Iranian Crown Prince urges citizens to reclaim country from Khamenei

The exiled Crown Prince of Iran has declared that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei's Islamic Republic 'is collapsing' and has urged citizens and soldiers alike to rise up against the regime. Reza Pahlavi (pictured), the son of the last Shah to rule before Iran's 1979 Islamic Revolution, has long been a prominent critic of Khamenei and says he wants to replace Iran's clerical rule with a 'national and democratic government'.
Now, following days of punishing attacks from Israel that wiped out the upper echelon of Iran's military command, targeted its nuclear facilities and sent Khamenei into hiding, Pahlavi took to social media to issue a rallying cry. 'Khamenei, like a frightened rat, has gone into hiding underground and lost control of the situation,' he declared. 'The regime's apparatus of repression is falling apart. 'All it takes now is a nationwide uprising to put an end to this nightmare once and for all. Now is the time to rise - the time to reclaim Iran.' In an emotional message to Iranians at home and abroad, he added: 'Let us all come forward... and bring about the end of this regime. A free and flourishing Iran lies ahead of us... We have a plan for Iran's future.'
Pahlavi's call for revolution comes as the region teeters on the brink of all-out war. Khamenei on Tuesday declared that Israeli would be shown 'no mercy'. 'In the name of the noble Haidar, the battle begins,' he wrote in Farsi, referring to Ali - whom Shia Muslims consider the first Imam and the rightful successor to the prophet Mohammed. Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump said he wanted Khamenei's 'unconditional surrender' as American air and naval assets descended on the region, raising suspicions that the US military may soon enter the fray.
Pahlavi's father, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (pictured), took power in Iran following a 1953 coup engineered by Britain and the US. Under the Shah's secular and pro-Western rule, Iran experienced a rapid modernisation program financed by oil revenues. Education and healthcare expanded, infrastructure boomed, and Tehran became a showcase capital for Western influence in the Middle East.
But the regime's repression, inequality, and reliance on the hated secret police, SAVAK, sowed resentment among Iran's religious and working classes. Mass protests, general strikes, and clashes with security forces destabilised the monarchy throughout 1978 as the cancer-stricken Shah struggled to cling to power. It was then that Pahlavi, aged just 17, left Iran for military flight school in the US, just before his father abandoned the throne for exile in January 1979. The Islamic revolution followed as a coalition of religious clerics, leftist groups and disaffected Iranians tore down the monarchy, overran the US Embassy in Tehran and the swept away of the last vestiges of the American-backed government.
Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (pictured), a radical Shia cleric, took charge, denouncing Pahlavi's father as a puppet of the West and positioning Islam as the path to justice and national sovereignty. Among the revolution's foot soldiers was a young cleric named Ali Khamenei. A loyal supporter of Khomeini's vision, he played a key role in consolidating the new regime's power, helping to purge dissent and set up the Islamic Republic's security infrastructure. He would go on to serve as president in the 1980s before being appointed Supreme Leader after Khomeini's death in 1989. Yet after more than four decades of Islamic rule, the Pahlavis and the age of the monarchy have retained their mystique in Iran. Pahlavi's critics associate him with Western meddling in Iranian affairs, while his supporters see him as an antidote to Khamenei's repression.
Any American intervention in the Middle East would be 'a recipe for all-out war in the region', Esmail Baghaei, a spokesman for the Iranian foreign ministry, told Al Jazeera today . Pahlavi has long campaigned against Khamenei, reminding people that Iran under the Shah was far more socially liberal. 'If you look at the legacy that was left behind by both my father and my grandfather... it contrasts with this archaic, sort of backward, religiously rooted radical system that has been extremely repressive,' Pahlavi said. 'This regime is simply irreformable because the nature of it, its DNA, is such that it cannot,' the exiled prince said. 'People have given up with the idea of reform and they think there has to be fundamental change. Now, how this change can occur is the big question.'
Prior to the outbreak of hostilities between Jerusalem and Tehran, he had outlined in previous interviews how he felt a revolution would eventually occur in Iran, even without foreign intervention. Asked how his envisioned revolution could play out, Pahlavi said it would need to begin with labour unions starting a nationwide strike. He said members of the Revolutionary Guard, a paramilitary organisation established to protect the clerical system, would be assured they wouldn't be 'all hung and shot.' Israel launched its air war, its largest ever on Iran, on Friday after saying it had concluded the Islamic Republic was on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon - an accusation that Iran denies.
The US has so far only taken indirect actions in the current conflict with Iran, including helping to shoot down missiles fired toward Israel. But Trump has ordered significant air and naval assets to the region, suggesting Washington could be about to enter the conflict. Trump was given three options by advisors about how the should largest military in history should assist Israel in demolishing Iran's nuclear program, according to The New York Times. The first and most basic option was the US providing intelligence and jets for refuelling Israeli airplanes on bombing missions along.
The second option included American and Israeli joint strikes on Iran. The most hawkish option provided a plan for a US-led military campaign that included B-1 and B-2 bombers, aircraft carriers and 'cruise missiles launched from submarines,' the Times reported. Meanwhile, Ali Bahreini, the ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations in Geneva, said Iran will continue to respond strongly to Israeli strikes despite Trump's calls for surrender. 'We will not show any reluctance in defending our people, security and land - we will respond seriously and strongly, without restraint,' Bahreini declared.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

