Middle East Geopolitical Dynamics and Regional Power Structures, why the US aims at reinstating the Shah Regime in Iran
Iran’s Challenges and Economic Pressures
Iran faces unprecedented economic and social pressures that have significantly impacted its domestic stability. On 25 October 2024, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) once again placed Iran on its blacklist, alongside only Myanmar and North Korea, reflecting international concerns about the country’s financial system integrity. This designation compounds existing economic challenges stemming from comprehensive international sanctions regimes. The impact of these sanctions has been particularly severe on Iran’s general population, contributing to widespread social unrest. These diverse protests point to the profound depth of the crisis afflicting the country and impacting various segments of society, with demonstrations spanning multiple sectors of Iranian society. Recent reporting indicates that from nurses and oil company employees to retirees and municipal workers, these demonstrations reflect widespread dissatisfaction with inadequate wages, poor working conditions, and unmet promises from government authorities. Iranian government’s response to domestic protests has drawn significant international attention and sanctions. OFAC has imposed 11 rounds of sanctions actions targeting the Iranian regime and its security elements and officials that are involved in a brutal crackdown on peaceful demonstrations since nationwide protests began in September 2022. These sanctions specifically target Iranian officials responsible for protest suppression, including those involved in the crackdown following the death of Mahsa Amini, which sparked nationwide demonstrations.
Human Rights Watch documented the government’s systematic approach to protest suppression, noting that on the anniversary of the death in custody of Mahsa Jina Amini, Iran’s authorities dispatched thousands of its military-security personnel, along with vehicles and equipment, to Kurdish-majority areas in the western provinces, where protests had been widespread over the past year. This heavy-handed approach demonstrates the regime’s ongoing concerns about internal stability and its reliance on the security apparatus to maintain control.
Israeli Security Concerns and Strategic Competition
Israel’s strategic relationship with Iran has evolved into one of the most significant sources of regional tension in the Middle East. Recent intelligence reporting suggests escalating preparations for potential military action. The US has obtained new intelligence suggesting that Israel is making preparations to strike Iranian nuclear facilities, even as the Trump administration has been pursuing a diplomatic deal with Tehran, according to multiple U.S. officials familiar with the intelligence. The nuclear dimension of this competition remains central to Israeli strategic planning. At the heart of their escalating tensions is Iran’s nuclear program. While Israel is thought to possess clandestine nuclear weapons in its arsenal, it has insisted it will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear bomb. This position has remained consistent across multiple Israeli governments and represents a fundamental red line in Israeli strategic doctrine. Military analysts have noted the technical challenges involved in any potential Israeli military action against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. Any attack would require a weeklong campaign and not be a one-off. Conducting such an operation would also pose great risks, highlighting the complexity of military options available to Israeli decision-makers. The escalation of tensions has been particularly pronounced following the October 7, 2023 Hamas attacks and subsequent regional developments. The October 7 Hamas attack, coupled with Iran’s missile barrages against Israel on April 13 and October 1, 2024, has heightened Israel’s concerns about Iran’s nuclear program advancement. These incidents have created a cycle of escalation that continues to influence strategic calculations on both sides.
The Iran-Israel competition extends beyond direct bilateral tensions to encompass a broader regional struggle for influence conducted through proxy relationships and alliance networks. Iran’s development of what it terms a “resistance economy” has been partly driven by its need to maintain regional influence despite economic sanctions. Iranian authorities were able to put the state to work, discipline capital, and mobilise existing capacities by leveraging mass labour protests alongside elite-led campaigns calling for the construction of a ‘resistance economy’. This strategic approach represents Iran’s attempt to maintain regional influence despite economic constraints, utilizing ideological mobilization and resource optimization to sustain its network of regional allies and proxy organizations. The sustainability of this approach remains uncertain given the mounting economic pressures and domestic challenges facing the Iranian government.
