Reza Pahlavi and the Neoconservatives


Reza Pahlavi and the Neoconservatives
by Q

Once again, Kadivar is being funny. "What Neocons?" he asks, pretending like there's never been any relationship between the inexperienced puppet-clown and the US neoconservatives and AIPAC. Below are parts of two articles (among many others) that make this clear. The photo above shows Pahlavi with neocon assets Sohrab Sobhani and Elena Benador. It goes with the first article. Please read carefully.

First article



IPS - June 2003


"The form of government would be a Constitutional Monarchy, with the Head of State being Reza Pahlavi, son of the former Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who was deposed in the 1978-79 Islamic revolution, and Sohrab Sobhani as his Prime Minister", Mr. Beeman wrote. 

"The Bush Administration apparently has a handpicked American "plumber" ready to go in Iran, much like Ahmed Chalabi (the leader of the Defence Department-backed Iraqi National Congress) in Iraq. This is Sohrab "Rob" Sobhani, an Iranian-American associated with the neoconservatives in Washington. With Reza Pahlavi as Shah, the 40-ish Sobhani would presumably be prime minister or president", he prognosticated. 

As in his previous article published by the Beirut-based The Daily Star, (see IPS's "America's Case Against Iran Is Full Of Holes"), the scholar names Mr. Michael Ledeen, a tough-tongue historian and journalist as the "promoter" of the "Restore Monarchy" project. 

"The promoter of the Administration policy is American Enterprise Institute Freedom Chair Holder Michael Ledeen, who has written and lectured obsessively about regime change in Iran. Ledeen was reported by The Washington Post to be one of four advisers in regular consultation with White House strategist, Karl Rove", Mr. Beeman said, adding that Ledeen and Sobhani recently established the Coalition for Democracy in Iran (CDI) to promote this regime change. 

Reza Pahlavi had been living quietly in Maryland until 11 September, when he began to address the Iranian community via the internet and satellite television. This prompted the Iranian community to dub him the "Internet Prince." 

Rob Sobhani, who has known Reza Pahlavi since childhood, was actually born in Kansas. His doctorate, completed in 1987, dealt with Iranian-Israeli relations from 1948-88. He became a specialist in energy policy. He has had his finger in many pies in Washington, including consultation on the construction of an oil and gas pipeline across Afghanistan. 

Well-connected politically, he ran twice for the US Senate from Maryland as a Republican. Although his heritage is Iranian, he is far from being an expert on Iranian society, politics or economics. His move to the Washington area put him in close contact with his old friend, Reza Pahlavi. 

Sobhani's interests in regime change are very clear and very consonant with American desires. They are largely commercial. Following his graduation from Georgetown, he became head of a Caspian Energy Consulting, a firm dealing with the transport and sale of Caspian oil. 

On March 5, 2001 in an article written with Pennsylvania State business professor Fariborz Ghadar, he advocated a number of the policies that have since been carried out by the US, including containing the Taleban and Saddam Hoseyn. He also notes that supporting a secularisation of Iran would lead to easier transport of Caspian oil through Iranian territory. 

Of equal importance, Sobhani also sees secularisation of Iran as beneficial for Israel. This is not surprising, since Israel and Iran had excellent ties before the 1978-79 Islamic Revolution. The Iranian Jewish community is the oldest continuous Jewish community in the world. The community is as prominent in Diaspora as in Iran, with members in powerful positions in the Israeli government and in American life, particularly in California. Elimination of the clerical regime in Iran would eliminate support for (the Iran-backed Lebanese) Hezbollah. It might even lead to renewed trade between Tehran and Tel Aviv. 

Ledeen, Sobhani and Morris Amitay, former director of the principal Israeli lobbying group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) joined forces at the American Enterprise Institute in a seminar entitled The Future of Iran, in which they called for regime change. AIPAC has indicated support for the restoration of Reza Pahlavi to the throne, although they wish to remain in the background, as reported by Mark Perelman on 16 May in The New York Jewish Daily Forward. 

Sobhani has pursued a ploy in order to give himself academic billing for television and the lecture circuit. He teaches one course at his alma mater, Georgetown University on Iran and Caspian Oil politics. On this basis he has claimed to be a "professor" at Georgetown. He is in fact an adjunct faculty member at the college, but here it is hard to know what kind of "adjunct" he is, since he never seems to be on campus. The chair of the department of government has tried in vain to get him to cease and desist in claiming this affiliation. 

Both Sobhani and Michael Ledeen are remarkably cagey about claims for the restoration of the Monarchy. Their ambitions are clearly to restore the Pahlavi dynasty, but they are both exceptionally careful about making this pronunciation openly or in print. They are frequently photographed with Reza Pahlavi and in some circles Sobhani is derisively referred to as "The Pretender's Prime Minister". Sobhani, when he refers to Reza, frequently calls him an "activist" rather than a future Monarch. 

