Reza Pahlavi on BBC about Opposition

Darius Kadivar
by Darius Kadivar

From January 18 2008 Interview on BBC Youth Program.

The Former Crown Prince of Iran Reza Pahlavi speaks openly on all issues in regard to his political role and struggle as well as to issues regarding his father's reign, Personal Fortune and the state of the opposition,the attitude of the MKO, Iran Iraq War, His position in regard to threats of War with Iran, on efficiency of Sactions and on civil dissobedience.

Plus Q&A with compatriots.

I leave the interpretation and/or pertinence of this interview to the sagacity of you listeners/Readers:

part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Part 4:



more from Darius Kadivar

Good discussions

by AnonymousChicken (not verified) on

Good discussions. Thanks Mammad. Your views are similar to mine, no need to repeat them.

Why Reza Pahlavi has not started an organization, such as NIAC to have at least the number of members which NIAC has? Iranians are lazy and they expect someone else to do their work for them. So I suppose the melat is waiting for another Khomeini to come to make water, gas, etc. free.

Reza Pahlavi is an Iranian (or as someone said whose name I do not remember, he is an Eye-ranian.) We cannot shut him out. But NO Kingdom for Iran anymore. We had enough of Shah and Savak. Where are the members of Savak who made our lives difficult? I was stopped more than ten times by these people for questioning and last a friend to their firing squad.

Iran must be developed by all Iranians of all religious groups keeping religion out of government.

Reza Shah or others must not wait for IRI to change, because it won't happen soon unless we do educate our people and work together to protect our country and its heritage.


IRI method...Divide and conquer

by donya (not verified) on

I have met with R.P privately to discuss Iran, just as I have with Gangi and hagigatjoo. All three say the same thing. There must be a regime change in Iran, it cannot be based on Islamic Rights, it must be based on human rights. This change can happen peacefully throught a national referendum. Let's stop fighting with each other, we seem to have so much baggage from the past. Let us concentrate on our problem today...the Islamic Republic. Let's not speak ill of old leaders. Let's talk of now, and come up with a solution...together. Stop looking for a leader, we are not cattle. Someone will rise, we must lead.


I hope this works...

by Donya (not verified) on

Try holding down the "shift" key as you right click your mouse...that may help. Thanks for the reply.




by Mammad (not verified) on

Thank you. Now, we can debate.

In response to your points, in the order that you wrote them:

1. How did I do that? What did I say that gave even this impression, let alone saying so explicitly?

2. I have read everything that he has said or written, because I follow such developments.

First of all, that comment was pointed more toward Kadivar, not RP. In the past, he has posted several articles in which he has said that RP can be a catalyst. At the beginning of my comments I also said, "Kadivar is at it again ...."

Secondly, if RP is in this simply because he wants to help (which would certainly be welcome), he would not often talk as if he wants to lead this.

3. This is not pure conjecture, as you say. In the evening of 9/11/2001 RP said those words which were broadcast on the Iranian radio in Los Angeles, KIRN670AM. I even sent a fax to the radio about this, protesting its broadcast in those sensitive times. I still have the fax for historical records. Someone published an article on this site and strongly protested it.

I am sure that it was on 9/11/2008. But, since it is six and a half years since then, there is a small probability that it could have been a few days afterwards. But, that is not the point. The point is RP's words in those sensitive times. As I said, if he really has changed his mind, then that is great.

Thank you again.



by Setiz (not verified) on

Sorry I cannot view your video on my system. I do not know what you meant either. But yes bakhtiar was probably the best choice that we had to give us what we wanted without destroying all the bridges and replacing them with religious fraud. And yes, we made a deadly mistake in favoring khomeini over bakhtiar.


Mammad Agha...

by Setiz (not verified) on

Well, your last comment makes a lot more sense than the previous one. Let me talk to you as a hamvatan without roudarvasi.

You said in the past that you are a scientist. One would not expect a scientist to dismiss someone based on any of your itemized reasonings, all of which are either hearsay or of no consequence, as I explained in my previous comment. You made no mention of critical issues that a would be leader of change in iran should discuss. You could approve or reject reza pahlavi based on critical issues such as his views on:

(a) role of religion in the state.

(b) his personal role after a new system is set up.

(c) role of women in future of iran.

(d) role of minorities in iran.

(e) how rule of law is imposed on people uniformly. How judges are selected. How juries are involved.

(f) how various checks and balances are enforced to prevent any deceptive corrupt leader to take over as khomeini did.