The diplomatic trajectory preceding the Israeli strikes reveals a complex series of negotiations and deteriorating relations. Recent US-Iran nuclear talks had reached an impasse, with Iran preparing to reject a U.S. proposal deemed a “non-starter” that failed to address Tehran’s interests regarding uranium enrichment. The two sides had been engaged in multiple rounds of talks, including a fifth round in Rome, where they clashed over uranium enrichment issues. The United States maintained its longstanding position throughout these negotiations. President Trump warned Tehran of military action if diplomatic efforts failed, while Iran emphasised that talks would focus solely on its nuclear program, not its military capabilities or regional “axis of resistance”. This fundamental disagreement over the scope of negotiations contributed to the diplomatic breakdown.
International Legal Framework and IAEA Findings
Diplomatic failure occurred against the backdrop of deteriorating Iranian compliance with international nuclear obligations. The International Atomic Energy Agency’s Board of Governors passed a resolution formally declaring Iran noncompliant with its nonproliferation obligations for the first time since 2005. The resolution passed with 19 votes in favour, three against, and 11 abstentions. IAEA reported that Iran had sharply increased its stockpile of uranium enriched to 60% purity, reaching over 408 kilograms, a nearly 50% rise since February, with the agency warning this amount is enough for multiple nuclear weapons if further enriched. A key issue cited was Iran’s failure to provide credible explanations of uranium traces detected at undeclared sites. Iran’s response to the IAEA resolution was defiant. Iran condemned the Western-backed resolution and announced plans to establish a new uranium enrichment facility, calling the move politically motivated and technically baseless. This announcement came just hours before the Israeli strikes began.
Diplomatic Communications and Internal Iranian Dynamics
While the public diplomatic record shows clear deterioration in negotiations, the extent of private diplomatic communications regarding potential political change within Iran remains unclear from available sources. The United States has consistently maintained its opposition to Iranian nuclear weapons development throughout multiple rounds of negotiations, but specific details about discussions regarding regime change or internal Iranian political dynamics are not documented in publicly available diplomatic communications. Since Iran has started expanding its nuclear energy industry and accelerating the use of nuclear material for potential military grade weapons, the strategic aim for Israel has been to contain, degrade and impair Iran’s capabilities, while having an active role in the U.N. assembly in denouncing the Iranian military threat. On the other side, since the 1979 Ayatollah Islamic Revolution and the siege of the American Embassy in Tehran, the United States has been a longstanding supporter of the former Iranian Shah, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, who sought political refuge in the United States in 1979. Since then, the Pahlavi family, especially Reza Pahlavi, have been active in exile and involved in organisations and civil society initiatives. Descendant of the Shah, Reza Pahlavi has been for a long time based in Washington D.C. and has been for all his time a vocal opponent of the Islamic Republic and a promoter of secular democracy in Iran. Reza Pahlavi has been active in many fora, the Geneva Summit for Human Rights & Democracy: Delivered the keynote address, boldly condemning the Islamic Republic’s brutality—from killings of intellectuals to environmental destruction—and called for international backing of grassroots resistance voanews.com+15genevasummit.org+15reddit.com+1. NUFDI Iran Conference centred on launching the Iran Prosperity Project (IPP), a comprehensive economic vision with ten principles for rebuilding post-regime, likened to a Marshall Plan. The recent participation at the CPAC alongside Matt Schlapp is characteristic of the affiliation to the POTUS political organisation, hence giving Reza Pahalavi the endorsement for returning to a destabilised Iran to replace the Ayatollah Islamic Regime. In April 2025, Reza Pahlavi inaugurated the Iran Prosperity Project (IPP), in Washington as part of NUFDI. The IPP outlines a post-regime economic roadmap—covering stabilisation, governance, and reconstruction. Pahlavi is one of its leading voices iranintl.com+13en.wikipedia.org+13rezapahlavi.org+13. All these initiatives have been implemented in preparing international support for things to come, such as, United States’ latest diplomatic talks with Iranian envoys who have selectively briefed about the offer of cooperation for a change of Regime, in light of impending inevitable military actions. What is sure it’s that recent Israeli military actions in Iran have put the rolling military machine in motion, and that Iranian government envoys should cooperate for a change of Regime, or face a much prolonged conflict and profound destabilisation and economic crisis.
The current military escalation must be understood within the context of Iran’s strategic military doctrine, particularly its “True Promise” operations. Iran has conducted two major direct military operations against Israel under this codename, with Iranian officials repeatedly threatening a third operation that may now be imminent, given the Israeli strikes.