All three have connections with the media agency, Benador Associates, who manages both their op-ed placements and television appearances. Eleana Benador represents Richard Perle, James Woolsey, Charles Krauthammer, Martin Kramer and other conservatives connected to the Bush Administration. Pictures of Eleana Benador and Reza Pahlavi with Israeli supporter and AIPAC member Bob Guzzardi, and Middle East Forum head Daniel Pipes appear on Bob Guzzardi's website. 

Sobhani and Ledeen clearly feel that the United States can produce an internal coup in Iran. Ledeen has said as much in (his recent book) "The War Against the Terror Masters" and many articles for the National Review Online, The Wall Street Journal and other media outlets. 

Ledeen and Sobhani expect to have the coup first, and then present Reza Pahlavi as the emergent ruler. Ledeen said as much in a rally in Los Angeles for Iranian monarchists, saying in effect: Let's have the revolution first, then worry about who will rule Iran. 





Second Article: Exiles: How Iran's Expatriates are Gaming the Nuclear Threat


New Yorker, March 2006



Still, the response to Pahlavi's satellite TV appearances allowed him to at least argue that he had a constituency in Iran. "And the C.I.A. got interested in him," an Iranian analyst told me. "It took the view that his uninvolvement could be an advantage. 'He's clean! He hasn't killed anyone! And he might be able to be a unifying figure.' "

Pahlavi and his supporters were thrilled by Bush's State of the Union speech in January, 2002, in which he referred to an "axis of evil" that included Iran and Iraq, along with North Korea, and later that year and in early 2003 opposition members obtained meetings with officials in the Vice-President's office, the National Security Council, and the State Department.

The heart of their support, however, was in the Pentagon, which was preparing a draft national-security Presidential directive, or N.S.P.D., on Iran. An Iranian political activist recalled having policy discussions with several people who were working on the draft, including Larry Franklin, the Pentagon's Iran desk officer; Ladan Archin, an Iranian American Pentagon official; and Michael Rubin, a young Pentagon staff assistant who wrote the draft. (In August, 2004, it was reported that Franklin was suspected of having described the document's contents to two AIPAC employees; he pleaded guilty last October.) It appeared that the Defense Department officials had been in contact with Pahlavi's associates. "There were ideas discussed that I had heard about from Ahmad Oveyssi a year or so earlier," the Iranian activist said. When the activist offered his own ideas, the officials' obvious enthusiasm led him to conclude that the draft was an elaborate directive for the mobilization of opposition forces. There would be money for communication devices for students in Iran; for American and European N.G.O.s; for buying off and neutralizing the Revolutionary Guard; for buying information; for supporting existing satellite-television operations; and for funding the exile opposition.

In the spring of 2003, after the invasion of Iraq, Pahlavi and his close circle were heartened. "They became so cocky-they thought that any day now they were going back to Iran," a person with close ties to them told me. "It looked as though America had walked over Afghanistan and Saddam. The Americans were talking about bringing Zahir Shah, the former king, back to Afghanistan from Rome. When he fell from power, in 1973, he was sustained by the Shah. They figured the Americans were going to bring Reza back." One of Pahlavi's congressional allies, Senator Sam Brownback, a Republican from Kansas, introduced a bill that would have channeled a hundred million dollars to support opposition activities, including TV and radio broadcasts into Iran. In May, 2003, Michael Ledeen wrote a policy brief for the American Enterprise Institute Web site arguing that Pahlavi would make a suitable leader for a transitional government, describing him as "widely admired inside Iran, despite his refreshing lack of avidity for power or wealth." The schism within the Administration between those who were favorably disposed toward Pahlavi and those who were not reflected the broader interagency policy divide. Richard Haass, Secretary of State Colin Powell's policy-planning director, recalled recently, "Reza came to see me one day. It was a pleasant fortyminute meeting. It was not clear to me that he had much of a following in Iran-and, in any event, he did not convince me that Iran was on the brink."

Haass continued, "I was in one camp, and the Vice-President's office and the O.S.D."-the office of the Secretary of Defense-"in the other. There were two very different schools of thought. One, that the U.S. ought to 'engage' Iran, offer the Iranians as much of a dialogue as they were prepared to have-to extend these concrete and political benefits, but only if we get what we want. The problem is that a lot of people in the government have been wedded to the idea of 'regime change.' They thought the regime was vulnerable, and engagement would throw the Iranians a lifeline. I believed then and I believe now that they are dead wrong.


more from Q
Hoshang Targol

Pahlavi "dynasty" has as much possibility of coming to power in

by Hoshang Targol on

a post-islamic republic Iran as the Ghajars did back in 1940's (after the Allies occupation of Iran) ZERO, NONE, they're done, and gone: good ridance.