(g) how treasures of thecountry is used to progress all of iran

etc. These are the questions that were never asked of khomeini and his gang afront, and these are the critical issues that are rotting iranians in iran today, not if a potential leader earned or bought his university degree. If we want university degree, I have news for you: we already have a leader with the highest degree of the land, doctor ahmadinejad, whom I would not consider qualified to clean up a ...... let alone running the country.

You Mammad, the scientist, mentioned none of these critical issues except for arguing about validity of reza pahlavi's degree and that he is uneducated and if he could shut others up and .... Well, please re-listen to his videos to see if the issues raised by him is more important or the ones that you raised. Don't you think I deserve to expect more from a scientist of the land, and don't you think that we are in deep trouble if our commoners rationalized similarly?

I respect you and I want you to be able to participate in future of iran. But I am opposed to your positions of exclusionary attitude, demonizing shah in every respect including his son's rights as a citizen. I want to be able to see a better iran in my life time, and if that means dealing even with the devil (conditionally), then I will do that, let alone reza pahlavi. Why? because he is the only one that has any recognition in iran. There is nobody else; I challenge you to mention someone else that can be trusted more than we can trust him and has better recognition than him and then I will yield. But your hatred is really a serious barrier in your thought process and if you consider yourself to be an educated person, you should relieve yourself of past emotions and resort to rationality and logic instead.

Mammad, let me be frank with you please. I am very suspicious of people who once had anything to do with the iranian revolution and islamic regime. Why? Because they showed a lack of sound judgment that led us to where we are, and now I question their motive and their hidden agenda. I am very distrustful of likes of Ganji and Baghi and Khatami and Karrubi and ... and ... as they were quiet when they were in position of power ignoring iranian girls who were being raped in iranian prisons and I do not want to give them any support or a second chance to screw up iran, and I do not want to participate in their crimes, even if those crimes are claimed to be direct from god's mouth. I am also very distrustful of those who place 'iran' behind any ideology, let it be religious or ethnic. When I review the characters of those who staged the revolution, from Qom to najaf, from karbala to beirut, and from berlin to belfast (are you surprised?), all I see is deception and deceit. 99% of those who supported the revolution really intended to stage a coup and take over the country, from leftists to islamists, and from so-called intellectuals to bazaaris; none had any good intention of setting up a healthy progressive democratic system. They all wanted to selfishly replace the shah and take control of power and wealth in iran. Alas that there was only one pie which mullas took ownership of, and the rest defeated and disappointed, have now turned into innocent opposition overnight. That is why I wish shah had stayed and put them all in jails. That would have saved us some 500,000 lives, some $1 trillion in treasure, and some 30 years of precious time.

The people of iran come in multiple colors of ethnicity and religion (and gender of course). Either iran can survive with equality for all with the only common thread amongst us running supreme, the sacred iranian nationality, or will weaken and ultimately disintegrate us into a balkanized mosaic. I respect your religion and mine, but I believe it belongs to our houses and our places of worship. It makes me really nervous to see that deep inside our minds we place religion above nationality. We took that route and trusted the highest religious authority, the sign of god, and he led us to disaster, mass murder of citizens and 30 years of oppression. And you, my scientist hamvatan, still do not want to accept that as bad as shah allegedly was, his days were infinitely better than any day of the past 30 years. As long as you do not accept that and twist your logic around to defend the revolution and the islamic republic's system of deception, we are far apart.

I do not mind you criticizing the shah or his son, but only when it is based on reliable data, it is pragmatic within realities of iran, there is a better alternative presented, and it is about something that matters, then there is a good chance that I would agree with you.

I wonder what the experience has been that made you so eternally angry toward the pahlavis.


SETIZ... Take some responsibility!

by Donya (not verified) on

Setiz, we had Bakhtiyar to turn to. BUT WE chose Khomeini. We with the the help of the International community did this to our selves.



by Anonymous4now on

You write:


“1. As far as committing any crime is concerned, Reza Pahlavi is completely innocent. I did not say a word about this. I do not know what the heck you are talking about.”


Why then are you characterizing him in such a manner?


“So, here is the man, the "catalyst," the beacon of hope!! Yeap! That is what Iran needs!! Iran should be a poor place to need a character like him, who most important character is that he has no character.”


Why do you say this?  Have you read his writings or listened to him, ever? 


