The Perennial Call for Intervention
When Reza Pahlavi urged the US to consider military intervention to 'save lives' and hasten the Iranian government's collapse, it wasn't a novel proposal. This specific playbook, advocating for regime change through external force, was last successfully implemented in 1953, when the CIA and MI6 orchestrated a coup to depose democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh, reinstalling
Pahlavi's father to power. That intervention plunged Iran into 26 years of brutal dictatorship under a US-backed monarchy. The current narrative, amplified by certain Western outlets, frames the Iranian government as 'on the brink of collapse,' a claim repeatedly made for over two decades. The same sentiment was widespread prior to the 2003 Iraq invasion, where intelligence was cherry-picked to
present a similar picture of imminent collapse. Such forecasts consistently precede calls for 'humanitarian' interventions that rarely achieve their stated goals, as seen in Libya in 2011, which devolved into protracted civil war and slave markets, or Syria, where 'moderate rebels' eventually included al-Qaeda affiliates. Historically, Iranian exiles, particularly those connected to the former
monarchy, have consistently advocated for forceful foreign intervention, seemingly undeterred by the destructive precedent set by the 1953 coup. This enduring plea for external military action, often dressed as liberation, conveniently ignores the millions of Iranian citizens who consistently participate in their country's elections, regardless of Western approval. The double standard is stark: a