Introduction: The Tehran Airstrikes—A Misread Crisis and the Choice for Order
In the early hours of June 13, 2025, Israel launched a massive airstrike operation against Iran, including direct attacks on the capital Tehran. The Israel Defense Forces declared this operation a “preemptive strike” against Iran’s nuclear program, reportedly killing Major General Salami, commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, along with several other high-ranking officials, deploying 200 fighter jets to strike over 100 targets.
However, this author takes issue with such characterizations. This article argues that against the backdrop of President Trump’s recent major diplomatic success in the Middle East—securing $2 trillion in investment commitments and reaching understanding and consensus with Russia on the Ukraine issue—Iran has not engaged in particularly provocative behavior. This strike appears to be a deliberate, proactive attack by Israel, potentially signaling a strategic intention to completely end Iran’s theocratic rule and replace it with a “secular monarchy.”
This article seeks to expose a truth long obscured by mainstream narratives framing Iran as a “autocratic dictatorship” and “anti-imperialist”: Iran’s theocratic regime is exceptionally stable, with internally consistent governing logic that is far from the “autocratic dictatorship” commonly portrayed externally. Over the past 46 years, Iran has not only avoided collapse under severe sanctions but has successfully exported its Islamic revolutionary ideology, challenging regional order and effectively playing the role of a regional imperialist. This direct, lethal strike targeting the capital and senior officials may be a strategic response to this long-term threat, foreshadowing potential action aimed at restoring the Pahlavi dynasty.
I. Iran’s Theocratic Regime: Underestimated Stability and Its “Philosopher King” Model
Iran’s political system is unique—a republic that combines theocratic and democratic mechanisms, with core stability far exceeding external expectations. It possesses all the advantages of an elected government, including a degree of popular mandate and legitimacy, the ability to absorb social energy through electoral mechanisms to avoid large-scale social opposition, and channels for government responsiveness to public opinion. More critically, its political system incorporates a “philosopher king” style supreme leader.
The Supreme Leader can be viewed as Plato’s “philosopher king”—combining moral authority with political wisdom and wielding actual governing power that transcends elected government. Through absolute control over national policy direction, the Guardian Council, and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), he achieves highly concentrated power.
This unique governing model uses the Supreme Leader’s authority to compensate for many common shortcomings of democratic politics, such as policy short-sightedness, partisan conflict, inefficiency, and populist influence. In Iran, the Supreme Leader’s final decision-making authority ensures long-term strategic stability and avoids frequent policy fluctuations. This dual safeguard gives Iran’s regime tremendous resilience. Despite facing severe long-term sanctions, Iran has maintained systemic stability and long-term ideological revolutionary export through strategic trade cooperation with only a few countries like China and Russia.
According to TheGlobalEconomy.com statistics, Iran’s political stability index has recovered from its 2019 low point. Compared to other countries like Thailand with repeated military coups or Venezuela’s economic collapse, Iran under theocratic leadership has actually avoided intense internal power struggles, creating long-term stable conditions. This stability is built upon strict social control through Shia doctrine and high ideological unity—which is precisely the source of its external danger.
II. The Real Harm of Theocratic Export: Erosion of Middle Eastern Secular Order
Unlike mainstream narratives emphasizing Iran’s “anti-Western” image, the core danger of Iran’s theocratic regime lies in its explicit policy of “exporting Islamic revolution”—a subversive threat to secular order throughout the Middle East region. It actively seeks to create instability within other Islamic countries through proxy organizations, even directly subverting existing regimes, particularly targeting secular monarchies dominated by Sunni Muslims. Its strategy involves exploiting sectarian divisions, inciting Shia minority groups, and exporting fundamentalist ideology.
2.1 The Bahrain Case
Iran has long been accused of supporting Shia dissidents in Bahrain and explicitly supported anti-government demonstrations in Bahrain during the 2011 “Arab Spring.” This directly led to the Bahraini government’s crackdown on Shias and intensified tensions between the two countries.
2.2 The Saudi Arabia Case
Saudi Arabia has repeatedly accused Iran of inciting Shia minorities in its Eastern Province and providing support to challenge Saudi royal rule. After Saudi Arabia executed Shia cleric Nimr in 2016, Iran’s strong domestic reaction and attacks on Saudi diplomatic missions directly led to the severing of diplomatic relations between the two countries, highlighting Iran’s interference in Saudi internal affairs.
2.3 The Hamas Case: The Most Controversial Proxy Network
Hamas, as Iran’s important proxy on the eastern Mediterranean coast, represents the most controversial and influential case of Iran’s “revolutionary export” strategy. Despite Hamas being Sunni religiously, driven by geopolitical interests, Iran has long provided funding, weapons, and military training to this Palestinian organization.
Through Hamas, Iran achieves multiple strategic objectives: First, establishing sustained military pressure around Israel, forcing Israel to disperse resources to deal with multi-front threats; second, by supporting the Palestinian “resistance movement,” Iran gains political influence in the Arab world that transcends sectarian boundaries, challenging the regional leadership of Sunni powers like Saudi Arabia; third, Hamas’s rocket attacks and tunnel warfare tactics provide a replicable “resistance model” for Iran’s other proxies.
Hamas’s large-scale attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, and the subsequent Gaza War, fully demonstrated the destructive impact of Iran’s proxy network. This conflict not only caused enormous humanitarian disaster but, more importantly, disrupted the ongoing peace process in the Middle East region, particularly the Arab-Israeli normalization under the Abraham Accords framework. Through Hamas’s actions, Iran successfully pulled the region back into confrontation, which is precisely the core objective of its “revolutionary export” policy.