“5. The man who supposedly is against war said, on September 11, 2001, "terrorism is like an octupus. Octupus' eyes are its weak point, and the eyes of terrorism octupus are in Tehran," meaning hit Tehran.”


You are basing your argument on pure conjecture.  On September 11, 2001 there was no discussion of invading any country, and only a few days later did George Bush give an ultimatum to the Taliban in Afghanistan to hand over Osama Bin Laden.  Reza Pahlavi has rejected the notion of a foreign invasion many times.


“3. As to whether I hate the Pahlavis: I hate monarchy, I hate dictatorship, and I hate any political system with unelected leaders. I am for a secular, democratic republic.”


But it is not very democratic to be exclusionary.  If in a secular, democratic Iran, the majority of people voted for a constitutional monarchy, would you accept it or fight it?

 To ensure that people do not make the wrong choice again we have to do our best to unite and assemble a democratic and pluralist opposition, together, so that people can no longer be fooled and can have a viable alternative.  It seems to me that you are defeating your own cause with your attitude, because people inside Iran are so frustrated that at the first opportunity they have they may well opt for what you despise most.  We have wasted and fritted away 30 years, bickering about whether the Shah was good or bad.  So be a part of the solution, and help educate the Iranians in exile in the ways and means of democracy, tolerance, and unity.  Don’t dismiss them wholesale. 


Setiz and Anonymous4now

by Mammad (not verified) on

I am sorry, but, with all due respect, the two of you do not seem to read what I say. Both of you seem to have a preconceived notion of what I think, what I stand for, etc., no matter how hard I try to explain. Every time you respond to whatever I say, you just repeat the same thing. Then, why bother?

Setiz, in particular, says I want no change. That I should go to Iran, that I am immature, etc. How he reached such conclusions and fact findings is beyond me, because I said nothing of the sort. Almost everything that you said, as valuable as they may (aside from labeling me, questioning my character, etc.) had nothing to do with what I said in my original comment.

Reza Pahlavi, as a citizen of Iran, is entitled to,

(1) Opposing the IRI;

(2) Presenting himself as a potential leader of the opposition, and

(3) presenting himself as a potential future leader of Iran.

But, by the same token, I am also entitled to opposing him. Instead of using profanity, which almost all the monarchists use, I listed several reasons why I oppose him. All of them are factual and documented. You have any arguments against my reasons? Then tell me which of the reasons is wrong or questionable, and then we can have a good discussions. All of my reasons might be wrong, but this will only become apparent through a candid, point-by-point discussion of the reasons that I listed, not by throwing mud at me.

But, the two of you only question my character, my education, my honesty, etc. Fine, if you wish to be like this, so be it. We cannot have any discussions. But, I thought that the purpose of spending time and writing in this column was teaching and learning, not labeling people, questioning their character, integrity, honesty, etc. What is the difference, then, between such behavior and what the likes of Hossein Shariatmadari of Tehran Keyhan do?


AAA and sick&tired

by Anonymous4now on

Mammad’s argument is all based on his personal hatred of Reza Pahlavi and the assumption that if he were to lead the opposition then he would necessarily need to have the education and the knowledge about the everyday life of Iranians to be the king or executioner of the laws and rules of Iranian society.  His argument shows a complete lack of maturity and is based on the age old notion that Iranians need a figure head to govern them. 

To fight the IRI, the fragmented opposition needs to come together under the leadership of a well recognized figure, but to conclude that this opposition leader will need to be the jack of all trades so as to take over the country is, to simply put it, 30 years old.    We should not be looking for someone to take over the nation, and if living in exile has thought us anything, it is the fact that a progressive and successful nation needs a system in place, a system of checks and balances, and not a front man.  It is incumbent on all Iranians in exile to participate in this movement and demand adherence to rules and principles of plurality and democracy.  Clearly this movement cannot take root inside Iran, but it can kick start the process of democratization in Iran.  Reza Pahlavi may be the last hope Iranians have to salvage their nation.  Participation is much more empowering than remaining fragmented and simply doing nothing and reciting aayeh ya's.



by Setiz (not verified) on

Mammad's comments need no response, they are simply childish and triggered by hatred towards a person with no record from an ex-revolutionary. But since you asked:

1. The man has spent his entire adult life out of Iran. He does not have the foggiest idea about the present Iran and Iranians.

So do a lot of 4 million other iranians who live abroad, as well as a lot of IRI leaders who staged the revolution from their exile in najaf and karbala and beirut. Did you want him to be in iran to be hanged? We should stop considering any fanatic islamist more iranian than others. I have been in iran many times and I bet that Mammad is far less familiar with iran of today than reza pahlavi is.