The Guardian

35 minutes ago

• The Guardian

Israel kills innocent Palestinians. Activists spray-paint a plane. Guess which the UK government calls terrorism

On 20 June, in what has now become an appallingly familiar story, Israeli forces once again opened fire on Palestinians at an aid distribution site, this time killing 23 people. The same day, it was revealed that activists affiliated with the UK group Palestine Action had broken into an RAF base and defaced two military aircraft in an act of protest. One of these actions involved the intentional use of lethal violence against civilians, resulting in the deaths of 23 loved and irreplaceable human beings. The other involved no violence against any living things and resulted in no deaths or injuries. The UK government has now announced its intention to deal with one of these incidents as a terrorist offence. Guess which. International organisations could hardly be more unanimous in their assessment that Israel is committing extremely grave war crimes in Gaza. In November last year, a UN special committee found that Israel's campaign in Gaza was consistent with the characteristics of genocide. In December, an Amnesty International investigation concluded that Israel 'has committed and is continuing to commit genocide'. Now, a series of unprovoked and illegal Israeli attacks on Iran have succeeded in drawing the US directly into war with Iran, in violation of US and international law. While massacres continue in Gaza, Israeli aggression threatens to ignite a major regional and perhaps even global conflict. And yet the UK continues to provide Israel with military intelligence, and British companies continue to sell lethal weapons to the Israeli state. In a poll conducted last year, 56% of British voters supported a complete embargo on arms sales to Israel. Across the UK, hundreds of thousands of people have attended demonstrations mourning those lost to the conflict and demanding an end to the slaughter. But the government stubbornly persists in its support for Israel's military campaign. Mass peaceful protest, even with majority support among the wider population, has yielded no results. In the face of state support for genocide, what are conscientious people supposed to do? The activists who broke into the RAF facility at Brize Norton knew, of course, that their actions were illegal. From the suffragettes to the gay rights movement to the anti-apartheid struggle, genuine political resistance has always involved intentional law-breaking. As Martin Luther King Jr wrote from a Birmingham jail: 'One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.' And the provision of weapons to facilitate genocide is more than unjust: it is an abyss of moral horror. Those brave enough to break the law in protest – many of whom are already serving time in prison for their actions – deserve our highest respect. But proscribing an entire organisation under the Terrorism Act is not the same thing as prosecuting particular individuals for specific transgressions. If the government follows through with its intention to designate Palestine Action as a terror organisation, mere membership of the group would constitute a crime. In fact, even supporting the group purely in words – as I am doing now – could also constitute a serious legal offence, punishable with a sentence of up to 14 years in prison. Financial dealings with members and supporters may also be illegal, even if the individuals concerned have done nothing against the law other than belong to or express support for a protest movement. Under UK law, the home secretary has broad discretion to proscribe any organisation 'concerned in terrorism'. Until now, this process has only ever been used against militant groups either directly involved in or actively advocating violent armed struggle. But crucially, the act defines terrorism vaguely enough to include mere property damage and disruption of electronic systems – even in the total absence of a threat to human life or public safety. If the government proceeds down this path, any ordinary person in the UK could in theory be sent to prison simply for expressing verbal support for non-violent activism. Quite aside from the broader principle, this would represent an alarming curtailment of free speech. Palestine Action is not an armed group. It has never been responsible for any fatalities and does not pose any risk to the public. Its methods do involve property sabotage, which is, obviously, illegal. But if killing 23 civilians at an aid distribution site is not terrorism, how can we possibly be expected to accept that spray-painting a plane is? Law-abiding protest has so far failed to stop the genocide. More than 50,000 innocent children have been killed or injured. In what circumstances could civil disobedience ever be justified if not now? I can only say that I admire and support Palestine Action wholeheartedly – and I will continue to, whether that becomes a terrorist offence or not. Sally Rooney is an Irish writer

