January 24, 2026

A Name Does Not A King Make: Leadership Change In Iran




When the Bush administration invaded Afghanistan in the fall of 2001 it had the option to install the king of Afghanistan, Mohammad Zahir Shah, as a unity figure to bring the war-torn country together in a time of transition. 

But Pakistan objected and the Americans obliged. 

The king was an old man at that point so his position would've only been ceremonial but this episode speaks to the fact that Washington doesn't think about the day after when it goes around knocking over regimes across the world. It mostly defers to regional powers to help fill leadership vacuums. Pakistan in Afghanistan. Turkey in Syria. Iran in Iraq.

If Don Diaper decides to attack Iran with the hope of overthrowing its current regime what regional power will fill the leadership vacuum in Tehran?

There is none. And, besides, Iran is too big. 

Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan were easier to solve because Iran was motivated to see a stable Baghdad, Turkey had plans of reclaiming Damascus going back a hundred years, and wily Pakistan had the Taliban in its backpocket just waiting for Kabul to collapse.

As for Reza Pahlavi, the man is no king. Neither was his father. The Shah was afraid of blood, and of his own people. You can't be a king and fear blood. 

And there will be blood because the Shiites of Iran, if there's one thing they're not afraid of, it's blood. So even if the regime collapses, and Ayatollah Pol Pot is removed from power, the next leader won't be a secular guy. He'll be a dyed-in-the-wool Shiite. They're the ones with all the military hardware and dedicated followers.

And Iranians will unify behind any leader that prevents state collapse.

The Iranian crown won't be picked up by a guy who's been living in American suburbia for the majority of his life.

So the Israelis and the Americans better think twice, thrice, four times, and more, before committing the United States to another war in the Middle East.