2. The man has no education whatsoever, except for the BA degree that USC in Los Angeles gave him in 1985, simply because his father had given USC $7 million in the early 1970s to establish the Shah Chair in petroleum engineering.

This is so childish and arrogent to assume that Mammad's degree is more viable than reza pahlavi's. Anyone remotely familiar with american educational system knows that this is not how it works. They do not give you a degree because your deposed dead daddy gave a lousy $7M to the school a decade earlier. Besides, we saw what "educated" people like "dr. Yazdi", "dr. Larijani", "dr. Sanjabi", ... have done and are doing to our country. Education can be as dangerous as it can be helpful.

3. The man has not worked a single day of his life and, therefore, he does not the foggiest idea about how the working men and women live in Iran.

Neither did emam khomeini, the leech who lived on people's donations for his entire life, and whom likes of Mammad lined up behind with closed eyes. what do you want him to do, drive a taxi cab?

His mission is to help iran saved; that is his job. Besides, do YOU know about lives of people iran, when you called achievements of islamic republic "fantastic" (in another thread) when young girls have to 'fantastically' sell their bodies to put food in their mouth? Or young boys to 'fantastically' turn to drugs to forget their miserable lives.

4. The man lies so brazenly about his father not amassing a large fortune simply because he was the Shah.

Do you have any proof for how much his father stole? See my other comment if you don't. Besides what if I accuse you of the same without any proof, what would you say? The fact is that nobody knows with any degree of accuracy how much his father stole, too little or too much; it is all hearsay and therefore not a matter for any intelligent discussion.

5. The man who supposedly is against war said, on September 11, 2001, "terrorism is like an octupus. Octupus' eyes are its weak point, and the eyes of terrorism octupus are in Tehran," meaning hit Tehran.

He is right but your conclusion is yours not his. For people of iran, the devil is in tehran. Apparently you did not listen to above videos where he makes a comment opposite to your conclusion. What else do you want him to do to convince likes of you. Are you convinceable by any means, anything at all that he could say?

6. The man has no support within Iran.

That is only partially correct. He has some support among those who have come to realize the mistakes of 1979 and youth who have heard of the good old days of pre-revolution. Although his support is somewhat minimal and not hopeful but the key issue is that no other person has any better support in iran. So in a relative term, he has the recognition.

7. Despite the best efforts of his dandlers, the man has not been able to organize even his own few supporters, but has established relations with some of the most anti-Iran American groups.

I don't know where this is coming from. Yes, he talks to a lot of different groups that I and you may not like, but that does not mean anything as long as there is no quid pro quo since desperate times need desperate measures. But I agree that he has not been as effective as he should have been for any meaningful acheivement.

8. The man has never ever condemned the barking dogs in Los Angeles and elsewhere, like BZB and BSE, who, in his name, viciously attack anyone who criticizes him or anything remotely related to him.

What? You want him to limit freedom of speech of those who are loosely connected to him. That is IRI, not him, and not what we are missing here in foreign land.

9. The man has never ever expressed his position regarding the foreign-sponsored coup of 1953 and his father's illegitimate rule, leaving that to history to judge, but has taken the most extreme position against the 1979 Revolution against his father which is, aside from everything else, is a more recent event than the 1953 coup.

What do you expect him to say, that his father was right to regain his constitutionally legitimate rule, or was mosaddeq right to have violated constitutional laws of the land in his favor? While none of us like any foreign interference in iranian affairs, the issue of mosaddeq vs. shah in view of what was best for iran at the time is very complex and controversial. If you think that you have the answer, you are simply wrong. Mosaddeq is only a convenient dead excuse for anti-shah propaganda; had he survived he would have probably set aside by the leftists a few years later. BTW, shah's rule was as (il)legitimate as those who came 2500 years before him and 30 years after him. Do you really consider an idiot like ahmadinajad more legitimate than shah because he could fool 17 million people to vote for him?

Grow up and argue issue based on rationality and logic rather than childish "bahaneh giri", hearsay, rumors, and emotional freeze in pre-fraudulent-revolution hatred. We saw what that blanket emotional hatred did to us; let's not take the same route twice.


