The collapse of the Islamic Republic – if it comes – does not automatically deliver Iran into the hands of Reza Pahlavi, and the assumption that it should reveals more about Washington’s appetite for convenient narratives than about the political reality of a ninety-million-person nation whose relationship with monarchy is far more complicated than the diaspora rallies in Los Angeles suggest. Pahlavi is not a government-in-waiting. He is a symbol – and symbols, as any student of revolutionary history knows, are the most dangerous things to confuse with institutions.

Begin with the inconvenient archaeology of the Pahlavi dynasty itself, because the Islamic Republic did not materialize from a theological vacuum. It was born from the carcass of a monarchy that, for all its modernizing veneer, governed through SAVAK – one of the most feared secret police apparatuses in the Cold War world, trained by the CIA and Mossad, responsible for the systematic torture, disappearance, and execution of political dissidents across the ideological spectrum.

The Pahlavi dynasty built progress without consent

The Pahlavi project was, from its inception, an act of civilizational imitation. Reza Khan – an illiterate military officer who overthrew the decrepit Qajar dynasty in a 1925 coup and crowned himself Shah – modeled his entire modernization program on Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’s Turkey, watching from across the border as the founder of the Turkish Republic abolished the caliphate, adopted the Latin alphabet, banned the fez, secularized the courts, and dragged a post-Ottoman society into the twentieth century by its collar.

Reza Shah imported the template wholesale: compulsory Western dress, the forced unveiling of women, the construction of railways and factories, the establishment of Tehran University, the confiscation of clerical land endowments, and the systematic marginalization of the Shia ulama from public life.

He initially wanted to declare Iran a republic, as Atatürk had done, but abandoned the idea under British and clerical pressure and settled instead for a new dynasty – the critical divergence that would define everything that followed. Where Atatürk built institutions, however imperfectly, Reza Shah built a personality cult. Where Atatürk envisioned an eventual democratic tutelage, Reza Shah openly embraced what he called “one-man rule.”

The modernization was real – industrial output increased seventeenfold, highways expanded from two thousand to fourteen thousand miles, free compulsory education was introduced for both sexes – but it was modernization without consent, progress without participation, Westernization without the Western contract between state and citizen.

His son, Mohammad Reza Shah, inherited both the ambition and the deficiency. And the result, forty years later, was a population that had been given roads, hospitals, and universities but never a voice, which is precisely why, when Khomeini offered them one, they took it.

During his reign, Iran was a developmental autocracy of the classic Third World variety: rapid industrialization, aggressive secularization, cosmopolitan aesthetics in Tehran’s northern districts, and a boot on the throat of anyone who questioned the arrangement. The White Revolution of 1963 – land reform, women’s suffrage, literacy campaigns – was genuine modernization imposed by genuine authoritarianism, and its benefits accrued overwhelmingly to the urban elite while the rural poor and the traditional merchant class, the bazaaris, watched their economic autonomy dissolve under state-directed capitalism that enriched the court and its cronies.

When Khomeini thundered against the Shah from exile in Najaf, he was not speaking into silence. He was amplifying a grievance that had been accumulating for decades across every stratum of Iranian society – leftist intellectuals, Marxist guerrillas of the Tudeh Party and the Mujahedin-e Khalq, nationalist liberals of the National Front, and the clerical establishment that saw its institutional authority being systematically dismantled by a monarch who fancied himself Cyrus reincarnated.

The 1970s’ Iran was undeniably steeped in religious fervor, and Wilayat al-Faqih functioned as the Shia equivalent of what the Muslim Brotherhood and Wahhabi revivalism were simultaneously achieving across the Sunni Arab world: a fusion of political Islam with........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)