By Amr Gohar
Washington DC – Rudy Giuliani, former mayor of New York City, sharply criticized Reza Pahlavi after Pahlavi declared himself Iran’s “transitional leader,” warning that such a move could further complicate the country’s already volatile political situation.
According to a series of posts published on Giuliani’s official social media account, the former mayor described Pahlavi’s announcement as a “dangerous step” and a “recipe for disaster,” arguing that unilateral declarations of leadership risk deepening divisions rather than advancing democratic change.
“A Risky Move at a Sensitive Stage”
In his online remarks, Giuliani stated that Iran is going through a highly sensitive phase that requires unity and broad legitimacy. He warned that individual efforts to install transitional leadership without national consensus could further destabilize the political landscape.
He emphasized that democratic transformation must be rooted in the will of the Iranian people, not shaped by inherited titles or self-appointment.
“No Return to Monarchy”
Giuliani also asserted that Iranians would not accept replacing the current religious establishment with what he characterized as a return to monarchical dictatorship. He referenced the 1979 revolution as a popular rejection of autocratic rule, arguing that today’s protests are centered on freedom and self-determination.
Questioning Popular Support
In his posts, Giuliani questioned Pahlavi’s domestic support, stating that he lacks meaningful backing inside Iran. He pointed to the historical legacy of the Shah’s era, describing it as marked by repression and centralized authority.
“An Insult to Sacrifice”
Concluding his remarks, Giuliani criticized what he described as Pahlavi’s privileged life abroad, saying that attempts to claim leadership without a broad mandate could be viewed as dismissive of the sacrifices made by Iranians currently demanding change.
The comments have added to growing debate among opposition circles over the future political structure of Iran, as different factions continue to present competing visions for a post-clerical system.