Iranian protesters are blinded by nostalgia – reinstating the Shah won’t fix everything
The Islamic Republic, which was born of revolution in the late 1970s, is still using 20th-century tactics to suppress dissent. Last week the country’s government turned off the internet to stem the protests that have brought what could be the largest crowds to the streets since the Green Movement of 2009. It isn’t working. Cutting off electronic communications in an age of widely available, privacy-enhancing technology is near impossible.
Some protestors are calling for the return of Iran’s royal family through the former Shah’s son, Reza Pahlavi, who has spent most of his life in exile in the US. But the regime’s opponents should be wary of harking back to simpler times. In many ways, nostalgia for the old system is unsurprising. Iran’s youthful population, which has a median age of 34, has little memory of the Shah’s era, so it is natural that they would look back on photographs of pre-revolution Tehran, with its stylish, miniskirt-clad women and disco-playing nightclubs, and yearn for what their country lost. On top of this, the Islamic Revolution has been delegitimised by 47 years of brutality under the guise of a morally righteous theocracy. Over the past decade, Iranians’ living standards have been battered by soaring inflation, largely as a result of US sanctions. This is particularly galling when the sons of mullahs drive around in luxury cars.
However, nostalgia for the system that was deposed in 1979 is both dated and dangerous. The old Shah was already seriously ill when he was overthrown and died a little more than a year later. His son has not been to Iran since he fled as a teenager. In recent days, Pahlavi has begun speaking publicly in support of the protests. While he has said that it is up to Iranians to decide what kind of system of governance they want, he is apparently keen to wield some influence, either as a figurehead or a political powerbroker. If he really wants to help his country and perhaps atone for the mistakes of his father, he should rule out a return to power.
The problem is that Iranians have few other good options. Most of the organised opposition is murky and compromised, particularly the most vocal group, the People’s Mojahedin Organisation (MEK), which is cult-like and archaic, having started as a leftist opposition to the Shah. Today it is based in Albania and has won the backing of only a few fringe figures, including Rudy Giuliani, Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer. Some opposition leaders are viewed as aligned with Saudi Arabia, a country that would have much to gain by destabilising its regional rival – but little reason to promote democracy there given that it is also an autocratic state.
Nostalgia is a powerful force in modern politics but it necessarily glosses over anything that detracts from its roseate view. The Shah’s regime was not as tyrannical as that of the Ayatollah but neither was it democratic or free. These two things are what Iran’s people need and want. Reza Pahlavi’s rhetoric offers a good impression but there was genuine popular appetite for the Shah’s overthrow in 1979. By rallying around an avowed monarchist, Iran could simply slip from one form of autocracy to another. To reach something better, nostalgia should be tempered with honesty and the courage to forge a new, brighter future for Iran.
Hannah Lucinda Smith is Monocle’s Istanbul correspondent. For more opinion, analysis and insight, subscribe to Monocle today.