And if our monarchist friends haven't noticed the US and her allies did not set up monarchies or liberal-democracies in either Iraq or Afghanistan, in both countries they established Islamic Repblics. Why?

The Cold-War is over, no need to fight socialists. Capitalism needs well functioning markets, "republics" are the optimal form for this purpose( uniterrupted well regulated accumulation of Capital). Demography has also changed. Ten years from now Pahlavis will be as historically ancient and politically relevant as Ghajars.

Furthermore perhaps there is a substantial reason behind why VOA and BBC prefer Ganji and his ilk over RP, they like to have Greens in power, more than any other groupings in Iran today.

And why the heck do Iranians have to rally behind a "strong man" why can't we elect a women as president in a post-IR Iran. Are we condemned to a closed circle of history? According to both IR and monarchists we are ( it has to be Shaikh or Shah, it's just in our history, culture, food and water we eat and drink,...), in reality we're not condemned to either.

Shah and Shaikh have always been two bastions of backwardness, repression and reaction in Iran.

Nah ein khobeh nah oshon, lanat be har dota shon. 



by afshinazad on

Why keep bashing RP and why is that we don't concentrate on main peoblem every Iranian facing today, do you have a better person than RP and why not name the person and ofcourse if you are not another IRI lover to destroy the country for fascist regime.this is insult for Iranian people comparing RP with chalabi or karzi , IRI is more afarid of RP than any one else because they know that he has a lot of supportrs in the country and might you want to go read even what reformes even mentioning every day.why is that you are not trying to write the article about IRI and komenie how they got planted and who and which countries destroyed our life. it is shameful that we keep bashing one another and yet we are not doing anything. where are those satellites which mentioned and where are those support from CIA OR NECONS you are talking about,even BBC or VOA don't like interview with RP, question is why they prefer to interview akhonds or islamist like. I would say before we accuse the people being in bed with neocons or others, let's think about one thing that is united  force to bring the monsters who are destroying our country and future of our nation and I must say I am the person for some one who could bring honor and dignity and respect and freedom to our country and might that be you. and so let's work together for better us and country.


ENEMIES of America!!!!!!!

by Bavafa on

Sorry, couldn't help but laugh.

But for the sake of not changing the subject of this blog and hijacking it to the GWB murderous reign, we will leave it for another time.



Big Thug on the Block

by Escape on

explains what it's like to be President when your country get's attacked and you have people to protect.Unfortunately for the ENEMIES of America,he didn't ACT LIKE A SPINELESS PACIFIST.


Niloufar Parsi


by Niloufar Parsi on

his mommy was a rather decent woman. i wish she had stayed behind and tried to become the reigning queen. much better than her husband or son for the job. will always be a fan of hers despite my anti-monarchist leanings :)


Pacifist's unifying against the IRI

by Escape on

What a joke.Unifying to do what? -Unifying to ACCEPT the IRI is superior to your capability because you are weakened and useless,spineless pacifists.You are definately of the blood of slaves. Reza Pahlavi has accomplished the SAME AS YOU EXILES.You have no room to criticize him.


Dream on!

by Shutruk on


It would be better for Reza Pahlavi to forget Iran - find a job as a PR man and live out a happy and cosy life in America.

Darius Kadivar


by Darius Kadivar on

Just to say that this is the 2nd Time Q blogs about me in relation to my comments and opinions which is his choice and Right to do so.

However because he mentions my name here it is the ONLY Reason which Prompts me to Respond to his defamation blog which I always ignore otherwise for the reasons fully known by all and which I don't believe I should repeat here Once More.

Had this blog been Only about Crown Prince Reza, I would not even bothered responding given that Q's Opinions do not matter to me and I always avoid even commenting on him or interfering in his personal foes or cyber jests with other people on any given subject be it on his own blogs or on that of others.

However as I said before I do Not wish to Speak or Debate with this Gentleman ( Or is it a Gentlewoman ? since he also seems to suspect another fellow blogger Farah Rusta he shamlessly accuses of being a man) on ANY Subject whatsoever.

For as far as Q and I are concerned it's as Good as it Get's :



As Such if ever this Gentleman (Or is it a Gentlewoman ? ) engages in a comment on my blogs or elsewhere mentioning my name in a defamatory way or else which I may deem as offensive, irrelevant, provocative or even interesting, or even if he comes and says hello on my blogs I shall not hesitate for whatever it's worth to Flag him if necessary.

Something which I Rarely if Ever do because I believe in Free Speech but I won't accept Q's Recurrent Provocative behavior for which he has never been moderated but rather encouraged to nausea.

You are Free to take them into account or not for it is ultimately your website and your editorial choice and on which I have absolutely no control anyways.

But I am mentioning it for Future Reference as to the fact that it is Not me who Engages in conversations with Q.




