A Formula for Freedom?
How can the Iranian people bring down the Islamic Republic? And what will happen next?
It has been 43 years since the so-called Islamic Republic regime in Iran has been established. Iranians and their friends around the world mourn what has been lost and look at what Iran could be again once it is liberated from this vilest of regimes.
The vision for a post-liberation Iran should be the opposite of everything the Islamic Republic represents. It means:
Dismantling the Islamic Republic in its entirety, and establishing a civil state based on the pre-1979 constitution
Looking after the interests of the Iranian people first, and ending all involvement in foreign conflicts
Establishing peaceful and friendly relations with all nations in the region and the world
These are the principles that should be accepted by all opposed to the Islamic Republic and who desire its overthrow. This of course brings the question of how will the regime be overthrown, and what will come next. A strategy for regime change must be worked on and agreed upon by the opposition, but they will also ask what is the next step as in what will happen on the day the Islamic Republic ceases to exist.
Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi has unrivalled popularity as a unifying national figure, and pro-Pahlavi chants have been consistent in protests. He has said that the decision on the future governance of Iran will be left to the Iranian people after the regime’s overthrow. Does that mean that he rejects a role for himself and a restored monarchy? To clarify things, I tend to think this is not the case.
Looking at history, we have seen cases of those who took the throne of a country to establish a new dynasty, and those who have been offered the throne of a country (albeit without actively campaigning for such). We have seen a monarchy restored in Cambodia, following a historical experience which included a genocide caused by Communism. And we have seen movements for restoring monarchies in European nations following the fall of Communism. I will give out here a few examples:
Australia (1999)
When Australia held a referendum on the monarchy in 1999, it was expected that the “yes” vote would win and Australia would become a republic. Against this, monarchists campaigned vigorously despite a major disadvantage (the republican side had corporate, media and political elite backing), and mustered a miraculous victory for the “no” vote in all six states.
It is to be noted that the Royal Family did not actively campaign for the monarchy in the referendum - it would have gone against their nonpartisan role, transcending partisan politics, to do so.
Albania (1997)
King Zog I of Albania established a new dynasty in Albania in 1928 and ruled the country until being removed by Fascist Italy in 1939. As it were, Albania was to fall to Communism. However, the Royal Family did not give up - Zog’s son Leka was very active in exile during the Cold War, and established extensive contacts. And he did campaign for the return of the monarchy after Communism fell.
In 1997, Albania held a referendum on restoring the monarchy - the only time in Europe this was done after the Cold War. The monarchist side lost the referendum, but it is widely agreed that the process was not free or fair - electoral fraud and the fact Albania was in a state of virtual civil war at the time made conditions impossible for a clean vote. Politicians do acknowledge this, and accept that it is not a closed issue.
Leka II continues his father’s activities as heir to the throne today.
Norway (1905)
The Kingdom of Norway had long existed as a legally distinct entity but was in union for centuries with Denmark (and at times with Sweden), and in union with Sweden from 1814 to 1905. In 1814, Norwegians enacted a constitution which is still in force today.
In 1905, Norway held two referendums. First was a vote to dissolve the union of Sweden and Norway (thus making Norway an independent nation), and second was a vote on continuing the monarchy and offering the throne to Prince Carl of Denmark, who became King Haakon VII of Norway. The new king had himself insisted that the choice be confirmed by the electorate at the time.
What I have given here are but three examples which arose in radically different circumstances, but all are pertinent to illustrating how the future governance of Iran can be determined. What is to be illustrated here is that royalty do not necessarily campaign for their position or role, but can, and more likely than not do choose to accept the role that is offered to them. There are also cases of royalty actively and quite militantly campaigning for their position, as demonstrated in Albania. There are different ways to go about it.
I sincerely hope this clarifies a few things about the pathway the Iranian people will have to take towards national liberation, and towards determining their future governance. I am inclined, as my friends are, to support a constitutional monarchy for Iran. I am illustrating here possible formulae for this to win consent among Iranians, and acceptance by all.
Shah of Iran never resigned.The Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi is The legitimate King of Iran.