On the Anniversary of Iran’s Revolution: Key Lessons for Revolutionaries

Farhang Jahanpour

TFF Associate, former Board member

February 11, 2026

Oxford (Special to Informed Comment; Feature) – Today, 11 February, marks the 47th anniversary of the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, and coincidentally, it also marks the 15th anniversary of the ousting of Hosni Mubarak after 30 years of oppressive rule. There were some other uprisings during what came to be known as the Arab Spring, which resulted in the ousting of ruling dictators. Undeterred, Iranian leaders, after the terrible carnage in January this year, are making big plans to celebrate the anniversary of the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Many people optimistically assume that massive popular revolutions against dictators will automatically result in the establishment of democratic governments. Unfortunately, the aftermath of the Iranian revolution and the massive uprisings by Arab masses during the so-called Arab Spring have led to the establishment of even worse regimes.

Far from resulting in the establishment of democracy, human rights and the rule of law, the 1979 Iranian revolution replaced the Shah’s dictatorship with an autocratic and reactionary religious dictatorship that last month resorted to extreme violence, killing thousands. Its religious pretensions have won the support and loyalty of more religious sections of the society, which has made its ouster much more difficult.

Several Arab regimes which have come to power in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria, Yemen and elsewhere as a result of Arab uprisings have proved to be more efficient dictatorships, often backed by the West. Practically, throughout the Arab world, we have several intimidated, oppressive and subservient regimes that have betrayed their people and have become open vassals of more openly aggressive US governments. After these experiences of failure, it is time to study the reasons for their failure so as not to repeat their mistakes.

The spark of the revolution in Tunisia was an altercation on 17 December 2010 between a young fruit seller named Mohamed Bouazizi and a policewoman called Faida Hamdy. Soon, demonstrations erupted in several cities and in less than a month, on 14 January 2011, they had succeeded in toppling President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, one of the most autocratic rulers in North Africa, after 23 years in office.

Massive demonstrations in Tahrir (Liberation) Square in Cairo, starting on 25 January 2015, marked the start of the revolution in Egypt, and in less than three weeks, Hosni Mubarak, who had ruled Egypt for 30 years with Western backing, was toppled. It is interesting to note that exactly 65 years earlier, on 25 January 1952, the Egyptian police in Ismailia fought against the British forces by refusing British demands to evacuate the Suez Canal Zone. That event marked the beginning of the Young Officers’ Uprising. That day was traditionally celebrated in Egypt as the “Police Day”, but after the massacres in Tahrir Square, it came to be known as the “Day of Rage”.

In the first post-Mubarak democratic election held in Egypt on 23 and 24 May 2012, with a voter turnout of 46%, the results were split between five major candidates. In the second round, held on 16 and 17 June with 52% turnout, Mohamed Morsi, the candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood, won with 13,320,131 votes or 51.73% of the votes cast.

Despite many international observers declaring Egypt’s first democratic election in its long history to have been fair and free, the military under General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi staged a coup on 3 July 2013, deposed and imprisoned President Morsi who died in jail, suspended the constitution and started a violent nationwide campaign against the members of the Muslim Brotherhood, killing and wounding thousands of demonstrators who opposed the coup.

According to the Egyptian Health Ministry, 638 demonstrators were killed on 14 August, including 595 civilians and 43 police officers, but Human Rights Watch announced that its investigations revealed the killing of many more people: “At least 1,400 protesters have been killed in protests and political violence as a result, and most likely scores more.” While the West had cut off all aid to Morsi’s government, after a short pause, it resumed aid to the leader of the military coup, General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi.

The Algerian War of Independence against the French, also known as the Algerian Revolution, started on 1 November 1954 (All Saints Day). The war caused the deaths of up to 1.5 million Algerians, 25,600 French soldiers, and 6,000 Europeans. French soldiers committed many war crimes, including massacres of civilians, rape and torture. The French destroyed 8,000 villages, and over 2 million Algerians were displaced. However, after all those sacrifices, the Algerians achieved their independence on 19 March 1962, more than seven years after the start of the revolution.

The “Libyan Revolution” against Muammar al-Gaddafi’s four-decade rule started on February 15, 2011, with initially peaceful anti-government rallies held in Benghazi on February 15, 2011, by protesters angered by the arrest of a human rights lawyer, Fethi Tarbel. The protests intensified and became more violent.

Western powers showed solidarity with the protestors and condemned the regime’s violence against them. On February 28, the United States froze at least $30 billion in Libyan assets. Eventually, Western states planned military intervention, allegedly to prevent the massacre of protestors by Gaddafi’s forces. The African Union (AU) rejected any military intervention in Libya, asserting that the crisis should be resolved through negotiations.

Meanwhile, Gaddafi’s forces seemed to be gaining the upper hand and advanced on the remaining rebel positions in Benghazi and Tobruk in the east and Misurata in the west. But Western countries pushed a resolution at the UN Security Council to authorize military action, including the imposition of a no-fly zone to protect Libyan civilians. Beginning March 19, a coalition of U.S., UK and French forces with warplanes and cruise missiles attacked targets in Libya, and on March 27, NATO forces officially took command of military operations. On October 20, Gaddafi was seized and killed by rebel fighters, supported by Western forces.

