It is no secret that a central goal of the US attack on Iran is regime change. Donald Trump has the Iranian population Openly called upon, to bring about this change themselves. But what could such a upheaval look like? And how was Iran actually governed before the Islamic Revolution fundamentally changed the country? To answer these questions, it is worth taking a closer look at Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the last Shah of Iran, and his son Reza Pahlavi, who is still considered by some as a possible successor today.
What does the title „Shah“ actually mean?
Shah is the Persian word for King. The title refers to ruling designations of Achaemenid Dynasty back, which already 550 BC were used in the first Persian Empire. The title remained in various forms over the following 2,500 years in use. Until the abolition of the monarchy in the year 1979 Shah was the official title of Iranian kings.
The Pahlavi dynasty continued the title Shah into the 20th century and also used the old Persian ruler title „Shahanshah,“ meaning „King of Kings.“ This designation is associated with Cyrus the Great, the founder of the Achaemenid Empire.
The last Shah was Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who came to power in 1941 after his father, Reza Shah Pahlavi, was forced to abdicate by the British and Soviet Union.
The last Shah of Iran was Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. He ruled from 1941 to 1979, until the Islamic Revolution forced him into exile. His rise, however, didn't begin with an ordinary succession but in the midst of World War II. To understand how Mohammad Reza Pahlavi 1941 When he came to power, one must look at Iran's role in World War II.
Iran was officially neutral at the start of World War II. 1941 British and Soviet troops marched into the country. The reason for this also lay in the strategic importance of Iran's Railway lines. You were then by German engineers and advisors controlled and operated. This was a serious problem for Great Britain and the Soviet Union.
The monarch at the time, Reza Shah Pahlavi, showed little interest in pushing the Germans out of the country. Great Britain however, needed a more reliable ruler in Tehran: someone who would secure access to Iranian oil and at the same time allow British weapons to be transported to the Soviet Union via Iranian railway lines.
Mohammad Reza Pahlavi official portrait from 1973, Photo: Wikimedia Commons
When the army of Reza Shah could no longer offer resistance to the British-Soviet invasion, flea he out of the country. On September 16, 1941 the Iranian Prime Minister announced Mohammad Ali Foroughi, that Reza Shah's son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who was to become the new Shah.
Neither the Soviet Union nor Great Britain was particularly enthusiastic about the young monarch. However, both powers accepted him because they needed access to Iranian railways. Thus, Iran became an important supply route for British and American aid to the Soviet Union during the war. And Mohammad Reza Pahlavi became the new Shah of a country whose sovereignty was greatly compromised from the beginning of his reign foreign interests was characterized by.
Further foreign interventions and the struggle for Iran's oil
With the end of World War II, the Cold War. For the Iran The pressure from outside did not let up. Like many other states, Iran became the scene of a power struggle between the USA and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. At the same time, an ideological conflict intensified internally between capitalist, nationalist, and communist forces.
In the early 1950s, this conflict reached its peak. In 1950 Mohammad Mossadegh, elected prime minister of Iran. He wanted to nationalize the Iranian oil industry, which was dominated by the British. Anglo-Iranian Oil Company revoke their special rights and at the same time limit the Shah's power. For Great Britain, this was an alarm signal. Because the British economy benefited greatly from the Iranian oil business. Mosaddegh's plan therefore not only threatened one company, but an entire network of Western economic interests in Iran.
Mohammad Mosaddegh upon his arrival at Schiphol Airport in the Netherlands on May 28, 1952. Photo: Harry Pot / Anefo / Nationaal Archief
In Iran itself, Mosaddegh was extremely popular. But concerns grew in Washington and London. His decision to Nationalization was interpreted as a socialist-influenced course. At the same time, the US feared that Iran might move closer to the Soviet Union during the Cold War. What followed was a pattern that became increasingly common during this period: the US and Great Britain planned 1953 a coup d'état against Mosaddegh. The Prime Minister should be removed and replaced by General Fazlollah Zahedi to be replaced by one that seemed politically more reliable to the Western powers.
