Reza Pahlavi, son of king overthrown by Iran's clerical rulers, sees a chance at regime change
This rallying cry is alluring for many of the 4 million Iranian exiles and expats worldwide, just under a third of whom live in the U.S., according to Iranian Foreign Ministry statistics from 2021.
'If change does come, the only path that offers both stability and a sense of national continuity is through Pahlavi,' said Amin, 38, an Iranian now living in Canada who declined to give his second name or exact location because of fear of speaking out against the regime even from abroad.
There is a disagreement among experts about Pahlavi's popularity inside Iran itself.
A 2022 study by Gamaan, a Dutch-based research group, gauged Pahlavi's domestic popularity at 39%, far more than then-Prime Minister Ebrahim Raisi, in second with 17%, and imprisoned Nobel Peace laureate Narges Mohammadi on 15%.
'He is the only national figure inside Iran with cross-generational, cross-class, and cross-ethnic legitimacy,' one prominent Iranian diaspora account on X, @upuouo, said last week.
Other contenders abroad include the dissident group Mujahedeen e-Khalq, more commonly known as the MEK, which has gained high-profile supporters including the former New York mayor and Trump ally Rudy Giuliani. But MEK, widely seen by Western experts as a cult, has negligible support inside Iran thanks to its backing for Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war of 1980-88.
Critics of Pahlavi see him as the pro-Western figurehead of a dynasty that took power in the 1920s aided by the British, cemented its grip with help from the CIA, and is only poised for a return following airstrikes by Israel and the U.S.
Amin Aghdasi, 30, from Tehran, described him as 'a coward who betrays his nation' and someone waiting 'for power to be handed to him.' Pahlavi 'thinks a war criminal like Bibi can help bring back his monarchy,' Aghdasi added, referring to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
NBC News has requested comment from Pahlavi's media team, both on concerns about his familial ties to his father's legacy, and the decision to use preselected questions at his news conference.
Some analysts are also skeptical of polling inside Iran, where some opinions can lead to jail or worse.
'There's been a real push to get Pahlavi to be seen as a credible opposition figure in Iran, but my sense is he's not,' said Dina Esfandiary, the Middle East geoeconomics lead for Bloomberg Economics, Bloomberg's internal research division. 'He's got a following outside of the country,' but 'honestly, inside Iran, not that much. He hasn't been inside the country in over 40 years' and many 'people believe his family is the reason why Iran is where it is today.'
She agrees there are few good options.
'That's one of the reasons why the Iranian people, while they want change, are afraid of it, because they have nobody to coalesce around,' she said. Any lasting solution, she thinks, would 'need Iranians to work together and to present a viable opposition.'
One reason that's not been possible domestically is Iran's crushing of successive protest movements with deadly force. Most notably the Green Movement of 2009, in which marchers railed against that year's rigged election, and the mass outcry over the death of Mahsa Amini following her detention for not following female headscarf laws in 2022.
In Paris, Pahlavi sought to portray himself as a model of openness and selflessness who would help birth a new peaceful and democratic era in Iran, perhaps along the lines of Spain's King Juan Carlos I who helped dismantle the authoritarian regime of Francisco Franco and establish a parliamentary monarchy.
Though he was reluctant to give a formal name to the transitional role he might play — saying 'I don't believe I need a title' — he was unequivocal about his message to the ayatollah.
