Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi: Stakes are high in mission to bring democracy to Iran

telegraph.co.uk ^ | 22/01/2005 | Sarah Sands

[F14 Pilot]

"So it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation… America will not impose our own style of government on the unwilling. Our goal instead is to help others find their own voice, attain their own freedom."

Reza Pahlavi, the son of the last Shah of Iran, who was watching President George W Bush's speech on television at his hotel in London, noted the language. He was relieved that the phrase "regime change" was not used.

He believes that American military intervention in Iran would be wrong: "Iranians are not willing to buy freedom at any cost. They do not want the freedom of an American general marching in. It is a matter of national pride. We do not need an American soldier to save us."

Mr Pahlavi, 44, has been actively campaigning for secular democracy in Iran since September 11. He says that it is only the regime that stands between an educated, well-resourced country and the free world: "All the unemployment and poverty in Iran is a by-product of political asphyxia."

But Mr Pahlavi says that the rising against the regime must come from within. He looks to the Ukraine or Yugoslavia as a model and rejects comparisons with Iraq: "Iran has a different history, polity, totally different scenarios. Our society is more dynamic and capable. We don't need teachers from American universities to come and teach us about democracy."

What Mr Pahlavi wants from Europe and America is "support for the Iranian people. This means refusing to deal with the regime".

He is particularly opposed to any weapons for trade negotiations: "Other countries should take a principled position on the regime. They must not be seen to cut a deal, at the expense of the Iranian people." There has been little reporting of protests against the regime since the elections last year but Mr Pahlavi's adviser, who asked not to be named, claimed the frustration is at boiling point, particularly among students.

"President Khatami addressed a meeting recently and the students started chanting 'shame on you'. It was moving," he says.

The opposition in Iraq is fastening on the May presidential elections as the moment to force the collapse of the regime. Petitions are being compiled on the internet for a referendum. The opposition claims that the election will be hollow.

"Saddam had elections," says Mr Pahlavi. "Let's not be infatuated by elections." Will the Pentagon have the patience to wait for an internal uprising? A report this week by Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker revealed that special forces are already on the ground in Iran.

Mr Pahlavi responds that America must anticipate scenarios but he again rebuffs any sort of intervention. He will not accept, for instance, an American bombing of nuclear installations in Iran to pave the way for a popular uprising. He says that this would immediately strengthen the position of the Mullahs. "It has to be the right mechanism," he says.

He agrees that the stakes are high. Iraq has little chance of becoming a stable country while Iran is supporting insurgency there. "Iran doesn't need to invade Iraq," says Mr Pahlavi. "It is already in there."

He is also clear about the purpose of Iranian Mullahs acquiring nuclear weapons: "It is to blackmail the rest of the world." He says the regime is acutely aware that it is exposed by the toppled tyrannies on its borders and is ready to lash out.

Is he pushing for a restoration of the monarchy as part of a new Iran? "My political mission is over the day that Iranians have the freedom to go to the polls," he says.

[nuconvert]

Thanx. I've seen that.

[Reza2004]

As we watch leaderships emerge in light of a single world refining speech. Reza Pahlavi is perhaps in the best position to truly surface and campaign now. He has a very positive name recognition to 80% of all Iranians. Also, he confirms the view of all Persian activists who have been screaming for years that they only need real support, not invasion.

[nuconvert]

I have to agree about Pahlavi.
I think he could truly be the unifying force behind the democratic movement. And that's what it needs to get rid of the regime.

[sionnsar]

[Khashayar]

why do you think the WORLD should listen to what you say?

[Khashayar]

He is Iranian, He is son of the late shah of my country and we respect him a lot.

[Khashayar]

I repeat, he is the son of our late Shah! Why do you insist on insulting?

[Khashayar]

You need a long term psychological treatment!
I hope God helps you get rid of the pains.

[Khashayar]

He lives in New Jersey not L.A

[Khashayar]

Read the memoirs of "William Sullivan" the last ambassador of the US to Tehran!

[blackie]

Freedom in Iran ~ Now!

[Reza2004]

True. The regime has successfully bullied and eliminated anyone who could be a uniter. I believe they even propped opposition and took notice of their supporters, then embarrassed and discredited their puppet and successfully made it difficult for Iranian people to trust any emerging leader. With one exception, Reza Pahlavi.

[pillbox_girl]

why do you think the WORLD should listen to what you say?

I speak as I find, and there are a LOT of people who agree with me (the truth is very attractive that way).

More to the point, why should the U.S. listen to your whiny little please that we spend our money and blood fighting your fight in your way?

Yet again, I ask you: What have you done to bring about freedom in Iran? If the United States does as you ask and sends military force to overthrow the Iranian Government, will you be there at the front, rifle in hand? Or will you still be here whining on this forum and hiding behind braver and better men (and women) than you?

You continually fail to answer. I can only assume it's because you are in fact doing nothing but whimper and whine. And that does not entitle your opinions to any gravity.

[pillbox_girl]

More insults. A sure sign of a lack of a rational argument.

[Smartass]

A revolt from within could be done by our CIA.
It would establish if that organization is back or
still at the mercy of spineless Democrats.

[parisa]

Yeah, I'd already seen this. He was also interviewed on BBC (audio): http://www.rezapahlavi.org/audiovideo/bbc12105.html

and an Irish radio RTE, here: http://www.rezapahlavi.org/audiovideo/rte-radio12105.html

He is getting a lot more exposure, and I sense he has toned down his rhetoric somewhat against the Europeans.

[parisa]

The concept of "royalty" is what Iran had for 2,500 years, until 1979, when mullahcracy and the rule of "velayateh faghih", meaning supreme leader, meaning mullah "royalty", took over. Monarchy is the core identity, history and heritage of Iran, just as it has been the core of Britain's.

That said, no one knows what the future will bring for Iran, but I sincerely believe that the best outcome for a peaceful, stable Iran which will contribute to stability in the region, and security in the rest of the world, would be for Iran to return to its core values which had kept the country intact for millenniums, and is part of its identity - both historically and culturally - to unify the country as a whole, but establish constitutional, democratic institution for governing the nation. That would be good for Iran and good for America.

[parisa]

I am SOOO late to this thread, but still:

Don't forget Brzezinski's role in establishing the Islamic rule in Iran, also the famous Guadalupe Summit of 1979 where Carter and his men, met with the 3 usual suspects of Europe - Britain, France, and Germany - where the final "fatwa" against the Shah was agreed upon. Also the role of the communist Ramsey Clark who met with Khomeini and his gang in Paris as that mullah sent surprisingly sophisticated and knowing commands and dictates to his "street-fighters" especially about methods to deal with the military, as well as General Huyser's secret meeting with the armed forces in Iran - behind the Shah's back - to quell any military coup by the army loyal to the king.

[nuconvert]

Thanks for your input

[JohnG45]

That said, no one knows what the future will bring for Iran, but I sincerely believe that the best outcome for a peaceful, stable Iran which will contribute to stability in the region, and security in the rest of the world, would be for Iran to return to its core values which had kept the country intact for millenniums, and is part of its identity - both historically and culturally - to unify the country as a whole, but establish constitutional, democratic institution for governing the nation. That would be good for Iran and good for America.

Beautifully said!