If not reza pahlavi, then who?

by Setiz (not verified) on

Or shall we keep waiting forever. Likes of Mammad do not want any fundamental change, they want as little change as possible to keep the islamic regime in power. People like khatami, karrubi, ganji, baghi, ... are all regime insiders genetically engineered with islamic fanaticism and pickled, instead of eliminated, to be placed in position in strategic times of need to save the regime from total collapse.

Okay, no reza pahlavi, then who? There is nobody else, or else we would not be stuck here after 29 years.

If one claims that reza pahlavi is unfamiliar with iran, then he should (1) listen to him to see what he says, (2) read opposition here to see if they know any better about daily struggles of iranians, or if they care any more about today's iran than reza pahlavi, and (3) make a visit to iran, specially in the last 6 months to see (a) how bad things are and (b) that even very young who never saw pahlavi regime in action long for those good old days and look forward to a leader to emerge, even if he is reza pahlavi.

What matters is the saving of iran as soon as possible. If there is any other viable person, then that is fine, let him come forward. If there is no other person and reza pahlavi is willing to be that leader, then so be it. That of course does not mean a return to monarchy as we knew it, rather a return to rule of the people of iran. Then and only then reza pahlavi should compete with others for any position if he wishes based on people's vote. This is aligned with what reza pahlavi has said many times before.

We have seen an exclusionary regime for 30 years now. Exclusion based on ideology, religion, ethnicity, and gender; that is IRI. We cannot move to any new era with the same mental attitude. Exclusion should be based on behavior rather than personal likes and dislikes. The only ones excluded from participation in future of iran should be those with criminal records that can stand in a neutral court of law; likes of IRI or mojahedin leaders with blood of iranian youth on their hands. We should welcome any other person with affinity for iran and iranians, rather than looking for replacing one exclusionary regime with another.


good comments

by AAA (not verified) on

Mammad good points. Toning down the language would make your arguments stronger though.
Setiz: why don't do try to debunk Mammad's argument point by point instead of going on a rant which does not address any of his concerns regarding RP.
Reza L: well said. But after all he is who he is because of him being a son of the late Shah. Even most of those who may view him for what he is, a concerned Iranian in diaspora, don't give him a very good grade. Mammad gives a few good reasons why.
For me, his alignment with the most dubious characters in the Washington Beltway, like those at the AEI, is worrying and discredits him. His closeness to this circle of policy makers borders intellectual poverty and a broken moral compass.


I agree with Mammad!

by sick&tired (not verified) on

There is no way someone like Reza Pahlavi, who probably knows about Iran and Iranians less than 'Billy Jones' (typical ignorant American), can go back and solve the mess that his father and the mullahs created, so everything will be happily ever after.

Why we Iranians are always in a binary mode: if it's not Shah, it's Khomeini. If it's not Khomeini, it got to be Shah again!


I respect him very much!

by Kamangir on

I have always watched and listened to Reza Pahlavi's speeches and interviews and am familiar with his views.  I have lived in Europe for more than two decades and am aware that he is the only valid and respectable and known Iranian figure among the European and I know what I'm talking about.

I respect him very much, have great simpathy towards him and the entire Pahlavi family. They did great things for my country. In days such as these, when the worse of the ver worst of Iran such as ahmadinejad and his clan of seyyeds and akhoonds and neo-akhoonds are destryoing every single bit of my country's decency and reputation. Reza Pahlavi's presence is a blessing.

My God Bless him and Iran





Why should Shah show more engagement?

by Arash Kamangir (not verified) on

I read often unjust critics about Pahlavis not being active enough. Royal family of Iran were treated very unjust by Iranian nation and hardly anyone stood out for them. They were insulted and had to leave the country and the rest. Don'T we say in Farsi" die for someone who would fever for you!". We know now that Pahlavis were good to us and both Reza Shah and Muhammad Reza Shah did more for Iranians than they deserved.
Now then it is upto Iranians to show that they are prepared to support Shah and are ready to go this very difficult way with them. First thing people in Iran can do is to stop blaming Carter for their miseries and be honest to themselves.

Javid Shah



by Setiz (not verified) on

Thank you for your feedback, here and elsewhere.

I was actually in iran very recently and saw a total absence of any opposition that people can organize around. Likes of Ganji and Baghi are viewed with distrust due to their past association with islamic regime. There remains nobody else but prince reza. Those who are sitting here in the comfort of their heated homes assume that people of iran still think like 1979. What I saw very recently was very different, they blame carter for the 1979 disaster, and they are angry with prince reza for NOT being more effective and forthcoming with ideas. Let's face it, shah was bad as long as we had not seen the islamic republic. That is no more the case for the people who must resort to all sorts of struggles to have food on their table.

