Cybersecurity firm Treadstone 71 reports: “online popularity of Reza Pahlavi, the exiled son of Iran’s last Shah, is significantly inflated by a coordinated “digital machine” of inauthentic accounts, bots, and AI-generated content”

For more than a century, modern Iran has lived under forms of authoritarian rule—first under a centralized monarchy and, since 1979, under a theocratic republic. Throughout this period, Iranians have repeatedly sought to redefine their political order, only to see those efforts suppressed, co-opted, or derailed by internal fractures and external pressures. Today’s upheavals in Iran, emerging in the wake of economic collapse and decades-long political repression, starkly illustrate the ongoing struggle over the country’s future direction. Yet, the narrative surrounding that struggle—both inside and outside Iran—is increasingly contested, complicated by disinformation, diaspora politics, and symbolic battles over legitimacy.

Protest Movements – In late December 2025, widespread demonstrations erupted across Iran amid a deep and protracted economic crisis marked by currency collapse, soaring inflation, and severe shortages of essential services including water and electricity. What began with strikes among Tehran’s bazaar merchants soon spread to a wave of nationwide street protests demanding more than economic relief: protesters called for political change and an end to the Islamic Republic system itself. 

Human rights organizations have documented an escalating crackdown by Iranian authorities. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch reported that security forces, including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and FARAJA police units, have employed unlawful force against largely peaceful demonstrators, resulting in dozens of deaths in early January 2026 alone. Independent verification of casualties remains extremely difficult due to the government’s internet blackouts and information suppression. 

These events have been described as the deadliest cycle of repression since the government’s violent suppression of movements in 2022 and 2019. In cities from Tehran to smaller provincial centers, protest slogans have sharply focused on freedom, human dignity, and accountability rather than calls for a return to monarchy—underscoring the fundamentally republican and grassroots character of much of the movement.

The Shadow of Past – Iran’s modern history is inseparable from the downfall of the Pahlavi monarchy in the revolution of 1979. The overthrow of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi dismantled absolute monarchy and ushered in the Islamic Republic. Yet, the figure of monarchy has never entirely disappeared from Iranian political discourse.

Reza Pahlavi, the deposed shah’s son and heir, has lived most of his 65 years in exile, primarily in the United States and abroad. Critics argue that his life outside Iran’s political arena, and his family’s association with the vast wealth taken out of the country at the time of the revolution, have hindered his credibility among many Iranians who did not live under the monarchy or remember it fondly. 

In the current turbulence, Pahlavi has sought to position himself as a leader of Iran’s democratic transition, exhorting members of IRGC to side with the people and urging international pressure on the regime. But the extent and depth of his support within Iran remain debated. While some footage circulating on social media and diaspora platforms shows chants referencing Pahlavi, other analysts stress that these images may reflect isolated episodes amplified by online networks rather than a mass, monolithic movement behind him. This is while he refrains responding to more than half a century of tyranny and oppression that his father and grandfather imposed on the Iranian people,

Misinformation and the Politics of Narrative

“Reza Pahlavi’s digital prominence is a “simulacrum”—a manufactured fiction built by engineers, not citizens. The “metronome” timing, the industrial manufacturing of followers, and the scripted linguistic patterns provide indisputable evidence of a Coordinated Inauthentic Behaviour (CIB) operation.

Crucially, this “hollow army” has become a weapon in the hands of the very regime it claims to oppose. By inflating a synthetic opposition figure, the operation allows the Islamic Republic to frame all dissent as inauthentic, effectively arming the regime against the Iranian people”. (From Treadston71 report)

The dissemination of symbolic or misleading content is a powerful element in today’s political landscape. Viral videos and exaggerated claims can create an illusion of unanimity or inevitability around certain figures or agendas, even when those narratives do not accurately reflect on-the-ground realities. Such content can obscure the diversity of protester demands and, in some cases, play into the hands of those seeking to marginalize genuine grassroots movements.

For many Iranians, especially those who reject both the Islamic Republic and hereditary rule, calls to “bring back” monarchy are neither central nor universally representative. In fact, prominent diaspora opposition gatherings explicitly reject both clerical and monarchical rule in favor of a secular democratic republic. 

At a major solidarity rally in Berlin on February 7, 2026, thousands gathered to support the Iranian uprising. There, opposition figures underscored that real democratic change must not be conflated with the restoration of monarchy. Maryam Rajavi, president-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), warned that slogans invoking the shah could “hijack” the spirit of the uprising and serve the interests of both theocratic repression and reactionary forces. 

Former European Council President Charles Michel also criticized attempts to co-opt the movement for monarchical nostalgia, arguing such efforts risk undermining the broader push for a democratic and inclusive future. 

The path – After the killing of protesters in January, no one among the Iranian people believes that this regime has the legitimacy to remain. Many factions, however, actively distance themselves from monarchical references, arguing that inherited authority offers no meaningful alternative to theocratic rule. Many Iranians inside the country, particularly younger generations, frame their aspirations in terms of democratic governance, human rights, and individual freedoms rather than nostalgia for past regimes. 

The Iranian government welcomes the emergence of Pahlavi and considers it as a means to split the ranks of the uprising. Social fragmentation can be corrosive to movements. When segments of a broad opposition perceive their identity or aims misrepresented—whether by rival factions or external observers—trust erodes, solidarity weakens, and authoritarian actors can exploit those fractures to reinforce their own narratives and repression.

Authoritarian Resilience and International Perception

Authoritarian systems do not implode merely because of spectacle or symbols. They yield when the accumulation of facts, testimonies, and lived experience makes denial untenable. This requires rigorous documentation, credible reporting, and sustained international scrutiny. In Iran’s case, organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch play a vital role in documenting abuses and giving voice to those who risk their lives to demand accountability. 

Misinformation, such as unrealistic propaganda around the son of former Shah complicates this task by muddying the historical record and creating openings for governments to dismiss genuine grievances as propaganda. For journalists, academics, and observers, distinguishing between the varied strands of opposition discourse, and grounding analysis in verifiable evidence, is essential to understanding what is at stake in Iran today.

Conclusion: Beyond Binary Narratives

Iran’s struggle for freedom and dignity cannot be reduced to a binary battle between monarchy and theocracy. It is a multifaceted contest over political identity, social justice, and participatory governance. While historical figures and symbolic narratives will continue to shape discourse, the primary demand on the streets and in Iranian civil society remains centered on democratic rights, accountability, and sovereignty of the people—not the restoration of dynastic rule.

By resisting oversimplified storytelling and foregrounding credible evidence and diverse voices, observers can better appreciate the complexity of Iran’s present moment—a moment defined not by nostalgia for bygone eras, but by an urgent quest for democratic possibility.

© Eurasia Review