How the US Strengthened the Shah in 1953
The Shah played a central role in this plan. He was supposed to officially dismiss Mossadegh and make Zahedi the new Prime Minister. But the first attempt to depose Mossadegh, failed. The plan became known, Mossadegh remained in office, and the Shah himself came under pressure. Fearing the consequences, he left the country and temporarily went to Rome.
The question of power therefore remained open in Tehran. However, the USA did not give up on the overthrow. They supported loyalist forces, paid supporters, and helped organize protests against Mosaddegh. On the streets, the situation escalated: demonstrations, violence, and attacks on political opponents were intended to create the impression that Mosaddegh had lost control of the country.
This destabilization worked. Parts of the military sided with the putschists. The fighting eventually concentrated on central locations in Tehran, including Mosaddegh's office. In the end, his government was overthrown. General Fazlollah Zahedi emerged as the new Prime Minister off, and the Shah was able to leave Return from exile.
For the US and Great Britain, this achieved what they wanted: Iran's political direction remained under Western influence. For Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the coup was a turning point. His reign thereafter was more closely tied than ever to Western support. Iran became a central ally of the USA in the Middle East, on Israel's side.
The Divided Rule of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi
In the remainder 1950s For years, the Shah constantly navigated between Western and Soviet interests. At the same time, he sought to consolidate his own power vis-à-vis the elected prime ministers. For the most part, he understood that he could not provoke either Washington or Moscow too strongly if he wanted to remain in power and keep Iran out of a major conflict. In foreign policy, he relied primarily on close relations with the United States. But to the north, Iran bordered the Soviet Union. Moscow therefore remained a power that the Shah could never ignore.
Domestically, the Shah drew a lesson from Mossadegh's popularity: Reform promise could unleash enormous political power. Mossadegh had reached many Iranians because he promised social progress, national self-determination, and reforms in the interest of the population. Mohammad Reza Pahlavi therefore tried to present himself as modern, advanced to present the ruler. From this claim, he started 1963 the so-called White Revolution.
This reform phase was, especially under the religious authorities In Iran, deeply controversial. At the same time, it fundamentally changed the country. Several million farming families received land. Women gained the right to vote and could run for political office themselves. Teachers and medical personnel were sent to the countryside to improve education, healthcare, and living conditions there.
Modernization without democratization
Economically, the state also intervened more. Natural resources were further nationalized, and employees in these industries received limited profit participation. Additionally, the justice system was further separated from religious law and moved towards a Secular systems postponed, even though the influence of Sharia did not completely disappear.
Mohammad Reza Pahlavi speaks to a crowd in 1963 about the principles of the White Revolution. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
The reign of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was a period of rapid economic modernization. The Shah promoted industrialization by providing favorable credit to a new class of industrialists and strengthening domestic production. From everyday goods to luxury items. This also accelerated urbanization. A growing urban middle class benefited from high investments in education and healthcare.
But the context is important: this modernization did not automatically mean political opening. The Shah combined reforms and economic upswing with the expansion of his own power. This was a central contradiction of his reign: he wanted to modernize Iran, but not democratize it.
Aryan Nationalism and anti-Arab prejudice
Aryan nationalism here does not refer to German National Socialism, but to an Iranian narrative of pre-Islamic, Persian greatness: Iran was thus presented as the heir of an ancient „Aryan“ civilization understood, which should distance itself from Arab influence and political Islam.
Under the Shah, such nationalist ideas and anti-Arab prejudices grew. Behind this was the notion that Iran, or Persia, had lost its former greatness due to the Arab conquests and the growing influence of Islam. This perspective was not new. However, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi actively embraced it during his reign and made it a part of his political narrative.
For the Shah, Arab nationalist regimes in the region stood for Setback and blockage. He himself oriented himself more towards secular ideas, Western states, and Israel, including in military and cultural matters. This increased the devaluation of Arabs compared to Persians.
Why many Iranians turned against the Shah
One might think that comprehensive social and economic reforms would have secured the Shah lasting popularity. However, his reign was also marked by blatant corruption and a systematic dismantling of democracy. The feared secret service played a central role in this. SAVAK.