Shah was accused of killing 600,000 and stealing $20B out of iran's treasury by khomeini, the man of god, the emam of shi'ites. Number of killings turned out to be exaggerated by a factor of 1,500 according to Baghi. If the same level of exaggeration was in play for the amount of money that pahlavis stole, that brings pahlavis' take of iranian treasure down to less than $14M, a bargain for 58 years of ruling a turmoiled country like iran!

So I ask what is the fair compensation for someone who can save iran today. If someone can save iran from the islamic regime and turn it into a decent country, he is worth billions compared to the wastage that IRI has made in the past 29 years, a total close to $1 trillion.

We should change before iran can change. Reza shah, mohammad reza shah, and mosaddeq can be controversial, but prince reza's case is quite easy as he does not have any record one way or the other, except for his association with now-fond memories of period of mohammad reza shah and contributions of reza shah. So if he can be the catalyst for change, let him be, and beyond that, the people of iran should collectively decide on his role.

People who have agendas and deep in their mind have exclusionary ideas based on ideology, religious or otherwise, likes of Mammad, Ganji, and even Baghi are not cure but only replacement of a failure with another.

And I agree with you that had the staged fraudulent revolution of 1979 had not happened, mohammad reza shah still had died in a couple of years and his son had to moderate. In any case, I am very confident that had pahlavi regime survived, the chance of iran being in worse shape than what it is today would be very close to zero. I do not know what is so hard to understand about this simple conjecture, but only if one is capable of setting aside his inexplicable emotions and blanket hatred and think rationally and pragmatically. Those who disagree should at least offer an alternate practical solution before they shoot down the only glimmer of hope that can be seen in distant.



by Anonymous4now on

Excellent write up on “Grow up” and a fantastic rebuttal to Mammad, who despite his claims to be a scientist sounds, at times, completely irrational.  Reza Pahlavi is certainly well read and very rational, and you are right, he cannot be found guilty by association. 

  A young journalist friend of mine, who has recently left Iran, asked my view on the return of monarchy.  I said had the monarch survived it would have certainly reformed by now, but I don’t want to see monarchy back and I don’t think the people of Iran will accept that notion.  He said 70% of the population is under 30 and all they hear through the collective memories of their parents’ generation is the grandeur of the previous system compared to this.  Whether he is right or not is to be determined, but right now the most recognized figure in Iranian politics is Reza Pahlavi and he can be the catalyst for change, and play a role in unifying the opposition, only if, as you so eloquently put it, people would grow up! 


دو نکته درباره مصاحبه

It's Me (not verified)

نکته اول

آقای پهلوی میگه که ایران میتونست کل عراق رو در عرض کمتر از چهل و هشت ساعت و بغداد رو در عرض دوازده ساعت بگیره. حالا این رو مقایسه کنید با آمریکا که خیلی بیشتر از این طول کشید که عراق رو بگیره. کاملا مشخصه که ایشون یک آدم واقعگر نیستن بلکه افکارشون بر اساس تخیلات غیر واقعی و عجیب غریب نقش بسته.

نکته دوم

ایشون از تحریم حمایت کردن. در تحریمی که علیه عراق اعمال شد بیش از پانصد هزار کودک زیر پنج سال جان خودشون رو از دست دادن. ایرانی ای که از ویرانی کشورش حمایت کند خاین هست.



by Mammad (not verified) on


I normally do not respond to comments such as yours, because I do not wish to get involved in name calling, insults, and labeling people. Such things do not go anywhere. But, for the record:

1. As far as committing any crime is concerned, Reza Pahlavi is completely innocent. I did not say a word about this. I do not know what the heck you are talking about.

2. As far as Reza Pahlavi's comments on September 11, 2001 is concerned, that was a radio interview broadcast on KIRN670Am in Los Angeles, and its record exists. That generated a lot of anger then, and I know that some people published articles criticizing him, including on this site. Reza Pahlavi may have changed his mind which, if true, would be a great positive development.

3. As to whether I hate the Pahlavis: I hate monarchy, I hate dictatorship, and I hate any political system with unelected leaders. I am for a secular, democratic republic.

In particular, I despise the Shah's legacy because his corrupt dictatorship gave us the IRI which murdered my brother, my cousins, and too many of my classmates and friends, not to mention tens of thousands of others. You cannot find a statement more honest than this. I say it loudly and clearly, so that you would not need to name-call me.