2.4 Other Gulf States
Countries like Kuwait have also uncovered spy networks linked to Iran, accusing it of attempting subversion or intelligence activities.
These examples prove that Iran, through proxies including Hezbollah in Lebanon, Houthi rebels in Yemen, Shia militia organizations in Iraq, and Hamas in Palestine, has established a vast network that not only externally challenges the United States and Israel but substantially intensifies internal conflicts in Yemen, Iraq, Syria, and other countries, leading to large-scale humanitarian crises and regional chaos. This practice of “revolutionary export” is the most direct and fundamental erosion of Middle Eastern secular monarchical stability, and the core reason why many countries in the region deeply detest Iran.
III. The Opportunity for Change: US-Russia Acquiescence, Arab Monarchical Support, and Pahlavi Dynasty Restoration
Given the stability of Iran’s theocratic regime and its actual harm to the region, external intervention is viewed as the only possible path for its political transformation. Recent events are revealing subtle changes in this opportunity.
3.1 Acquiescence Under Improved US-Russia Relations
Notably, Israel’s airstrike on Tehran occurred against the backdrop of Trump’s major diplomatic success in the Middle East. Trump’s May visit to the Middle East secured $2 trillion in investment commitments, establishing a more solid US-Gulf state alliance. With the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war and adjustments in the global geopolitical landscape, the United States and Russia may reach some degree of understanding or consensus on certain key issues to avoid greater conflict.
Regarding the Iran issue, if a stable, non-revolutionary secular regime could replace the current theocratic system, this might align with both US and Russian common interests in regional stability. Therefore, even without public support, “non-interference” or “acquiescence” by both major powers to Israel’s action creates a favorable external environment for potential regime change operations.
3.2 Critical Support from Arab Secular Monarchies
The primary supporters of Israel’s action will be the Arab secular monarchies in the Middle East region. These countries, including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Jordan, and others, have long suffered from the threat of Iranian theocratic export. Saudi Arabia’s 2024 accusation that Iranian proxies attempted to interfere in Jordanian politics is the latest evidence. The US-Saudi military agreement signed on June 10 signals the formation of an anti-Iran alliance including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Jordan.
For these countries, a secularized and monarchical Iran would be more predictable than the current revolutionary-exporting theocratic regime and more aligned with their own interests. Therefore, Israel’s push for Iranian political secularization could potentially gain widespread support from these Arab monarchies, overturning external expectations that such actions would provoke strong backlash from the Muslim world. This is an action aimed at maintaining regional traditional order and stability, not simply religious conflict.
3.3 Pahlavi Dynasty Restoration: The Only Choice for Stable Order to Counter Theocracy
The ultimate purpose of this action may very well be the restoration of the Pahlavi dynasty. The reason it must be dynastic restoration is that Iran’s previous theocratic structure is already very stable—without an equally stable monarchical system to replace and balance it, society would quickly revert naturally to theocratic rule. This is a basic law of political stability: a highly integrated ideological system can only be replaced by another institution with equal historical legitimacy and social foundation.
Reza Pahlavi, heir to the Pahlavi dynasty, has proclaimed himself “Iran’s king in exile” since 1980, long advocating for the restoration and reform of the Pahlavi dynasty.
Internal Support Base
Domestic voices support secularization reforms, with some citizens nostalgic for the economic prosperity that existed during the Pahlavi era. The “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement that erupted in 2022, though severely suppressed, reflected deep secular demands, and the “Long Live the Shah” slogans that appeared during protests show that some citizens still view dynastic restoration as a possible option. These all provide internal support for secular monarchical revival.
Overseas and Historical Legacy
Overseas, large numbers of Iranian exiles hold expectations for Reza Pahlavi and actively participate in related activities. From a conservative perspective, a secular monarchy that can inherit historical traditions while adapting to modern social development often brings more lasting stability and order than post-revolutionary republican governments. Pahlavi dynasty restoration would not only end the chaotic export of theocratic rule but also provide Iran with a legitimacy foundation consistent with its historical context.
Of course, the path to restoration faces tremendous challenges: the Revolutionary Guard’s powerful military force and political-economic influence may constitute armed resistance, and people who have been subjected to long-term ideological indoctrination may not broadly accept monarchical restoration.
Conclusion: Iran’s Future—A Choice Between Order and Stability
As of June 13, 2025, Iran’s situation remains tense but not completely out of control. Iran has launched over 100 drones in retaliation, with the Israeli Air Force currently intercepting these drones outside Israeli borders. Reports indicate that Israel’s cabinet is evaluating next steps, possibly including open support for anti-theocratic forces.
The risks of this action are obvious: Iranian proxy organizations may further retaliate; if regime change lacks military support and legitimacy mechanisms, it could repeat the post-2003 Iraq turmoil; Iran’s existing system still possesses strong resistance capabilities. For an action aimed at stabilizing regional order, how to precisely and effectively promote transition while avoiding large-scale chaos will be the greatest challenge.
While Iran’s “philosopher king” system has demonstrated governing resilience, its subversive regional export has made it a primary threat to regional stability. The international community should move beyond simple binary oppositions of “anti-Western” or “autocratic tyranny” to more deeply understand Iran’s theocratic essence and its actual harm to other Islamic countries.
In the long term, only a secular monarchy that can inherit historical traditions while adapting to modern social development can replace the “philosopher king” style theocratic republic, bringing Iran more lasting stability while also bringing prosperity and peace—this is the order that conservatism desires.
The coming weeks will be a critical observation window. Can Reza Pahlavi integrate supporting forces? Can Iran’s regime resilience once again resolve challenges? These questions await time’s answers.