He was 1957 founded with the support of the USA and Israel and acted brutally against critics of the regime. In the 1960s, the rights of political parties were increasingly curtailed until they were practically meaningless. 1975 they were ultimately banned altogether. The Shah replaced them with Rastafarian-Party. She was appointed only approved Party of the state. Citizens were expected to join. Those who refused faced persecution.
Mass demonstration against the Shah in 1978 at the College Bridge in Tehran. Photo: Author unknown / sajed.ir / Wikimedia Commons / GFDL
Hundreds of political and religious opponents died under the rule of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. In 1975, the Shah allowed in the Evin Hill nine prominent political prisoners. Among them were members of the left People's Fedajin and the People's Mujahedin, another left-wing opposition group.
As the economy strengthened, so did corruption. Among the biggest beneficiaries were the Pahlavi family and the Shah's immediate circle. Many people outside the elite also benefited from the reforms. But at the same time, it became apparent how unevenly this new prosperity was distributed.
Whoever openly criticized corruption had to deal with the infamous SAVAK For more and more Iranians, the contrast became unbearable: on one hand, poverty and daily worries, on the other, the lavish lifestyle of the Shah and his entourage.
The Islamic Revolution of 1979
The reforms of the White Revolution and the Westward orientation promoted by the Shah had clear winners, especially Iranian women. However, large parts of conservative Iranian society rejected this development, as did the influential Shiite clergy.
Corruption, social inequality, political and religious oppression, as well as the forced orientation towards the West led to an ever-widening Disappointment about the Shah. 1978 reached this dissatisfaction its boiling point. In the City of Qom the first mass demonstrations broke out, from which the revolution would later emerge.
The Shah's response was violence. His security forces shot with sharp ammunition to the crowd. Dozens, possibly hundreds of protestors were killed. This is how the final phase his reign: Protests against the regime spread throughout the country.
became the central figure of the Revolution Ruhollah Khomeini, the later Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic. Khomeini was a Shiite cleric and one of the Shah's sharpest opponents. Even in the 1960s Years earlier, he had attacked the monarch's reform policies, especially his orientation towards the West and the weakening of religious authorities. 1964 Was Khomeini forced into exile because of this.
Portrait of Ruhollah Khomeini from 1981. Photo: Ali Kaveh / National Library and Archives of Iran / Wikimedia Commons
From the suburbs of Paris Khomeini coordinated the revolution. He succeeded in rallying diverse opposition groups against the Shah behind his leadership. His sermons were secretly brought into Iran, reproduced there, and further distributed through clerics. Khomeini presented himself not only as the leader of the Islamist opposition, but also as The voice of the left and secular forces, who also wanted to overthrow the Shah.
From France, he supported strikes and protests that increasingly paralyzed the regime. In January 1979, one year after the violent suppression of the protests in Qom, the Shah was forced to into exile go. His reign was thus over. A new order took its place: the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Why the Shah is being talked about again
So why is the Shah back in the news? We’re not talking about Mohammad Reza Pahlavi himself, the last Shah of Iran. The focus today is on his 65-year-old son and former heir to the throne Reza Pahlavi.
In a Performance in Berlin Pahlavi called for an end to the regime in Iran. Shortly thereafter, he was doused with a red liquid. The act seemed like a symbolic reference to the blood that had been shed under his father’s rule.
Reza Pahlavi has lived in exile since the Islamic Revolution of 1979 Exile in the United States. In the 1980s, he declared himself there to be King, formed a government-in-exile and planned a coup supported by the U.S. and Israel Coup d'état, which was supposed to propel him to the top in Iran. However, this did little to win him broader support. He received backing primarily from wealthy Iranian exiles in the U.S., while the majority of Iranians inside the country showed little interest in a The Return of the Monarchy showed.
