of properly assessing Israeli threats.

5. Women’s Rights and Hijab – Davos Rhetoric vs. Domestic Reality

At international forums like Davos, Zarif declared that the government “chose not to enforce hijab laws by force,” claiming that in reality hijab no longer existed by Islamic state standards, though some still adhered to it and believed in its importance.

Key questions:

• Does Zarif use women’s rights as an external cosmetic tool, while ignoring internal social and political complexities?

This contradiction weakened his credibility:

• Domestically, he was accused of media grandstanding.

6. Zarif, Resistance, and Calls for Dialogue with Washington

Zarif did not hide his preference for direct dialogue with the United States, even after:

• The failure of the nuclear deal.

• The assassinations.

• Maximum sanctions.

The decisive question:

Is this political pragmatism, or a departure from the resistance narrative?

From the Axis of Resistance’s perspective:

• His calls weaken deterrence logic.

• They reproduce the illusion of partnership with an enemy that has not changed its behavior.

7. Relationship with the Supreme Leader

Zarif declares commitment to Velayat-e Faqih (Guardianship of the Jurist), but:

• Abroad, he presents a reformist discourse suggesting the possibility of a “post-Velayat Iran.”

• This creates a duality between internal and external messaging, raising doubts about his true position within the system’s ideological structure.

8. Zarif and the Arabs – Accusatory Rhetoric and Widening the Gap

In many debates and interviews, Zarif accused Arab states of:

• “Betraying Iran.”

• “Aligning with Washington and Tel Aviv.”

But this rhetoric:

• Ignored the complexities of the Arab scene.

• Deepened an unnecessary gap between Iran and environments supportive of the Axis of Resistance.

• Gave opponents propaganda material to portray Iran as confrontational with Arabs.

9. After Zarif – BRICS and the Turn East

After leaving office:

• Iran joined the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (2023).

• Officially entered BRICS (2023).

• Began actual implementation of the 25-year China agreement, though Zarif had persistently undermined Iran’s relations with China.

These major strategic shifts occurred without Zarif, raising a harsh question:

Was he more of an obstacle to this path than a driver of it?

Conclusion

Mohammad Javad Zarif is neither a complete opponent of the system nor a revolutionary reformer.

He is a diplomat, skilled in rhetoric, but:

• He bet on the West and lost.

• Marketed a reformist image that never materialized.

• Opened vulnerabilities that were exploited against Iran and the Axis of Resistance, and continue to be.

Although Zarif is now outside the state, the Pezeshkian government is the closest to his views. Perhaps one could say he is the closest thing to being the intellectual architect behind this government.