The Diplomate Media – Printed on 25/04/2026
By the editorial staff of The Diplomate Media
A great civilization before the Islamic Republic
In the midst of the conflict between the United States, Israel, and Iran reshaping the balance in the Middle East and even globally, it is important to remember a fact that is all too often forgotten: Iran is not limited to the Islamic Republic or its militias. Iran is first and foremost the heir to one of the oldest and most refined civilizations in the world. From the Achaemenid Empire founded by Cyrus to the Parthians and then the Sassanids, Persia has carried a lasting idea of the state, administration, diplomacy, and imperial power. The Safavids, starting from the sixteenth century, then reconstituted a national Iranian framework by making duodecimal Shiism the state religion, a major element in the emergence of a unified Iranian political consciousness.
This is precisely why Iranian history precludes simplifications. Persia did not only produce an empire; it carried a vision of civilizational continuity. This historical depth explains why Iran has remained, despite invasions, conquests, and dynastic ruptures, a power of synthesis, culture, and regional balance. Even the Islamization of the country did not erase this ancient Persian foundation; on the contrary, it was grafted onto a political and cultural matrix that was much older than the Islamic Republic born in 1979.
Persians and Jews: a long and fruitful relationship
It is also this long duration that sheds light on the often positive relations between Persians and Jews. When Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539 BC, he allowed the exiled Jews to return to Judah and rebuild their Temple; in Jewish memory, this gesture left a decisive mark. More broadly, the Judeo-Persian communities were deeply rooted in the Iranian and Mesopotamian space, such that, under the Parthians and then the Sassanids, the Jews had been living under Iranian sovereignty for centuries. Persian influence has also left a lasting impression on certain aspects of Rabbinic Judaism.
It is certainly not about idealizing all of Iranian history; there were also discriminations, especially during certain pre-modern periods. But in the long run, the Persian world often provided the Jews with historical continuity, coexistence, and sometimes even superior protection compared to other spaces in the Near East. This historical reality still weighs heavily in the strategic memory of the region.
The Shah, Israel, and the geopolitics of the peripheries
This historical depth helps to understand another fact that is often obscured by present ideological passions: between 1948 and 1979, the Shah’s Iran and Israel maintained strategic relations, albeit often discreetly. This rapprochement responded to a clear geopolitical logic: Iran was a non-Arab and non-Sunni power seeking security and influence partnerships in its regional environment. Added to this was the existence of a significant Jewish community in Iran (paradoxically still present in the country and the largest in the Arab-Muslim world) and ancient human ties between the two societies. The Iranian-Israeli alliance under Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was not an anomaly but rather a convergence of interests consistent with the long history of Persia.
The Pahlavi regime also aimed at national modernization. The “White Revolution,” launched in 1963, aimed to transform the country through economic, social, and administrative reforms. It modernized Iran but also disrupted rural areas, accelerated urbanization, weakened traditional structures, and fueled opposition that was both political, social, and religious. It is within this tension that one must read the destabilization of the Shah’s regime.
1979: the Islamic Revolution and Western blindness
The turning point in 1979 was therefore, in the strict sense, a historical confiscation. The revolution did not only overthrow an authoritarian monarch; it replaced a modernizing national state with a revolutionary theocracy structured around the velayat-e faqih, that is, clerical-jurist sovereignty. The tragedy is that the West bears a double responsibility in this sequence. First, because of its past: the 1953 coup, orchestrated with American and British support against Mossadegh, durably nurtured anti-Western resentment. And then by its blindness in 1978-1979: a portion of Western elites wanted to see in Khomeini a mere moral or spiritual opponent, failing to understand that he carried a radical theocratic project.
France itself played a significant role in this sequence. Arriving near Paris on October 6, 1978, Khomeini, wrongly considered by the entire intellectual and leftist academic circles as a “Wise Man” and the new “Che Guevara” of oppressed peoples, then settled in Neauphle-le-Château, from where he could freely broadcast his messages to the world before his triumphant return to Tehran on February 1, 1979. For the West, this was a major analytical mistake: many did not see that they were offering a powerful sounding board to a religious revolution that would quickly liquidate liberals, marginalize and assassinate moderates, and establish a total theocratic power (see Roland Lombardi’s book, Director of The Diplomate Media).
Since 1979, the real Persia subordinated to the ideology of the mullahs
Since then, the Islamic Republic has continued to subordinate real Iran to an ideological project. The grandeur of Persia, its vocation for balance, diplomatic genius, and national interest have been overshadowed by an export revolutionary logic inspired by the Muslim Brotherhood and adapted to Shiism. The regime has been built around the Supreme Leader, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, and its Quds Force, which organizes and supports armed networks abroad; all of this has fueled what is now called the “Axis of Resistance,” including Hezbollah, the Houthis, Hamas, and other allied militias. In passing, the “Palestinian cause” is nothing more than a mere “business card” for the mullahs in Tehran in the Sunni Muslim world. It is no longer Persia speaking; it is an ideological apparatus that instrumentalizes the Iranian nation in the service of a strategy of permanent regional destabilization and terrorism.
The current conflict should not overshadow Iran’s long history
The current conflict brutally reminds us of this. On April 22, 2026, Washington announced the indefinite extension of the ceasefire with Iran to allow for further negotiations, without clear indications that Tehran or Israel are fully on board. But this crisis should not lead to conflating Iran with the regime that governs it. The Islamic Republic is not the natural outcome of Persian history; it is the ideological twist of it. It has transformed a great civilization, long capable of diplomacy, coexistence, and balance, into a power of confrontation, attrition, and nuisance.
This is why the Iranian question must be approached with rigor. It is not about being “for” or “against” Iran, but about distinguishing Persia from Khomeini, the Iranian nation from the revolutionary machine, the long history of a people from the ideology that has taken it hostage since 1979. As long as this distinction is not made, the West will continue to misunderstand Iran, just as it misunderstood the Islamic Revolution when it was taking shape. And as long as it lasts, the Islamic Republic will continue to make the region pay – and first and foremost the Iranians themselves – for this immense historical confiscation. And as Roland Lombardi wrote in his editorial on July 7th, the great Persia will surely absorb Shiite fundamentalism in the end; but until then, this great country and its people may still have to go through very dark hours.
—
Tags:
Iran, Persia, Iranian History, Geopolitics, Middle East, Iranian Revolution, Khomeini, Shah, Persian Empire, Persian Civilization, Iran 1979, International Relations, Strategy, Diplomacy, Iran Conflict, Israel-Iran, USA-Iran, Geopolitical Analysis, World History, Regional Power, Axis of Resistance, Shiism, Political Islam, Revolutionary Guard, Geostrategy, Ancient Iran, Ancient Persia, Safavids, Achaemenids, Sassanids, Parthians, Modern Iran, Middle East Crisis, Regional Balance, International Politics, Iranian Nation, Theocracy, Iranian Power, Historical Analysis
—