Darius Kadivar

FYI/Abbas Milani dinner with George W. Bush (Stanford Univ.Press

by Darius Kadivar on

Academic and Historian Abbas Milani whom NIAC advisor Hamid Dabashi has been attacking regularly for the past 10 years or so ain the same way he has been attacking author Azar Nafisi and accusing them both of being Pro Pahlavi and Neo Con Warmongers describes his meetings with then President George W. Bush.  ( See Very Recent Article Below dating from July August 2010 issue of the magazine: The Iranian Optimist )

The Same Abbas Milani who responded as such to a question submitted to him about Surgical Strikes on Iran's Nuclear Sites during a Talk in LA:



Recommended Reading:  

The Iranian Optimist

Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a friend of Milani's. "Many others put the onus of blame on Washington for the tension between the two countries. But Abbas was always brutally honest about the character of this regime."


Milani met with former undersecretary of state Nicholas Burns, the Bush administration's point man for dealing with Iran. "We had to reach out to people in the American community who know about Iran," Burns told me. "Abbas has a great sense of history and an intimate understanding of the complexities of the situation. He was careful in his judgments and backed them up with facts." Over the next two years, in meetings with Burns and other high-ranking officials, including National Security Adviser Steve Hadley, Milani laid out the case for eschewing military strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities in favor of negotiating with the regime—even if, as subsequent events have confirmed, those negotiations produced limited results.

 "Abbas has been the single most persuasive voice among Iran analysts in the U.S. arguing that military action would entrench the SOBs in power for another decade or two, devastate democratic forces and have all kinds of destabilizing effects in terms of Iranian retaliation," Diamond says.

In 2006, Milani was invited to a dinner with President Bush at the home of former Secretary of State George Shultz, just down the road from Stanford's Hoover House. Hadley had asked Milani to write a memo for Bush to read in advance, in which Milani reiterated his position that democracy was achievable in Iran if the United States and its allies refrained from using force against the regime. When Bush met Milani, the president told him to stay after the other guests left. "I want to talk to you one-on-one," Bush said. Milani and Bush chatted privately for 15 minutes. Bush asked if there were any reliable intermediaries who could negotiate with the mullahs on Washington's behalf. As they were leaving, Milani told Bush, "You know, you've got a lot of popularity in Iran for standing up to these guys." The president wheeled around and stared at Milani. Then he said, "You're not bullshitting me, are you?"

Darius Kadivar

Nice Photo by the Way ... I have Two For You ;0)

by Darius Kadivar on

Trita Parsi and Bob Ney:



Houshang Amir Ahmadi and Ahmadinejad:




Good Night Smart Ass !


Sargord Pirouz

"Clown prince"

by Sargord Pirouz on

Prince of what? He's not even a prince of a video game. lol

You know, it's a measure of embarrassment that such obvious stoogery is even countenanced by a few desperate exiles.  

It's akin to a few Norwegians pining for the return of a Vidkun Quisling. You'd have to be a complete ass to even think of advocating such a thing. 

Darius Kadivar


by Darius Kadivar on

Very Funny ...



Hope you will have more sleepless nights writing your regular anti pahlavi diatribes ...

The Sun is Shining Here ... Have a Good Night !




by P_J on

Fact is that Pahlavis and the Mullahs, have already joined history’s toilet!  

This uneducated and unaccomplished BOOB, Reza Pahlavi, has no chance of doing anything, except BETRIAL as his TRAITOR father did before him.  

Most Iranians don’t know of him, who he is, or care whether he is dead or alive.   Ones that DO, the older generation, considers this DESPICABLE family every bit as reprehensible as Mullahs are, and probably MORE.  

Iranians, in general, are QUITE AWARE that it was this family's despicable DEEDS that brought Khomeini and his henchmen to power.  

Consequently, I can't say that I am surprise to see this FEEBLE MINDED Individual's wheeling dealings with Iran’s enemies……as the saying goes:  Like father Like son!    


For the sake of Iran and unity against IRI

by Bavafa on

Lets hope his newly found wisdom and opposition to war against Iran last longer then his pervious stands "what is in it for me" when the infamous GWB was the big thug on the block and he was happy to facilitate just as Chalabi did for Iraq.


13th Legion

RP, NEOCONS, OR WHATEVER............................

by 13th Legion on





Neocon this, Neocon that, Reza this, Reza that, go get a fucking life and care about your country and its progress instead of blogging on IC day and night, the IRI is on its way out and NOTHING is going to stop that ;))))))))))

Mola Nasredeen

Q, If it wasn't for his mommy he would've been the king of Iran

by Mola Nasredeen on

by now, right! Reza Pahlavi and neocons should be exposed for what they are. The whole bunch belong to history's Zobaleh doni.