Reza Pahlavi at an event at Arizona State University in Tempe, Arizona, 2015. Photo: Gage Skidmore / Wikimedia Commons
Reza Pahlavi is once again in the spotlight today because some see him as a possible alternative to the Islamic Republic. For some in the United States and Israel, Pahlavi offers a seemingly simple answer: a familiar name, a pro-Western biography, and the symbolic return to a Time before 1979. But that is precisely where the problem lies.
For the Pahlavi dynasty stands not only for modernization and ties to the West, but also for Repression, Corruption and foreign influence. Anyone who talks about Reza Pahlavi today is therefore always also addressing the unresolved question of whether a regime change in Iran really democratic self-determination would mean, or simply another change in power imposed from outside.
Would Israel support a new Shah?
In 1959, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi sent a clear political signal. He allowed Israel to Trade Office in Tehran to open. In doing so, Iran effectively recognized Israel without formally establishing full diplomatic relations. 1962 He also changed local regulations. Iranian Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, and Baháʼís could henceforth take their official oath for community councils on their own holy scriptures, not exclusively on the Quran.
This decision was hotly debated in Iran. For Ruhollah Khomeini, the later Ayatollah and leader of the Islamic Revolution, she became a early point of contention with the Shah. She intensified her criticism of the monarch's political elevation of religious minorities and the Shah's increased alignment of Iran with Israel and the West.
Today, the connection between the Pahlavi dynasty and Israel has further developed. During a visit to Israel in the year 2023 Reza Pahlavi visited the Western Wall in Jerusalem, among other places. Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs valued the trip as a political signal. This acknowledged Pahlavi as the „most important leader of the Iranian opposition.“.
And what would the USA do?
In a 2025 Speech griff Reza Pahlavi bewusst auf eine Rhetorik zurück, die schon die Herrschaft seines Vaters im Kalten Krieg geprägt hatte. Während er die iranische Bevölkerung zum Fight for a regime change appeal, he spoke of those forces that allegedly wanted to prevent peace and prosperity. His late father had once aptly described them as „Unholy alliance of red and black“ refers to: So Communists and Islamists.
This language should go over well in Washington. It builds on old Enemy images from the Cold War and connects them with today's warnings about „Islamists.“ Both also belong to the political vocabulary of the Trump administration.
Donald Trump has not yet official as the preferred candidate for a post-regime change Iran. But that doesn't automatically mean he rejects the idea. One reason for his reticence is likely that he doesn't want to be openly associated with an exiled politician in case Iran enters a long and bloody civil war crashes.
Pahlavi's support could draw the US deeper into another war, with new arms shipments, money, and military aid. It is precisely for this that patience is dwindling within Trump's own base. This is because many of his supporters believed him when he promised a return to a stronger isolationist US foreign policy promised.
But do Iranians even want a new Shah?
It is obvious that many Iranians want an end to the brutal rule of the clergy, which began with the Islamic Revolution and has continued since 47 years halts. It is less clear whether they instead see a return to monarchy under a new Shah as a realistic alternative. The situation of the Iranian civilian population is more complicated than the regime change rhetoric from outside often suggests.
This is especially true since the massive US attacks to the country and the protests they have triggered. Internet and telephone connections are severely restricted. This makes it all.
But what the protests show is: Many Iranians want an end to Tyranny, Repression and state punishment. They want democracy and the freedom to decide their own leadership and future. An externally supported return of a Shah hardly fits with this claim.
It should not be forgotten that under Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, hundreds, possibly Thousands of people killed, tortured, or persecuted. His reign was not only a phase of modernization and reforms, but also a authoritarian order, who suppressed political opponents with violence.
The Iranian Writers Association brings these Stance most clearly to the point:
Freedom will certainly not fall from the sky with bombs and missiles from predatory powers. Those who have risen up against the status quo while maintaining their independence from domestic and foreign exploiters [...] neither wait for the repetition of an imaginary past and its heralds, nor wait for fake reformers.
Also: „Freedom does not fall from the sky with bombs and rockets from foreign powers. Whoever rises up against the existing conditions and remains independent of exploiters at home and abroad neither waits for the return of a glorified past nor for false reformers.“
