Exiled Crown Prince Wants President Trump to Diverge From “America First” and “Intervene Sooner” in Iran

Iran’s streets are ablaze with protests that began late last month over the rial’s freefall, now trading at over 1.4 million to the dollar, a stark symbol of the regime’s economic failures. Security forces have responded with lethal force, killing more than 500 demonstrators and arresting thousands, according to human rights groups like Amnesty International. Amid this chaos, exiled Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi has emerged as a vocal advocate for change, positioning himself as a potential guide for a post-regime Iran.

Pahlavi, son of the last shah deposed in the 1979 revolution, has spent nearly five decades outside his homeland. In a recent CBS News interview, he described his role as “a bridge and not the destination,” responding to chants of his name during the uprisings.

He expressed readiness to sacrifice everything, saying, “How could I not possibly be prepared to die for them? To die for liberty, to die for saving our nation? I’m prepared to do that.”

This is his fight. It’s the Iranian people’s fight. One can argue that other interested parties in the Middle East, from Saudi Arabia to Israel, might view it as their fight. But for America First patriots, getting involved in another fight in the quagmire should be avoided at all costs. We can cheer for the prince and his people but we don’t want to participate.

The prince sees the current unrest as different from past demonstrations. “Today, the ask is not just for reform, or for that matter, an economic demand. It is now putting an end to this regime,” he stated. “This is really the revolution in its true sense of the word.” He accused the ayatollahs of sustaining power through repression and deceptive negotiations, urging swift action to avoid more bloodshed.

Pahlavi directly appealed to President Trump, praising him as a “game-changer” who means what he says and says what he means. “We need action to be taken,” the prince said, pushing for U.S. support to help the regime “finally collapses.” He has communicated with the administration, though details remain private, and noted Trump’s solidarity with the Iranian people means backing their demand for the regime’s removal.

Trump has signaled openness to tough measures. After Iranian officials reached out for talks, he warned of hitting them “very hard where it hurts,” without committing to ground troops. White House statements confirm all options, including airstrikes, are on the table. However, reports indicate Trump has declined a meeting with Pahlavi for now, deeming it inappropriate amid the volatility.

The regime’s grip appears weaker than ever, fueled by years of sanctions, mismanagement, and proxy wars that drain resources. Iran’s backing of groups like Hezbollah and Hamas has isolated it further, while its nuclear ambitions threaten global stability. Some observers whisper that lingering influences from previous administrations—those soft on Tehran—emboldened the mullahs, allowing corruption and terror networks to flourish unchecked.

For Iran’s persecuted minorities, including Christians facing imprisonment for their faith, regime change could open doors to true freedom. Biblical accounts of ancient Persia remind us of a land once known for tolerance under leaders like Cyrus, who freed captives and respected beliefs—a far cry from today’s theocracy.

If the U.S. acts decisively, as Pahlavi advocates, it could tip the scales toward a democratic Iran, ending decades of oppression and reducing threats to allies like Israel. The protesters’ courage demands no less; their fight against tyranny echoes timeless calls for justice and liberty.

But this is still not our fight. For patriotic Americans, even those opposed to the Ayatollah’s regime, direct intervention is a bridge too far. We can cheer for and even pray for the protesters and hope that this leads to changes in the Middle East country, but committing any form of direct engagement does not align with the America First stance.