'Step down,' he said down the barrel of the camera. 'If you do, you will receive a fair trial and due process of law — which is more than you have ever given any Iranian.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Middle class youngsters chanting for death shows how sick Britain now is
The spectacle of massed crowds calling for the blood of Jews is more associated with Islamist dictatorships than our own democracies. On October 7, however, something foul awoke in the West. Less than two years later, we find thousands of white youngsters from the leafy suburbs of Middle England chanting 'death, death to the IDF' at the Glastonbury Festival of a Saturday afternoon. Would that be the same IDF that delivered us from the spectre of a nuclear-armed Iran with remarkably few civilian casualties? Which rescued us from the regime described by the head of MI5 as 'the state actor which most frequently crosses into terrorism' on our shores? Why, yes. Yes it would. Your average Glasto fan, it seems, would have no objection if Tehran's thugs brought the 'intifada' over here, perhaps with a nuclear bomb on London, so long as they brought death to Israel first. Such is the way with brainless trends, even when the fashion is for bloodlust. What Jewish festival-goers must have felt amidst that display of depravity is enough to make you ashamed of our country. Don't forget, this gory chapter began with a massacre of revellers at the Nova music festival; in a sane world, you'd have expected Glastonbury to fly the Israeli flag in solidarity and chant for the demise of Hamas. The cleanness of the Iran campaign shows how the IDF can operate when its enemy does not push civilians into harm's way for the benefit of the international media. Clearly, Israel is not trying to kill the innocent. Has that thought occurred to any of the Glasto cultists? Of course not. As transparent as it may be, Hamas propaganda is a roaring success when people get their kicks out of believing it. Depressingly, this has become the new normal. There literally is no evil so dark that it cannot find enthusiastic support on the Western Left, so long as that evil first wishes death upon the Jews. Astonishingly, that principle holds even if the evil happens to wish death upon us second. It's true what they say: antisemitism is a sickness and at bottom it is a hatred of ourselves. Whether Bob Vylan, the dreadlocked rapper who led Saturday's version of Orwell's Two Minutes Hate, was breaking the law is beside the point. Legislation is limited when the culture moves beyond it. Even the BBC's attempts at decorum – they had refused to broadcast the performance by Kneecap, the Irish band which has supported Hamas and Hezbollah and demanded that people kill their local Tory MPs – collapsed when put to the test. Shamefully, the 'death to the IDF' chant was beamed out by our national broadcaster into millions of homes. On Thursday, Sir Michael Eavis, the founder of Glastonbury, defiantly insisted that people should 'go somewhere else' if they did not like the politics of his festival. By Saturday, we saw what those politics meant: a carnival of bloodthirsty radicalism that would have been unrecognisable in the Britain of our parents. Jeremy Corbyn may have epitomised the vacuity of the Gaza Left by praising a banner saying 'build bridges not walls' that was literally pinned to a wall, but the joke is wearing thin. In May, a Palestine activist murdered two Israeli diplomats in Washington DC. Last week, Palestine activists sabotaged RAF aircraft vital to our national security. Yet still the simpering BBC fawns over the Eavis clan. For years, sensible people have scratched their heads at how the Left can have come to support jihadis. At the Glastonbury festival of narcissism, however, it has become difficult to tell them apart.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
US Senate votes down resolution to restrict Trump from escalating Iran war
Senate Democrats failed on Friday to get a war-powers resolution passed to limit Donald Trump's ability to single-handedly escalate the war with Iran. The resolution, 'to direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran', was voted down 53-47. The vote on the resolution, introduced by the Democratic senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, split along mainly partisan lines. One Republican, Rand Paul of Kentucky, voted for it; one Democrat, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, voted against it. 'Congress declares war,' Kaine said in a speech on the Senate floor. He stressed that the framers of the US constitution in 1787 were so wary of giving the power to start wars to one person that they did not even entrust it to George Washington, the first commander-in-chief. 'They decided that war was too big a decision for one person,' Kaine said. 'And so they wrote a constitution that said the United States should not be at war without a vote of Congress.' The measure would have compelled Trump to seek authorization from Congress before taking any further military action. Trump ordered airstrikes on Iran's nuclear facilities on 22 June. This directly followed Israel launching attacks on Iran, and Iran retaliating. Trump said that the US bombardment 'totally obliterated' key nuclear enrichment facilities and deemed the mission a success, although some initial reports said the damage was minimal. Iran condemned the attacks. Trump claimed on Friday that Iran had halted its nuclear ambitions after the bombings. But, he said, he would 'absolutely' continue to attack the country's nuclear sites if he believed it was once again enriching uranium. 'Time will tell,' Trump said at the White House. 'But I don't believe that they're going to go back into nuclear anytime soon.' Later on Friday, Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, rebuked Trump on social media. 'If President Trump is genuine about wanting a deal, he should put aside the disrespectful and unacceptable tone towards Iran's Supreme Leader, Grand Ayatollah Khamenei, and stop hurting his millions of heartfelt followers', Araghchi wrote on X. 'The Great and Powerful Iranian People, who showed the world that the Israeli regime had NO CHOICE but to RUN to 'Daddy' to avoid being flattened by our Missiles, do not take kindly to Threats and Insults', Iran's top diplomat added, in something approximating Trump's own social media style. 'If Illusions lead to worse mistakes, Iran will not hesitate to unveil its Real Capabilities, which will certainly END any Delusion about the Power of Iran.'