Operation True Promise was conducted by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) on the night of April 13–14, 2024, involving the launch of hundreds of ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and drones targeting Israeli positions. This was followed by Operation True Promise II on October 1, 2024, when Iran launched about 200 ballistic missiles at targets in Israel in at least two waves, the largest attack during the ongoing Iran–Israel conflict. The Iranian military has consistently threatened a third operation. IRGC Deputy Commander Ali Fadavi warned Israel that it would launch a third direct attack “in due course,” with Iran codenaming these operations “True Promise”. The theological significance of the “True Promise” name is notable. In Islam, the concept of the “True Promise” refers to the Day of Judgment (Yawm al-Qiyamah), suggesting Iran views these operations as having profound religious and strategic significance beyond conventional military actions. The Israeli strikes on June 13, 2025, occurred against this backdrop of escalating Iranian threats and may have been designed to preempt or degrade Iran’s capability to launch True Promise.
As Israel launched large-scale strikes against Iran on Friday, saying it had targeted nuclear facilities, ballistic missile factories and military commanders at the start of a prolonged operation to prevent Tehran from building an atomic weapon. This represents the most significant direct military confrontation between the two countries in recent history. Scope of the Israeli operation appears extensive. In the early morning hours of 13 June 2025, the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) and Mossad began launching large-scale strikes targeting Iranian nuclear facilities, infrastructure and high-level officials. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, “This operation will continue for as many days as it takes to remove’ what he called a ‘clear and present danger”. The human cost of the escalation has been significant, with the strikes killing three senior commanders, including Maj. Gen. Hossein Salami, head of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, according to the Israeli military and Iranian state media. This targeting of high-level military leadership represents a significant escalation beyond infrastructure targets. The timing of these strikes is particularly notable given previous diplomatic efforts. The attacks potentially signal the likely end, for now, of President Donald Trump’s hopes for a negotiated peace deal to halt Tehran’s nuclear development, highlighting how military actions can fundamentally alter diplomatic trajectories.
The international response has been complex, with the United States maintaining a cautious position. US President Donald Trump has called on Israel to hold off on a strike for now, though this guidance appears to have been superseded by events. The U.S. position reflects the delicate balance between supporting Israeli security concerns while managing broader regional stability. Iran’s immediate response has included military retaliation, though details remain limited in early reporting. The broader implications for regional stability are now shifting from theoretical analysis to immediate crisis management, as both direct confrontation and proxy conflicts may intensify across multiple theatres. Iran’s immediate response has included military retaliation, though details remain limited in early reporting. The broader implications for regional stability are now shifting from theoretical analysis to immediate crisis management, as both direct confrontation and proxy conflicts may intensify across multiple theatres.
Implications for Regional Stability
The convergence of Iran’s domestic challenges, regional security tensions, and now direct military confrontation creates an unprecedented situation with immediate implications for Middle Eastern stability. The combination of economic pressures, social unrest, external military strikes, and the targeting of senior military leadership presents the Iranian government with an acute crisis requiring immediate strategic response. The international community is now managing active escalation rather than monitoring potential developments, fundamentally changing the strategic calculations for all regional actors. The interaction between domestic instability and direct external military pressure creates immediate uncertainties that require crisis-level diplomatic and security responses.
Potential Crude Oil Market Forecast: Price Spikes under a conflict scenario
| Scenario | WTI Crude ($/barrel) | Brent Crude ($/barrel) | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline (June 2025) | ~$78–82 | ~$82–86 | Present day |
| Initial Attack / Missile Exchange | $100–110 | $110–120 | Within days |
| Full Regional War (Iran, Israel, U.S. directly engaged) | $130–150+ | $140–170+ | 1–2 weeks |
| Strait of Hormuz closure or disruption | $160–200+ | $180–220+ | Sustained |
| Global recession-induced correction (after spike) | $100–120 | $110–130 | 2–6 months later |
| Event | Brent Price Reaction | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| 1979 Iranian Revolution | $15 → $39 (2.5x in 12 months) | Supply drop of ~4 mb/d |
| 1990 Iraq Invades Kuwait | $21 → $41 in 3 months | Oil shock despite high spare capacity |
| 2019 Abqaiq Drone Attacks | +19% in 24 hrs | Largest single-day price jump in history |
| 2022 Ukraine Invasion by Russia | ~$90 → $139 | Similar in scale to Hormuz closure threat |
Drivers of Oil Price Spikes in This Conflict
Strait of Hormuz
- Roughly 20% of the global oil supply (17–18 million barrels/day) flows through this narrow waterway.
