Poster in Tehran with the portrait of Ali Khamenei, the killed revolutionary leader.Image: IMAGO / Anadolu Agency
Will the Shah’s son take power – or will there be a civil war? A development would also have dramatic consequences for Europe.
March 4, 2026, 2:09 p.mMarch 4, 2026, 2:09 p.m
Mahdi Rezaei-Tazik / ch media
The majority of Iranians reacted with joy to the death of revolutionary leader Ali Khamenei. Many are now hoping for the final overthrow of the Islamist system. Such an upheaval is possible, but it is anything but certain.
So what happens next in Iran? Three scenarios emerge – starting with the most plausible:
The mullahs make a deal
The regime capitulates, accedes to the demands of the USA and Israel – and remains in power.
A system like the one in Iran cannot be overthrown through air strikes alone. The US has also stated unequivocally that the democratization of Iran is not its primary goal. In view of general war weariness and fear of the country’s disintegration, a massive popular uprising does not occur. Iran is therefore moving towards de facto military rule.
Regardless of whether the next Supreme Leader is actually elected by the so-called Council of Experts – as provided for by the constitution – or not, the Revolutionary Guards will continue to maintain control over crucial political and economic key areas. And the likelihood that the Revolutionary Guards will allow the reform camp to gain power is very low.
The Shah’s son takes on the transitional role
The regime’s repressive apparatus continues to be bombed from the air and is ultimately completely destroyed. Tensions within the Revolutionary Guard are increasing massively. In response, the people rise up – similar to January – in an uprising of millions that ultimately leads to the fall of the regime. The opposition, led by Reza Pahlavi, the crown prince of the Pahlavi dynasty, makes the transition.
He is the hope of most exiled Iranians: demonstrators gather around a picture of Reza Pahlavi in Los Angeles.Image: keystone
Under Pahlavi’s leadership, the Iranian opposition has gained new momentum. Around a million people from the Iranian diaspora worldwide followed his call – in Munich alone in February the police recorded a record participation of 250,000 participants. During the nationwide protests in January, slogans such as “Long live the Shah” and “Pahlavi will return” were an integral part of the demonstrations.
The loud return to the Pahlavi dynasty comes from three sources: a positive reassessment of the family’s historical legacy, the lack of political alternatives and the desire for a pro-Western Iranism as a direct counter to anti-Western Islamism.
Pahlavi’s political strategy for a change of power is based, on the one hand, on preserving the country’s territorial integrity. He also wants to establish a secular democracy in Iran and promises a free referendum on the country’s future form of government.
Many Iranians compare the Shah’s regime with today’s system – and rate the former as clearly superior. There is great concern that the country will collapse due to separatist forces. Because of Pahlavi’s integrative power, the population will most likely opt for a constitutional monarchy based on the Western European model.
The country is sinking into civil war
A civil war breaks out as Israel and the USA exploit separatists in particular as ground troops. The regime will no longer respond with the card of Islamism, but with that of Iranian nationalism. In this way it will attract parts of the population to its side, legitimized by the goal of preserving territorial integrity.
Iranian flag in a pile of rubble after an air strike in Tehran.Image: keystone
A few days ago, Parliament President Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf appealed to patriotism: “If you don’t support us, at least you love Iran.” At the same time, the Minister of Science attempted a remarkable reinterpretation: he equated Ali Khamenei, who always disparaged pre-Islamic history, with Cyrus the Great.
This third scenario would have the most serious impact on Western Europe: in the event of a civil war, millions of refugees would be expected.
In all three scenarios there would be one main winner: Israel. In the second scenario, Jerusalem can position itself as a liberator – similar to Cyrus, who once liberated the Jewish people. This would allow Israel to gain Iran as an ally.
This becomes more understandable if one takes a look at the slogans that have been heard during the protest movements of the last two decades in Iran: “No to Lebanon, no to Gaza, I am dying for Iran” or “Neither Islam nor the Koran, I am dying for Iran”. Many Iranians reject the regime’s Islamist and anti-national foreign policy and would like to see normalization of relations with the international community, including Israel.
If the first scenario occurs and the regime remains in power, then Israel will not have gotten rid of the mullahs, but it would have significantly weakened them.
In the event of a civil war, the country – both the regime and the population – would be primarily concerned with itself.
In short: the outcome of the war will leave a lasting mark on the Iranian people. Israel will be remembered either as a respected actor or as a deeply rooted enemy.
The global community is facing a historic moment: the choice between perpetuating Islamism and supporting the emergence of a democratic, pro-Western Iran. Anyone who looks closely, taking into account the regime’s 47-year record, will hardly be able to deny that Islamism – in its current political form – is no less dangerous than communism in the Soviet sense. In addition, a democratic, pro-Western Iran could also be of considerable importance for Western Europe as an energy supplier. (aargauerzeitung.ch)
Dr. Mahdi Rezaei-Tazik
is an Iranian-Swiss political scientist and Iranist at the University of Bern. His focus is on criticism of religion and secularism in Iran. (chm)