All those revolutions started with a great deal of hope and optimism for real change. The most famous lines of a Tunisian poem, “when the people decide to live, destiny will obey, and chains will be broken”, became the anthem of young protestors in Tunisia and Egypt. That sentiment was echoed in the chant of the Egyptian protestors in Tahrir Square: “The Egyptian nation has decided to topple the regime.” The term that was used most often by the demonstrators was karama, or dignity. They wished to regain their dignity as free and independent individuals and not as oppressed masses.

It is clear that a number of domestic mistakes, and opportunism by Western governments, have been responsible for the tragic failure of those revolutions. There were many false assumptions common to all those revolutions, but I will only refer to a couple of them.

The first mistake was a naïve belief that the revolution would be definitely benevolent and would change society for the better. This excessive optimism meant that the revolutionaries were not prepared to examine the real alternatives and work towards achieving them. At the height of the Iranian revolution, I met a good friend who had become very active in anti-Shah protests and would have been severely punished if the revolution had failed. He was a popular university professor who had been a member of the Communist Tudeh Party, but as he became a successful professor with two houses, he seemed to have changed his loyalties. Yet, during the revolution, he had suddenly reverted to his roots and had become an extreme leftist.

When I saw him, he turned to me and in a sarcastic and contemptuous tone said: “We do not see you in our meetings and demonstrations very often.” I replied: “My dear friend, you are a very intelligent person with a background in liberal and leftist causes. Do you know where you are taking the people now? Have you read anything by Ayatollah Khomeini and do you support his views? What do you want to put in the place of the current regime if you succeed in toppling it?”

To my surprise, he became angry and said: “Even asking that question is treason to the revolution. At the moment, the only duty of all progressive forces is to topple the Shah’s regime. The mullahs do not know anything about politics, but they are useful in mobilising the masses. Once we topple the Shah, we will send Khomeini and the rest of the mullahs to their mosques and seminaries and we will rule.” Unfortunately, Khomeini had other ideas. After the revolution, he decimated the leftist forces in a way that could never have been dreamed of by the Shah. Despite all his services in mobilising the students, my friend too had to flee the country in fear for his life.

Sadly, this is still very much the case with the current uprising in Iran and in many Arab countries. Any question about the aim of the revolution and any possible alternative to the current regime is regarded as unforgiveable treason.

The second major mistake of all those revolutions was a naïve belief in the good intentions of Western leaders and their alleged support for democracy and human rights. Practically, all the leaders of Middle Eastern revolutions believe that they would receive Western backing for opposing dictatorial regimes.

After many decades of exploitation of Iranian oil by the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company and the British government, giving Iran a very small share of the oil revenue, the nationalist Iranian prime minister Dr Mohammad Mosaddeq decided to nationalise Iranian oil, with massive support in the Majlis or Iranian Parliament. That decision caused an uproar in the United Kingdom, whose secret service, the MI6, drew up plans to topple him.

During the oil nationalization period and early years of his government, Mosaddeq looked to the United States as an ally in his struggle to throw away the yoke of imperialism. It also served the American purpose of wishing to get a foothold in Middle East oil that was mainly controlled by British concessions. Right to the end, Mosaddeq believed that the United States government would side with him in his disagreement with the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. The Shah dismissed Mosaddeq and appointed a veteran politician Ahmad Qavam, better known as Qavam ol-Saltaneh, as prime minister. Virtually, the entire nation rose up with massive demonstrations, and only three days later, the Shah was forced to reinstate Mosaddeq.

However, the CIA and the MI6 organised a coup in August 1953, and brought back the Shah who had fled into exile and restored him to power. They organised mass demonstrations, led by a gang leader Sha’ban Ja’fari, known as Sha’ban Bimokh (Brainless). Mosaddeq was imprisoned and many of his supporters were also jailed or killed.


Photo of Azadi Tower, Tehran, by Alireza Heydarifard on Unsplash

I translated the first two volumes of the Memoirs of my late friend, Ardeshir Zahedi, the late Shah’s son-in-law and the son of General Zahedi who led the coup. Zahedi also spent many years as ambassador to the United States and the UK. In the first volume of his memoir, which is devoted entirely to the coup, he maintains that the coup led by the CIA operative Kermit Roosevelt failed, and what happened later was a domestic military coup. Even if one accepts this version, there is no doubt that the idea of the coup was planned and executed by the CIA and MI6, but was very poorly implemented.

I vividly remember those events as a schoolboy. During those critical days of August 1953, a large number of villagers where we spent our summer vacation gathered around our radio to listen to the latest news bulletins. When, on 19th August, the national radio announced the fall of Mosaddeq’s government and General Zahedi asked the Shah to return to the country, many villagers ran widely through the village shouting, “The Shah is back”!