- Iran could mine the waters, use missile attacks, or sink tankers.
- Any closure or credible threat can cause immediate spikes of $30–$60 per barrel.
Attacks on Oil Infrastructure
- Iran has a history of targeting Saudi or Emirati oil assets via proxies (e.g., 2019 Abqaiq-Khurais attack).
- Israel, U.S. may retaliate by striking Iranian refineries, terminals, and pipelines.
- Mutual escalation could result in losses of 2–5 million barrels/day.
U.S. Naval Presence and Retaliation
- U.S. military involvement might include carrier strike groups, blockades, or retaliatory strikes on Iranian facilities.
- Global insurers may increase premiums or suspend cover for tankers in the region, further limiting flows.
OPEC+ and Saudi Reactions
- Saudi Arabia might increase production, but also might hold back to avoid antagonising Iran.
- OPEC+ may fracture if Gulf states face internal threats or attacks.
nypost.com Iran’s exiled crown prince reveals Biden betrayal – and why Trump’s ‘pressure’ is best chance of regime change
thetimes.co.uk Iran needs regime change – I’d die for it, says Shah’s son
Geneva Summit for Human Rights & Democracy
Delivered the keynote address, boldly condemning the Islamic Republic’s brutality—from killings of intellectuals to environmental destruction—and called for international backing of grassroots resistance voanews.com+15genevasummit.org+15reddit.com+15.
NUFDI Iran Conference
Keynote centred on launching the Iran Prosperity Project (IPP), a comprehensive economic vision with ten principles for rebuilding post-regime, likened to a Marshall Plan reddit.com+2en.wikipedia.org+2reddit.com+2.
CPAC in DC (Feb 2025)
Spoke at the Conservative Political Action Conference alongside Matt Schlapp, continuing outreach to U.S. conservative leaders, cpac.org.
National Press Club & Spiegel Interview
Warned former U.S. President Trump against diplomatic marketing, urging he recognise the regime’s deceit and ramp up sanctions reddit.com+4iranintl.news+4nypost.com+4.
New Year’s Message on X
Freedom message to Iranians on Nowruz, calling this the “final move” as the regime nears collapse iranintl.com+1reddit.com+1.
🌐 Affiliations & Initiatives
• Iran Prosperity Project (IPP)
Launched April 30, 2025, in Washington as part of NUFDI, the IPP outlines a post-regime economic roadmap—covering stabilisation, governance, and reconstruction. Pahlavi is one of its leading voices iranintl.com+13en.wikipedia.org+13rezapahlavi.org+13.
• National Union for Democracy in Iran (NUFDI)
A coalition championing regime change via democracy. Pahlavi works closely with NUFDI, frequently speaking at its events and collaborating on policy proposals reddit.com+15en.wikipedia.org+15rezapahlavi.org+15.
• Diaspora Political Networking
- Georgetown University appearance highlighted symbolic unity across the exiled opposition reddit.com+7iranintl.com+7iranintl.com+7.
- Met with Norwegian Parliament Speaker Masud Gharahkhani in March 2025 to discuss IPP and investment prospects in a free Iran reddit.com+1en.wikipedia.org+1.
• Media Outreach
Highly active across global media: over 10 interviews in 72 hours reported last April reddit.com. He’s appeared on platforms like Spiegel, Daily Telegraph, i24 Israel, Tory forums, and more.
• Appeal for Regional and Diaspora Support
Pahlavi calls upon Israelis and other regional groups to help fund civil disobedience within Iran reddit.comvoanews.com. He also framed the West’s role at Geneva as offering partnership—not pity—to the Iranian people liberoreporter.it+1rezapahlavi.org+1.
What could potentially change in United States foreign policy with a Trump Presidency
