Reza Pahlavi (R) with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (C) in Israel, April 17, 2023
Israel’s 12-day war on Iran last month eliminated senior military figures, including key Revolutionary Guards commanders and staff involved in regional operations; political officials; and nuclear scientists. The Israelis, assisted by the US, damaged sensitive elements in Iran’s security and nuclear structure.
Israeli leaders have hailed a tactical success. But can the same be said about their alliance with the Pahlavi family of the late Shah?
Pahlavi’s Approach to Israel
In 2023 Reza Pahlavi, the exiled Crown Prince of Iran, made a highly publicized visit to Israel during the Passover holiday. Signaling alignment with the Israeli state, he met with senior officials including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He visited Yad Vashem, Israel’s official memorial and research center for the Holocaust, where he expressed solidarity with the Jewish people and condemned the Islamic Republic’s denial of the mass killing.
The trip was widely covered in both Israeli and Iranian diaspora media. Many perceived it as Pahlavi’s effort to position himself as an alternative to the current regime.
In April 2024, Pahlavi posted on social media:
For years I have said the fates of Iranians and Israelis are uniquely intertwined. We have common hopes for peace, but are denied it by a common enemy: the Islamic Republic. This regime poses an existential threat to both Iran and Israel that will continue as long as this regime…
— Reza Pahlavi (@PahlaviReza) April 14, 2024
Through such statements, he made clear an appeal for Israeli support in efforts to topple the Islamic Republic from abroad.
Last month Pahlavi’s daughter Iman Pahlavi married Jewish-American businessman Bradley Sherman. At a time of heightened tensions between Iran and Israel, the marriage was widely interpreted as a symbolic gesture to solidify further the Pahlavi family’s alignment with Israeli and Western political circles. For critics, this was a calculated move to deepen the Pahlavis’ political legitimacy among pro-Israel actors and foreign
governments advocating regime change in Iran.
Pahlavi’s Move for Power
For the Pahlavi family, there is much to gain from an alliance
with Israel. But could the same be said about Israel? Was the alliance with the Pahlavi family during the 12-day war a strategic success for Israel or a political miscalculation?
With the operation’s label “Rising Lion”, which can refer to the Pahlavi family emblem and the national flag of Iran under its dynasty, Israel appeared to be sending a calculated political message alongside military strikes. This was an appeal to
nostalgia among segments of monarchist Iranians, while simultaneously mocking the Islamic Republic’s claims to legitimacy.
Israeli media consistently portrayed the Pahlavi family as a trusted ally, with outlets like The Jerusalem Post referring to Reza Pahlavi as a “true friend of Israel”.
An important question remains: does being a friend to the Pahlavi family translate into being a friend of the Iranian people?
During the war, Reza Pahlavi repeatedly framed Israel’s military campaign against Iran as an “opportunity” for political transformation. Positioning himself as the self-declared Crown Prince, he put forward his candidacy to lead a transitional government in the event of regime collapse.
The rhetoric closely aligned with the regime change narratives in both Israel and the US, casting Pahlavi as the preferred figurehead of a post-Islamic Republic Iran. Rather than advocating an organic, grassroots-led movement from within the country, Pahlavi was calling for an approach relying heavily on external military intervention and foreign support.
Regime Change: Solution or Folly?
The Iranian people have demonstrated their capacity for mass mobilization and collective defiance, both after the dispute 2009 Presidential election and during the Women, Life, Freedom protests from September 2022. Those movements brought together Azerbaijanis, Al-Ahwazis, Kurds, Persians, Baloch, women, youth, and workers in a challenge to the Islamic Republic.
In contrast, Pahlavi’s calls for support during Israel’s war failed to generate even a fraction of that energy. His self-
appointment as a transitional leader was met with scepticism or outright rejection from the majority of people inside Iran.
This silence and anger towards his appeal speaks volumes. While the alliance with Israel may have resonated with some segments of the Iranian diaspora, it is far less clear whether it advanced Israeli strategic goals. Associating the military operation with the Pahlavi legacy alienated large portions of the Iranian population who view the monarchy as a symbol of repression and dependence on foreigners.
Instead of presenting a neutral or inclusive alternative to the Islamic Republic, Israel tied its messaging to a deeply contested past. Doing so, it may have undermined any credibility among Iranians who seek democratic change but reject both theocracy and monarchy. Some see the absurdity that in the 21st century, a time supposedly defined by democratic ideals and popular sovereignty, a man still claims political legitimacy solely on the basis of royal bloodline.
Critics argue that Reza Pahlavi’s insistence on being recognized as the “crown prince” of Iran, having no electoral mandate or presence within the country, reflects a fundamentally-outdated worldview. In principle, there is little difference between a monarchy that asserts divine or hereditary right to rule and a theocracy that claims authority through religious supremacy. Both deny the people the right to self-determination.
In the context of strategic decision-making, it is baffling that Israel has lent credibility to such a figure. Given their well-established ties with Azerbaijan, a neighbor with ethnic and political links to the populace of northwest Iran, the Israelis should have a more nuanced understanding of Iranian internal demographic and political dynamics. Minorities constitute nearly two-thirds of Iran’s population, with South Azerbaijanis as the largest group.
These communities have long histories of resistance to both the Islamic Republic and the former Pahlavi monarchy. Any attempt to revive and return the latter, which advocates for Persian chauvinism, is likely to fall flat among the majority of Iranians.
The Right and Wrong Path to “Democratic Transformation”
By aligning with a discredited monarchist figure, Israel is attempting to impose a singular identity on an inherently diverse society. This is the attempt that Iranians have resisted for nearly a century. The drive toward centralization and cultural erasure is what fueled the 1979 revolution, and it remains a core struggle among national minorities.
If regional actors are truly committed to democratic transformation in Iran, they must engage with its pluralistic reality and support inclusive, grassroots movements, not nostalgic, authoritarian alternatives.
The Iranian people overthrew the Shah to reject that broken system. They will not rise again to reinstate it.
“Why Iranians Reject Israel’s Alliance with the Shah’s Son” which Iranians? who? the pro-regime religious zealots? or communists? don’t be worry because they do not consider themselves as Iranians! one worships USSR dead heros and the other, Arabic imams. both have nothing to do with Iran and Persian culture. this article is nothing but a weak and nasty anti-Shah propaganda.
The lion & sword symbol of the Iranian flag predates Islam! So the author simply doesn’t know her history. However, I agree, Pahlavi is not the answer. The Iranians inside Iran need to find someone they trust. It’s not for the Iranians outside of Iran to select the most convenient actor.
Not being a follower of RP, at the same time, I question what is qualification of Turkan Bozkurt vis a vis iran and pahlavi era. I have read her other articles too and I find it mostly ignorant of history of iran of the last hundred years. The world wasn’t invented during her dissertation.
So, the famous saying “on the internet you can be a dog and no one would know” applies here.
“…the marriage was widely interpreted as a symbolic gesture….”
By whom exactly interpreted as such??? I live in iranian community and I actually did not know that, let alone interpreting in any direction.
“Through such statements, he made clear an appeal for Israeli support in efforts to topple the Islamic Republic from abroad.
Last month Pahlavi’s daughter Iman Pahlavi married Jewish-American businessman Bradley Sherman. At a time of heightened tensions between Iran and Israel, the marriage was widely interpreted as a symbolic gesture to solidify further the Pahlavi family’s alignment with Israeli and Western political circles. For critics, this was a calculated move to deepen the Pahlavis’ political legitimacy among pro-Israel actors and foreign
governments advocating regime change in Iran.”