4. As far as I being a scientist: I do not claim to be, I am a scientist. Whether you accept or believe it is, with all due respect to you, immaterial, because what matters is that my scientist peers recognize that and have honoured me for it. I prefer not to use my complete name; if I did, you could check it for yourself.

5. In fact, it is precisely because I am a scientist - and because science is objective - that I believe that the Shah and his dictatorship were partly responsible for what is happening to us today. Hatret of the mullahs alone will not address the problem. Yes, the crimes that mullahs have committed far outnumber those committed by the Shah. But, it was the Shah's government that eliminated the secular opposition, the leftist opposition, the nationalist opposition, and even jailed moderate Islamic opposition, such as Mehdi Bazargan and his group that could not work after the Revolution even for one year and with utter honesty resigned, that left nothing for people to turn to, but the mullahs.

So, call me what you want. I respect your right to even insult me. I never respond to insults. But, if you set aside name calling and insulting, we can have a good discussions.



by Anonymous till iran is free (not verified) on

Sir, who are you to call others illegitimate? Or are you taking a lesson from khomeini's stamp of mofsedo-fel-arz on anyone whom he did not like. Is that the kind of regime you want? If so, maybe you are illegitimate yourself.

P.S. I am not monarchist but want a pluralistic future for iran which can include ALL iranians on equal basis, irrespective of any belief that they have, religious, political, ethnic, or gender-based. That is the only viable route for a country like iran.


Mammad Agha

by Setiz (not verified) on

You claim to be a "scientist", yet you do not really see how childish your comments are and solely based on your hatred of pahlavis.

You really have a blanket hatred for pahlavis and a genetic fanaticism with islamic regime, although you want it to moderate to survive. You are attacking an innocent man, really, whose only crime is to be the son of a pahlavi. Most of your itemized criticism of prince reza applies to most, if not all, iranians living abroad because of IRI, including I and you, one way or the other.

Honestly, I don't think you are anywhere near being a scientist, or else at least you would have provided better rational than mimicking khomeini's style of hatred.

You really have a hatred for pahlavis and you don't know why. No offense, but that kind of attitude needs a visit to a psychologist as it is blatantly irrational.

I have nothing for or against prince reza, and it is highly unlikely that he will have any role whatsoever in future of iran, but honestly, your comments are so childish towards a man that has (himself on his own) a far cleaner record than ANYONE in the islamic regime, from Khomeini to Ahmadinejad.

I really do not know what your agenda is, except to help the islamic regime to drag on forever, at the cost of not I and you, but the people who live within iran.

I sincerely hope that other iranian intellectuals and scientist have a far better sense of rationality and self-control towards blanket hatred, irrespective of if their political position; otherwise, we'll be in deep trouble for a long long time.


Why bother

by markux (not verified) on

One more time: ALL Monarchies are illegitimate without exception. People who flirt with this concept of government need to read Thomas Paine books and pamphlet.

Intelligent Iranian need to abandon this left over and get on with the next phase of Iranian history.

Do not go back to the old, look to the future.


Doroshkeh ahead of the horse!

by Omeedless (not verified) on

I marvel at his command of the Persian language, which also reflects the depth of his ideas--but to no avail. The current government is a reflection of our national character. Give it a 100 years or so to catch up.
ps--Thanks Darius Jon for the post!!


Kadivar is at it again

by Mammad (not verified) on

Kadivar is at it again, selling us his "catalyst" for change. In another post I explained why RP cannot be, and is not, what Kadivar and people like him like us to believe.

Let's see:

1. The man has spent his entire adult life out of Iran. He does not have the foggiest idea about the present Iran and Iranians.

2. The man has no education whatsoever, except for the BA degree that USC in Los Angeles gave him in 1985, simply because his father had given USC $7 million in the early 1970s to establish the Shah Chair in petroleum engineering.

3. The man has not worked a single day of his life and, therefore, he does not the foggiest idea about how the working men and women live in Iran.

4. The man lies so brazenly about his father not amassing a large fortune simply because he was the Shah.

5. The man who supposedly is against war said, on September 11, 2001, "terrorism is like an octupus. Octupus' eyes are its weak point, and the eyes of terrorism octupus are in Tehran," meaning hit Tehran.

6. The man has no support within Iran.

7. Despite the best efforts of his dandlers, the man has not been able to organize even his own few supporters, but has established relations with some of the most anti-Iran American groups.