Mosaddeq was not universally popular and there was still a good deal of support for the Shah, especially in the rural areas and among the military and the clergy. However, the vast majority of the educated middle class backed Mosaddeq and his reforms and his downfall was seen as a great betrayal. After returning to school the following month, I noticed that many of our teachers were wearing black armbands as a sign of mourning, as there was still some level of freedom in the society.

The main conclusion is that uprisings and revolutions in developing countries are extremely complex and have a number of powerful opponents at home and abroad. They need to be planned with a great deal of care and the revolutionaries must open their eyes to realities.

Let us remember the words of a popular Tunisian poet, Abul-Qasim al-Shabi, in his poem “To the Tyrants of the World”:

“Wait, don’t let the spring, the clearness of the sky and the shine of the morning light fool you

Because the darkness, the thunder’s rumble and the blowing of the wind
are coming toward you from the horizon

Beware, because there is a fire underneath the ash.”

Farhang Jahanpour
Former Professor and Dean of the Faculty of Languages, University of Isfahan; former lecturer at Cambridge, Harvard and Oxford universities; retired Editor for Middle East and North Africa, BBC Monitoring.

Related Posts

Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Jan ObergPhD, director, The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, TFFLund, Sweden October 2, 2026 This is my full original manuscript. The Chinese Academy of Social Science, CASS, makes two publications out if it. 1. China’s Five-year plan emphasized the capabilities of basic research and original innovation. It is regarded as the goal of the future social development, which, as required, should be significantly enhanced. Can you comment on the importance of original innovation in research and academic study? I believe it is easier to define “original innovation” in the natural sciences than in social sciences. The breaking points of what constitutes something new, or innovative, are not quite as sharp in the latter. But in both fields it is about opening up something that was closed, unseen, unexplored before – making manifest what was earlier latent. Innovations come in many forms and shapes – naming something that was not...
The agreement is catastrophic both because of what it says and what it doesn’t mention. It reduces further the major asset of security policies: Freedom of action. Jan Oberg TFF director September 25, 2026 A couple of hours before the agreement was signed on September 22, 2026, I published the following 13 hypotheses about what it would most likely contain on TFF Substack (in English). I was wrong on only the first point. Contrary to what Trump had written on his Truth Social platform, it does not appear to come into force immediately. In fact, it turned out to be worse than even I had anticipated. After these hypotheses now come a number of reflections in light of what the agreement actually contains, and does not contain, as well as the way in which it has generally been presented by major media outlets and by the public-service broadcaster DR. My...

Recent Articles

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...

TFF on Substack

Discover and subscribe to more peace materials on TFF Substack

Most Popular

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Read More
Living-Peace-Sign-Budapest-copy
Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
b54a1f10-8c65-4f0b-9dd5-4abc0a7d04cc_2659x2659
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
010
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Screenshot 2026-10-02 011738
Jan ObergPhD, director, The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, TFFLund, Sweden October 2, 2026 This is my full original manuscript. The Chinese Academy of Social Science, CASS, makes two publications out if it. 1. China’s Five-year plan emphasized the capabilities of basic research and original innovation. It is regarded as the goal of the future social development, which, as required, should be significantly enhanced. Can you comment on the importance of original innovation in research and academic study? I believe it is easier to define “original innovation” in the natural sciences than in social sciences. The breaking points of what constitutes something new, or innovative, are not quite as sharp in the latter. But in both fields it is about opening up something that was closed, unseen, unexplored before – making manifest what was earlier latent. Innovations come in many forms and shapes – naming something that was not...
arctic-circle-map
The agreement is catastrophic both because of what it says and what it doesn’t mention. It reduces further the major asset of security policies: Freedom of action. Jan Oberg TFF director September 25, 2026 A couple of hours before the agreement was signed on September 22, 2026, I published the following 13 hypotheses about what it would most likely contain on TFF Substack (in English). I was wrong on only the first point. Contrary to what Trump had written on his Truth Social platform, it does not appear to come into force immediately. In fact, it turned out to be worse than even I had anticipated. After these hypotheses now come a number of reflections in light of what the agreement actually contains, and does not contain, as well as the way in which it has generally been presented by major media outlets and by the public-service broadcaster DR. My...
girl-5894831_1280
Below are TFF-related media mentions, comments, videos and social media posts published elsewhere but not on this homepage. We happen to catch and list only a fraction. Regarding video comments and debates, we recommend that you go to the TFF Video Channel on Substack where many of them are reproduced. Jan Oberg is a contributor to China Daily – 52 million daily clicks – and Global Times, CGTN and CCTV (the national television), China Investment, Xinhua News Agency and several others. Articles and videos on these media very often multiply into countless Chinese (and Western media) that re-post them from these main media. Thanks to The China Academy, his analyses, interviews and comments are frequently posted on YouTube channels such as Thinkers Forum and Wave Media. These videos are often re-posted on Bilibili (China’s YouTube), the China Content Center on TikTok, and on the Chinese edition of TikTok, Douyin.com. This means reaching hundreds of millions of viewers worldwide over a year. While there are too many to catch on all these...