By: Jila Andalib, IT Specialist & Iran Political and Human Rights Analyst
This article is addressed to politicians, journalists, and analysts who view Reza Pahlavi favorably as a political alternative for Iran. That position often reflects frustration with the Islamic Republic and a desire for stability. But political projects must be judged by their conduct and likely outcomes. What follows argues that the current trajectory of RP-aligned movements point not toward democratic transition, but toward a recipe for internal war in Iran, one that would inevitably spread across the region and, if history is any guide, draw the United States and Europe into yet another destructive conflict.
The sounds of fascism are beginning to surface. They are not subtle. They are horrifying. And they are revealing. At the February 14 Reza Pahlavi–sponsored rallies in several Western cities, organizers announced that only officially approved national symbols would be permitted, specifically the monarchist version of the Lion and Sun flag, while all ethnic and regional symbols are banned. What is framed as unity exposed something far more dangerous.
Iran is not a mono ethnic nation, and it never has been. Kurds, Baluchis, Arabs, Azeris, Turkmen, Lors, and other communities are integral to Iran’s history and social fabric. They are not demanding separation. They are demanding recognition, dignity, and equal citizenship. They do not want to be treated as second-class citizens. Their flags and symbols are not threats to Iran’s unity. They are expressions of belonging within it.
The Lion and Sun itself is a historic symbol and some Iranians identify with it sincerely. The danger begins when one political version of that symbol, the monarchist version that imposes a crown over the lion, is transformed into a test of loyalty, and all other identities are erased from public space. Unity imposed through exclusion is not unity. It is domination.
This exclusionary logic is reinforced by a slogan increasingly echoed by hardcore RP supporters. One nation. One flag. One leader. This slogan is not symbolic or accidental. It was used explicitly by Hitler and the Nazi movement to erase pluralism, elevate absolute leadership, and enforce obedience. Its reappearance today should alarm anyone who understands history. Movements built on enforced uniformity do not create unity. They produce repression, coercion, and ultimately violence.
This is not an abstract concern. In several RP-aligned rallies and online spaces, slogans and gestures drawn directly from fascist movements have appeared. Recorded chants invoking phrases such as “Javid Shah”, while raising arms to a nazi style salute, and explicit references to Hitler have circulated publicly. These are deliberate appropriations, not accidents or jokes. While not all participants engage in this behavior, it has not been clearly or forcefully condemned by those claiming leadership. In such contexts, silence carries meaning.
The conduct of RP’s most aggressive supporters reinforces this pattern. Critics, journalists, activists, and members of ethnic communities who express disagreement are routinely attacked, insulted, and intimidated. Debate is replaced by harassment. Questioning is framed as betrayal. This is not the behavior of a democratic movement. It is the behavior of a political culture that seeks to enforce loyalty rather than earn consent.
The contradiction becomes even more striking outside Iran. At many RP-aligned rallies in Western cities, participants openly wave foreign flags. These are often the flags of states whose governments RP supporters openly urge to militarily attack Iran in order to install him as king. At the same time, ethnic Iranian symbols are banned as supposedly divisive. Iranian diversity is treated as a threat, while foreign power is embraced.
This inversion is not a minor inconsistency. It reveals how power is imagined and how legitimacy would be enforced. A movement that suppresses internal identities while courting external force is not preparing the ground for democratic transition. It is preparing the ground for instability. Governments imposed through foreign pressure lack social legitimacy and rely on coercion to survive. In a country as diverse and politically scarred as Iran, that path leads not to order, but to internal conflict.
There is, however, one reality that authoritarian fantasies consistently ignore. Iranian ethnic communities and the Iranian people as a whole have never submitted to fascism, and they will not begin now. From Kurdistan to Baluchistan, from Khuzestan to Tehran, Iranians have resisted imposed identities, absolute rulers, and enforced silence. Diversity in Iran has survived monarchies, dictatorships, and theocratic repression because it is rooted in lived experience. Any attempt to impose obedience through exclusion and fear will meet resistance. The struggle for democracy, equal citizenship, and pluralism will continue.
A political project built around Reza Pahlavi, enforced through exclusionary symbolism, authoritarian slogans, and aggressive loyalty policing, is not a solution to Iran’s crisis. It is a recipe for civil war. Not only in Iran, but across a region already destabilized by imposed orders and false promises of unity. Iran’s future depends on pluralism, equal citizenship, and respect for its diversity. Any movement that fears its own people while appealing to external power is not offering liberation. It is inviting catastrophe.