Reza Pahlavi, the exiled son of Iran’s last shah, has called on U.S. President Donald Trump to intervene more quickly against Iran’s ruling system, arguing that faster action could hasten the collapse of the Islamic Republic and reduce civilian deaths amid nationwide protests.
As mass protests challenge Iran’s leadership, Reza Pahlavi, the exiled son of Iran’s last shah (king), has intensified his appeal to the United States, saying international hesitation only emboldens repression. In an interview with CBS News, Pahlavi framed early intervention as the fastest way to end bloodshed and bring down the current system of power in Tehran.
“Action Is Needed Now”
In his interview with CBS News, Pahlavi said the international community must act before the death toll rises further. He argued that decisive external pressure would weaken the Islamic Republic’s ability to rely on force against its own population. According to Pahlavi, earlier intervention would ultimately save lives by shortening the duration of repression.
Claims of Internal Panic Within Iran’s Leadership
Pahlavi also claimed that elements within Iran’s ruling establishment are preparing contingency plans to escape the country. He said he receives intelligence from inside Iran, including information emerging from secret meetings within the supreme leader’s inner circle.
According to Pahlavi, some officials are “gearing up to escape from the country” and “loading up planes to take off,” a sign, he argued, that confidence in the regime’s survival is eroding at the highest levels.
Contacts With the Trump Administration
Pahlavi confirmed he has been in communication with the Trump administration, though he declined to share details. He dismissed recent diplomatic signals from Tehran as a calculated attempt to buy time and suppress protests that threaten Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s grip on power.
Trump’s Warnings and U.S. Options
U.S. President Trump told reporters that Iranian officials had reached out to him to negotiate, even as he warned of serious consequences if violence against civilians continued. He said the United States could strike Iran “very hard where it hurts,” clarifying that such action would not involve ground troops. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt later said all options remain on the table, including airstrikes.
“Red Lines Have Already Been Crossed”
Pahlavi said the regime has already violated the red lines set by Washington and is now attempting to present negotiations as a way out of the crisis. He described this strategy as an effort to deceive the international community while maintaining repression at home.
“They Wouldn’t Chant My Name If They Didn’t Believe”
Responding to questions about his legitimacy and role, Pahlavi said the scale of protests demonstrates public trust in him as a transitional figure.
“If the people did not actually believe that I can be the person doing that for them or the person to be trusted, they wouldn’t be in the millions on the streets of Iran, in the four corners of Iran, chanting my name and asking for my return,” he said.
“That should be indicative of the reality on the ground.”
Regime Change and the Cost of Protest
Asked by CBS News whether he was effectively encouraging regime change, Pahlavi said supporting the Iranian people means backing their core demand: the removal of the current system. When questioned about responsibility for protesters killed in the crackdown, he described the situation as a war, saying wars inevitably bring casualties and that inaction would only increase the toll.
“A Bridge, Not the Destination”
Positioning himself as a transitional figure, Pahlavi said he acts as the voice of Iranians abroad. He pointed to chants of his name during demonstrations as evidence of popular support, while stressing that he does not see himself as Iran’s final leader. He added that he is prepared to sacrifice his life for freedom and national survival.
Historical Precedents for International Support
Pahlavi argued that successful liberation movements have only triumphed when the international community decisively sided with oppressed populations.
“Any campaigns of liberation has occurred at the time that the world finally took the side of those people vis-à-vis oppressive regimes,” he said, citing the end of apartheid in South Africa and the collapse of the Soviet Union. “There are precedents in history, and I think Iran should not be the exception.”
