"The Fog Of War" - Reza Pahlavi BEGS Trump To Back Iran’s Regime Revolt

Key Concepts

• Intervention vs. Non-Interventionism: The debate surrounding the US role in foreign affairs, particularly in Iran.
• IRGC (Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps): The dominant military, political, and economic force in Iran for the past 47 years.
• Reza Pahlavi: The exiled crown prince of Iran, currently positioned as a leading figure in the opposition movement.
• Fog of War: The uncertainty and confusion inherent in wartime, leading to misinterpretations and unreliable information.
• Delta Force: The US Army’s elite special operations force, potentially playing a role in current events in Iran.
• 1954 Oil Agreement Consortium: A 25-year contract regulating Iran’s oil industry, seen as a deal brokered by the Shah with Western oil companies.

The Shifting Dynamics of US-Iran Relations: From Intervention to Current Pressure

The discussion centers on the historical and current dynamics of US involvement in Iran, contrasting past interventions with the present situation. The core argument is that the current pressure on the Iranian regime, particularly under the Trump administration, represents a significant shift and offers a potential opportunity for change.

Historical Interventions & The Shah’s Reign

The conversation begins by questioning the circumstances surrounding the rise of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (the Shah). It posits that his ascension to power in 1953 was likely the result of intervention by intelligence agencies like the CIA and MI6, rather than an independent event. This intervention aimed to secure Western interests in Iranian oil, specifically preventing nationalization similar to what occurred in Venezuela.

A key detail is the 1954 oil agreement consortium, described as a “constitution” – a 25-year contract that regulated the oil industry and satisfied Western oil companies. The Shah was characterized as a “dealmaker” who prioritized maintaining these relationships. However, when he later considered raising oil prices, it triggered a response from the US, as illustrated by an interview with Mike Wallace. In this interview, the Shah defends his decision to raise oil prices by pointing out that prices for everything else are also increasing, questioning the fairness of expecting Iran to maintain low prices while facing rising costs. (“Why are they raising prices on corn? Why are they raising prices on everything? You think what I'm buying right now is the same prices?”)

This attempt to exert control over oil prices ultimately led to the decision to “get rid of this guy,” highlighting the US’s willingness to intervene when its interests were threatened. The subsequent support for Ayatollah Khomeini was initially seen as a potential improvement, but ultimately led to further instability.

The Carter Administration & The Cycle of Intervention

The discussion then turns to the presidency of Jimmy Carter, described as a “non-interventionist.” However, it’s argued that even a non-interventionist approach can have unintended consequences. The speaker emphasizes that intervention/non-intervention isn’t a fixed policy, but rather a “fluid” decision-making process, with approximately 95% of situations requiring non-intervention. The speaker argues that the fall of Khomeini and the subsequent instability likely contributed to conflicts in Afghanistan and other parts of the Middle East. (“If Iran falls, Humeni falls, somebody else goes in his place and the place is peaceful, do you think we have the war with Afghan?”)

The Current Landscape & The Role of Trump

The primary difference between the last 47 years and today is the emergence of Reza Pahlavi as a leading figure in the Iranian opposition. Despite past criticisms, Pahlavi is now seen as a potential catalyst for change. He’s described as adaptable, shifting his rhetoric to align with whoever holds power – praising Biden and Obama when they were in office, and now appealing to Trump. (“For 47 years, if it benefited him to say good things about Biden, he did. If it benefited him to say good things about Obama, he did.”)

The speaker emphasizes that President Trump is the first US leader in recent history to apply significant pressure on Iran, and this pressure is crucial. He acknowledges the “cult-like” following Pahlavi has within the Iranian community, comparing it to the dynamics surrounding figures like Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton within the US political landscape. He notes the backlash faced by those who criticize Pahlavi, mirroring the experiences of those who challenged established political figures in the US. Stephen A. Smith is cited as a recent example of someone facing criticism for voicing dissenting opinions.

The Importance of Delta Force & The Iranian People

The speaker identifies the Iranian people as the most important factor in any potential change, followed by the US government (specifically Trump), and then the Delta Force. He believes the Delta Force’s capabilities are being closely monitored by the Iranian regime. He highlights the urgency of the situation and the need for decisive action.

The "Fog of War" & Information Chaos

The discussion acknowledges the “fog of war” – the confusion and misinformation that characterize conflict situations. This is illustrated by the proliferation of conflicting narratives and the difficulty in discerning truth from falsehood. The speaker recognizes the strong emotions and loyalties at play, and the existence of factions within Iran and the US with differing agendas. (“Even if 5% believes it, that's part of the fog of war.”)

Synthesis & Conclusion

The central takeaway is that the current moment presents a unique opportunity for change in Iran, driven by a combination of internal pressure from the Iranian people, external pressure from the US (particularly under Trump), and the potential for covert action by US special forces. The speaker stresses the importance of sustained pressure and the need to overcome the internal divisions and misinformation that are clouding the situation. The historical context of US intervention in Iran is crucial to understanding the current dynamics, and the speaker argues that a decisive approach is necessary to avoid repeating past mistakes. The speaker ultimately believes that the current pressure on Iran, combined with the support of key figures like Trump and the potential involvement of the Delta Force, could lead to a breakthrough.