“Western Civilization, and the United States in particular, is at risk. I say this because this is exactly what happened to my country 45 years ago” began Reza Pahlavi in his speech to the National Conservatism Conference (NatCon). He would certainly be one to know. In his Wednesday address in Washington, D.C. the former crown prince of the Imperial State of Iran dove into what his late father described as “the alliance of the red and the black,” the union of radical Marxism and radical Islamism.
Deposed in 1979 by the Islamic Revolution, Pahlavi’s father was Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. In the wake of the Shah’s ouster rose a steadfastly anti-American terrorist state, where there had once been a staunch American ally. (READ MORE: US Navy Works to Deter Full-Scale War)
One might be forgiven for thinking Pahlavi came to NatCon seeking strange bedfellows. It would be an understatement to say that the implicit assumption of his speech, that the Iranian regime needed to go, could easily have landed poorly. National conservatives have stood apart from the rest of the right in their fierce criticism of the foreign adventurism of President George W. Bush’s administration, particularly regarding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
But Pahlavi came with a message certain to find a sympathetic ear. The Ayatollah, he observed, eschews patriotism and nationalism in favor of a supranational, imperialist ideology. Islam, according to the Iranian regime, has no place for nationhood as such. “The lion and sun symbol, which adorned our national flag for centuries, was replaced with ‘Allahu Akbar,’” he lamented.
And indeed, the Ayatollah cannot be said to be any great respecter of national borders or national sovereignty. The Iranian regime has, after all, come by its designation as a state sponsor of terrorism honestly. Closer to home, the U.S. Director of National Intelligence recently warned that Iran was funding anti-Israel demonstrations in the United States. Pahlavi dismissed “fellow travelers” in the mainstream media that have treated Iran’s new president-elect, Masoud Pezeshkian, as a moderate reformer. Western political elites, Pahlavi alleges, are worse than naive; they are “accomplices.”
Lest Pahlavi aroused suspicion that his arguments against the Iranian regime, however true, were self-interested, he came with an argument from America’s self-interest. The United States, he said, has plenty of reason to wish the Iranian people well in their quest for freedom. An Iran liberated from the Ayatollahs would join with Israel and other regional allies in the Abraham Accords. This would allow America to withdraw her soldiers from the Middle East with honor, instead of the disgrace and embarrassment that fell upon us in Afghanistan. (READ MORE: Biden’s Conspicuous Decline is a Joke — On Us)
He observed that American experiments in imposing democracy in the Middle East have repeatedly failed. In Iraq, the withdrawal of American troops after the toppling of American troops led to sectarianism, not so subtly compared to American identity politics, and the eventual rise of the Islamic State. In Afghanistan, America passed over reinstating the country’s deposed king Mohammad Zahir Shah in favor of a doomed attempt to build a modern liberal democracy.
Pahlavi insisted Iran’s struggle was not America’s, that he was here to seek American friendship as opposed to American help, and that he disavowed the idea of yet another American regime change war. That being said, many in the audience must have suspected, as I certainly did, that Pahlavi was implying what he did not say aloud. (READ MORE: Civilization Means Power Used in Service to the Public)
On the whole, however, Pahlavi’s speech was an unexpected and credible broadside against what the French have taken to calling “Islamo-leftism.” The cocktail of permissive left-wing immigration policies and rising Islamism has become a potent brew that is powering the European right. It is no mistake that where centrist and center-left parties have taken measures to reduce immigration, such as in Denmark, right-wing parties have floundered. Despite characterizing Europe’s new nationalists as “threats to democracy,” the political establishment throughout most of the Western world seems to think that it should be able to disregard the preferences of voters and the interests of nations without any pushback.
They have thus far been wrong, and are suffering the consequences for their hubris at the ballot box. But as Pahlavi can personally attest, the consequences of allowing the alliance of radical Marxists and radical Islamists to go unchecked would be significantly more dire.
The post Reza Pahlavi: A Persian Prince Among the NatCons appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.