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Struggling in politics? Consider a war – the media will help
'You furnish the pictures. I'll furnish the war,' was the storied response of the newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst to Frederic Remington after the illustrator was sent to Cuba to cover an insurrection and cabled back to the boss that there was little going on. Much has changed since that famous (if true) exchange of the late 19th century, in the heyday of sensationalism known as yellow journalism. But one thing that hasn't changed is that there's nothing like military conflict to capture the attention of the public, with plenty of help from the media. And the media – whether a tabloid newspaper or a cable news network – benefits, too. These days, Donald Trump's recent strike on Iran has proved the point once again, with the media's attention intensely focused on Operation Midnight Hammer, as it was dramatically dubbed. First the emphasis was on the threat of attacks to Iran's budding nuclear arsenal, then on the possibility of all-out global war, then on the strikes themselves and then the announcement of a supposed ceasefire. All to the greater glory of Trump, at least as he tells it. For those who are trying to bring public attention to other important matters – even matters of life and death – that's a frustrating reality. Jennifer Mascia knows this all too well. She is a founding reporter for the Trace, a non-profit news site dedicated to tracking the epidemic of gun violence in America and trying to do something about it, through exploring solutions. When elected officials in Minnesota were shot earlier this month – the former state House speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband were killed, and the state legislator John Hoffman and his wife were wounded – it was a huge story. Huge, but fleeting. 'Pitted against a global conflict, domestic news doesn't really stand a chance,' said Mascia, who previously contributed to the now-defunct Gun Report at the New York Times, begun by the then columnist Joe Nocera. That's true for domestic news that, in an earlier era, would have commanded the media's attention for many days, if not weeks. The Minnesota violence was even more newsworthy because of an early manhunt and disinformation swirling around the apparent assassin's political leanings. Still, coverage seemed to disappear in the blink of an eye. 'The Trump era has all but ensured that important news will get smacked out of the news cycle in favor of the latest development in Trumpworld,' Mascia wrote to me in an email, after we had talked by phone. Mascia is quick to clarify that she's not suggesting that the media ignore what the chaotic president is doing. 'It's important that we cover Trump's constitutional breaches. We shouldn't become numb or complacent in the face of eroding democracy,' she said. But it was remarkable to see how quickly the Minnesota shootings faded from media attention. A CNN contributor herself, Mascia is often called in to provide perspective for 'Day Two' of coverage after the initial reporting of gun-related news. But often these days, she notes, there is no Day Two. By then, the media has moved on. 'Maybe if the Israel-Iran war wasn't going on, we'd still be talking about it,' she said. 'Anderson Cooper would be broadcasting from Melissa Hortman's funeral. But instead, he's in Tel Aviv.' And, of course, this extends to all sorts of other subjects, not just gun violence. Those who try to focus attention on voting rights, the rule of law, crucial supreme court decisions, widespread citizen action such as the vast 'No Kings' protests – to mention just a few – may get a modicum of attention. But nothing compares to a show of military force. And Trump, always attuned to how he's being perceived, is well aware of that. 'A spectacular military success,' he crowed after the strikes. 'A historic success,' echoed his defense secretary. Pete Hegseth couldn't countenance being asked actual questions and claimed the press was trying to distort the story 'for their own political reasons to try to hurt President Trump or our country'. Was the administration's bragging accurate? Perhaps not, said intelligence reports that indicated the strikes may have only added months to the time Iran needs to produce the material for a nuclear weapon. But no matter. The strikes – from the lead-up to the aftermath – sucked up all the oxygen in the media universe for many days. Even by Thursday early afternoon, the top four news articles (plus one photo) on the Washington Post mobile app, for example, were Iran-related. And Fox News, of course, remained largely a cheering section. Whatever the effect on world peace, military conflict sure is good for ratings, as William Randolph Hearst knew in his bones. 'Historians point to the Spanish-American war as the first press-driven war,' noted a PBS article accompanying the film Crucible of Empire. It wouldn't be the last. Margaret Sullivan is a Guardian US columnist writing on media, politics and culture