8. The man has never ever condemned the barking dogs in Los Angeles and elsewhere, like BZB and BSE, who, in his name, viciously attack anyone who criticizes him or anything remotely related to him.

9. The man has never ever expressed his position regarding the foreign-sponsored coup of 1953 and his father's illegitimate rule, leaving that to history to judge, but has taken the most extreme position against the 1979 Revolution against his father which is, aside from everything else, is a more recent event than the 1953 coup.

So, here is the man, the "catalyst," the beacon of hope!! Yeap! That is what Iran needs!! Iran should be a poor place to need a character like him, who most important character is that he has no character.


Grow Up....

by Setiz (not verified) on

We iranians should stop acting like naive children. We should learn from our experience of the past 30 years both within iran and in western societies based on rule of law. Iran does not change until the most educated individuals amongst us grow up and change for the better.

I am neither for nor against Prince Reza, but anytime I listen to him he makes sense, so I would like to challenge others and ask them to provide proof of their accusations.

Prince reza is an individual with no record, good or bad, at this time; so any animosity towards him is only an indication of irrationality and immaturity of the accuser.

People accusing him via his father to have stolen money from iran. Well, I say, where is your proof? Is it the same proof that you provide if I accused YOU of stealing money from iran without showing you any proof. Furthermore, IRI has also not been able to provide any proof whatsoever as to how much shah stole, despite having had access to all bank and oil industry records for 29 years now. At the beginning of the revolution, IRI claimed that shah took 6 billion dollars out of iran, well they went quiet once they could not support that with any evidence. Besides, how much pahlavi shahs deserved to be compensated for ruling iran for almost 58 years, irrespective of their performance as kings, compared to people of similar position around the globe?

Another claim is that the bad prince reza lives in a mansion in VA. Well, I have not seen his 'mansion' to judge it one way or the other, but have you, the complainer? Do you know how much it is valued, and do you know who owns it? And exactly how should a person of his status, son of a king, live, compared to standard of living of people of similar status in the US.

Another accusation is that his wife works! I wonder if she would have been criticized for being lazy and living on stolen money if she did not work. There is no shame in working, even for a person of her status. And what if they need the income because they did not steal enough money from iran? What if she just LIKES to work? Are either of these a short-coming or a sign of desperation of those who simply do not like all pahlavis without knowing exactly why?

The fact is that there is NO opposition inside or outside iran to fight iRI. They have all been either badly misguided, aka mojahedin, or wiped out by IRI. And if prince reza can in fact help free iran based on his stated views, he is one of very few who has more recognition and credibility than anyone from within IRI, likes of khatami the failure, or likes of Ganji the opportunist ex-IRI-intelligence officer.

We should grow up and learn something good from the western societies that we live in before we can do something for people of iran, and stop making accusation and demonization of people based on hearsay and old and discredited accusations. We already took that road once, and it took us here when we believed khomeini that shah killed 600,000 people, and stole $20B, and we believed him without asking for any proof, only to be discredited by IRI insiders, likes of Baghi, once the IRI trap was fully functional. Let's not repeat taking the same road that led us to the disaster that we are in today.


No precoceived notions...

by Reza L. (not verified) on

I guess you'll always have those who love him, based on whose son he is, and those who hate him, based on whose son he is.

For the rest of us, he seems like the rest of us,an Iranian abroad, concerned about the future of Iran.


Do over

by Alborzi (not verified) on

The guy wants a do over, its not going to be done
by IRI. People of Iran (against all odds) are struggling. Iran is surviving under many sanction (and they are having effect), this guy talks from his mansion in VA, while his wife (I am still looking for photos) is working. As they say "talk is cheap", his daddy was the guy who left while patriots were in jail, his father is known as a stupid coward in Iran. He ushered IRI.

Yek Irani

Good but no cigar

by Yek Irani on

He made sense on every point until he denied that his father stole money from Iran


Good Luck

by Nikkhah (not verified) on

It sounds great what he said and what he will.

BUT I wonder why he does not spend any time to organise Iranian world wide in order to talk to
them personally not via Youtube or on TV.

I am affright it costs him his money and he just want
to return to Iran if our compatriots have finished
his job in Iran.

Reza Pahlavi II, please remember the time has been
changed and the “Mordad 28th” comes not again.
You should make Iranian front against IRI with all
other Iranian oppositions as a leader or even as a partie otherwise we have to accept it as it is.

Payandeh Bad Irane Ma. Down with IRI.