Daily Mail​

37 minutes ago

• Daily Mail​

EXCLUSIVE Inside the ferocious power struggle to control Trump's daily intelligence briefing as he tiptoed toward Iran decision

A high-stakes power struggle sprang up inside the U.S. intelligence community as Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard moved to wrest control of President Donald Trump 's daily intelligence briefing from the CIA, the Daily Mail has learned. With the Iran and Israel war in full swing, the Russia-Ukraine war still churning and Chinese military forces training at an accelerated pace, whoever controls the distribution of the nation's most classified intelligence has the upper hand in shaping the decision-making process in whether to wage war. Last month, Gabbard ruffled feathers by threatening the CIA's influence after reasserting the ODNI's authority over the president's daily briefing (PDB), a role long dominated by the CIA. 'She's trying to move, physically move and take control of the President's daily brief,' one senior intelligence official told the Daily Mail. Despite the intelligence director taking over responsibility for the PDB in 2004, the CIA maintained the internal systems capable of creating the intelligence reports, which often contain much of the agency's classified information distilled into digestible memos. But Gabbard's attempt to shift production and delivery of the PDB from CIA headquarters in Langley to her own office has rattled the traditional power structure. 'Obviously, that controls what the president sees,' the source said. 'So she's, I would say, probably caused a lot of ripples within the CIA, especially within the DA, the Director of Analysis, by saying, "Hey, I'm going to take the PDB physically from Langley and move it down the street to the ODNI,"' the source said. Ratcliffe, the CIA director, is not necessarily thought to be grappling for the president's attention, the official confirmed. But others at Langley have been miffed by the recent move. 'Of course, the CIA is unhappy because they want to keep control of the product,' one ODNI official told the Daily Mail. 'Their phrase at the CIA is 'Whoever controls the information the President sees, controls the President.'' 'By housing the PDB staff under the ODNI, the production process aligns more closely with the ODNI's mission to integrate foreign, military, and domestic intelligence,' the official continued. 'This will yield a more cohesive and holistic intelligence product that reflects contributions from all IC agencies, reducing the risk of CIA dominance in the PDB's content.' The CIA did not return the Daily Mail's request for comment. 'There are a lot of folks at the agency, in particular, the Directorate of Analysis, they're used to being the final say,' the senior intelligence official shared. 'They're not used to someone saying, "Hey, I'm gonna ask you some questions about this."' Presidents have received regular morning briefings - comprised of intelligence on the most pressing national security issues - since Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s. Compiling intelligence reports has traditionally fallen to the CIA, specifically its Directorate for Analysis. Though in 2004 the Intelligence Reform Act created the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), which then began overseeing the PDB. The ODNI has publicly confirmed last month that some functions located at the CIA will now be moved to the ODNI, including the staff who oversee the PDB. Gabbard is responsible for overseeing all 18 federal intelligence agencies, including the CIA, though its Director John Ratcliffe is also a Cabinet member, creating a natural tension between the two agencies and its staff. While the war in Iran and Israel moves into its second week without any indication of a ceasefire, sources familiar with the DNI have shared that Gabbard is in nearly constant contact with the president on intelligence matters. 'She's been in every meeting,' a White House official told the Daily Mail. The official added Gabbard has been spotted at the White House nearly every day since the start of the conflict. CIA Director Ratcliffe has also reportedly been one of the key figures advising Trump on the war while suggesting the DNI has taken a back seat. Reports of internal jockeying within the administration come just as the president is at what is perhaps the most tenuous point of his second term. 'I think those are coming from people who either like drama for the sake of drama, or they're trying to give the CIA more power,' the official shared. 'I think people are trying to play the palace intrigue game,' he added. 'It's a power play.'

