Interview: Reza Pahlavi on Iran : 'A Race Against Time'
August 27, 2006
Newsweek International
Rachel Makabi
What does
'seriously talk' really mean? Will the regime seriously discuss its violations
of human rights at home?
Reza Pahlavi was just a teenager in 1979 when an Islamic revolution in Iran
ousted his father, the shah. In the years since, Pahlavi, who now lives in
Maryland , has been involved with activists both inside Iran and abroad who
seek to overthrow the mullahs from power. As the Iranian government continued
to stonewall on the nuclear issue—with the United States calling for sanctions
despite Iran's offer to "talk seriously"—NEWSWEEK's Rachel Makabi spoke to
Pahlavi, 46, to get his thoughts on the standoff, the effectiveness of U.S.
policy toward Iran and his ongoing work with Iranian dissidents. Excerpts:
Makabi: What do you make of Iran 's latest
nuclear proposal?
Pahlavi: The regime's response to [U.N.] Security Council Resolution 1696 was
predictable, as it was simply a variation of double talk—a tactic they have
now mastered to an art form. What does the regime's offer to "seriously talk"
really mean? Will it seriously discuss its violations of human rights at home?
Will it seriously discuss its patronage of regional militancy? I think not.
[This] is a race against time. Will it get the bomb first, thereby bullying
the world into appeasement, or will there be an actual convergence of domestic
and international pressures [on the regime]?
What do you think will happen if China or
Russia resists imposing sanctions?
Accepting the regime's rejection of the Security Council's demand for an
immediate enrichment freeze will erode the prestige and moral authority of the
United Nations, which for some time has been in need of rehabilitation. As
permanent members, Russia and China bear important responsibility to not
weaken the words, actions and authority of the Security Council.
Are you in favor of military intervention?
We need to steer away from the mind-set that either we have to diplomatically
negotiate or talk about any kind of military intervention. Neither one can
solve the situation. What's obvious is to invest in the people of Iran
themselves because you have the most natural ally among the Iranians.
You've long been active with dissidents.
What does your involvement entail?
I have been in touch with a number of organizations and groups, within and
outside Iran , who are working directly with activists on civil disobedience
as well as the treatment of political prisoners. It is very critical that we
keep dissidents operating inside.
Can moderate reformists like former
president Mohammad Khatami change the system from within?
The idea of reform has been discredited and came to an ultimate dead end. It
was unthinkable that this regime could ever reform itself. There is no process
of change that could come from within.
So what role do you think the exile
community can and should play?
In the short term, the exile community is a natural conduit [to express] what
is the state of affairs in Iran to the international community. In the long
term, the diaspora has tremendously dedicated and talented individuals who
have been quite successful, and this [will be] a very important human aspect
for our nation once we recover from this state of repression and liberate our
country.
Do you think the regime is close to
collapse?
It is completely at odds with what the people of Iran stand for. There is a
generational battle taking place. There is a flight of capital from Iran ; the
people of Iran are clear as to the consequences. They look at it as a
whole—our country is going down and all of our resources are being badly
managed by corrupt officials. The people of Iran are committed to putting an
end to it. This regime will not survive—I have no doubt about that, but it
should be at the hands of the Iranian people and not foreign intervention.
Right now, we need to help the people help themselves.
What would be the ideal government to
replace the existing one?
We will have a constitutional assembly, and within that debate, the Iranian
people will determine a final form of government. Our issue is to make sure we
have a secular, democratic system.
What role would religion play?
What you see today is a clear example of what happens when religion is
directly involved with the government. One should not confuse secularism with
something that may sound like you are against religion. It is in everyone's
interest to have a clear line of separation.
What role do you see yourself playing?
My only focus today is to bring the country to the point where people can go
to the polls and decide their fate and their future. That date, for me, is my
finish line. The use I have is based on the Iranian people and whether or not
they want me to play a more prominent role or not.
Newsweek International
Sept. 4, 2006 issue