Daily Mail​

43 minutes ago

• Daily Mail​

Iran holds world hostage: Iranian government poised to SHUT Strait of Hormuz closing off 20 per cent of global oil and gas

Iranian parliament has approved the closure of the Strait of Hormuz in a move which could see the world thrown into disaster. The decision to close the Strait, through which around 20 per cent of global oil and gas demand flows, is not yet final. Iran 's Supreme National Security Council must still make the final call on the matter, Iran's Press TV said today. But lawmaker and Revolutionary Guards Commander Esmail Kosari told the Young Journalist Club that doing so is on the agenda and 'will be done whenever necessary'. Last weekend, Kowsari told local media that closing the Strait of Hormuz 'is under consideration, and Iran will make the best decision with determination'. The Strait is a pivotal trade route for the world, with around a fifth of the world's oil flowing through the tiny sea passage, along with the same proportion of all Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG), making it the 'world's most important oil transit chokepoint'. But Kowsari said Iran was not limiting its options in dealing with Israel, telling local media last week: 'Our hands are wide open when it comes to punishing the enemy, and the military response was only part of our overall response.' Trade Gerrit Heinemann told Bild that should Iran choose to close the Strait, which borders the country, the results would be 'catastrophic.' '[It would be] worse than Corona and Putin combined! The second episode of the ongoing crisis would be even more severe than what we experienced at the beginning of the Ukraine war and during the Corona years. A disaster,' they said. He told the newspaper: 'A large part of the global supply chains runs through the affected region. This not only dramatically impacts energy supplies, but also the flow of goods. 'All of a sudden, all the crises we had just overcome would return: the energy crisis, inflation, disrupted supply chains, and now the threat of mass unemployment.' At its thinnest, it is just 21 miles wide, and the shipping lanes in the Strait are even smaller. This makes it incredible vulnerable to attacks, which international leaders have already warned. Iraq's foreign minister Fuad Hussein warned of a 'global energy crisis' if the Strait is closed. Cutting the world off from such a large source of energy would massively affect economies across the world, which still largely rely on non-renewable sources like oil for their needs. It comes as top US officials urged Iran to surrender today after strikes on the nation's nuclear sites 'severely damaged' its nuclear capabilities overnight. President Trump broke his two-week deadline on Saturday night as he launched 'Operation Midnight Hammer', sending a fleet of B-2 bombers to key nuclear sites. The US strikes included 14 bunker-buster bombs, more than two dozen Tomahawk missiles and over 125 military aircraft. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said at a morning press conference that the strikes were 'bold' and 'brilliant', and warned Iran that there would be dire consequences if it does not come to the negotiating table. Officials admitted that the strikes on the Fordow site, a deep underground nuclear enrichment facility, may not have been entirely destroyed in the operation, but described it as significantly damaged. The press conference came as world leaders condemned Trump's decision to wade into the conflict, with Chinese President Xi Jinping saying Trump 'violated international peace.' Iran's foreign minister branded Trump a 'lawless bully' who 'betrayed' diplomacy after the US blew up three nuclear bases - as he warned the world has been thrown into an 'unprecedented level of danger'. Early this morning, Iran retaliated by targeting Israel in a devastating set of attacks - with emergency services reporting at least 16 people injured.