The concept of an "Islamic government" was deliberately left undefined. This vagueness allowed various anti-Shah groups—from secular liberals to Marxists—to project their own hopes onto the revolution, creating a broad but fragile coalition. The lack of detail was a feature, not a bug.

Related Insights

Kicked out of Iraq, Khomeini landed in Paris. This unexpected move gave him unprecedented access to the world's press, turning him into an international figure and allowing him to broadcast his revolutionary message globally, which was crucial for his success.

While appearing as a traditionalist, Khomeini's core concept, the "Guardianship of the Jurist," was a profound theological revolution. It proposed for the first time that clerics should directly rule the state, breaking with centuries of Shiite political quietism. This innovation provided the ideological basis for the new republic.

The ruling elite has inverted from 80% ideologues at the revolution's start to 80% charlatans today. Expedience and financial gain, not revolutionary zeal, now bind the regime's core. This ideological hollowness makes the regime more brittle than its rhetoric suggests.

The Iranian Revolution was fueled by a Shia worldview centered on martyrdom, cosmic struggle between good and evil, and an apocalyptic final battle. U.S. policymakers, lacking any understanding of this religious framework, were completely unprepared for its political power.

Prominent Western left-wing intellectuals were initially supportive of Ayatollah Khomeini. They were drawn to his anti-imperialist rhetoric about "the disinherited of the earth," mistakenly projecting their own ideals onto him and predicting he would usher in a "humane" form of governance.

The Shah was seen as a repressive autocrat, yet he was indecisive when confronted with mass protests, partly due to his illness. This politically toxic combination alienated the people through repression while emboldening them through weakness, creating the perfect conditions for his downfall.

The Shah’s modernization efforts, including land reform and expanded state education, were intended to build popular support. Instead, they backfired by threatening the economic base and social authority of the powerful clerical class, turning them into organized opponents.

Dara Khosrowshahi theorizes the Shah of Iran's regime collapsed because he modernized too fast, focused excessively on military power over industrial growth, and failed to bring along rural populations and integrate Islam into his vision, creating a power vacuum for the Islamic regime to exploit.

Ayatollah Khomeini's political genius was blending traditional religious conservatism with the era's fashionable anti-colonial nationalism. By framing the Shah as an American and Israeli puppet, he mobilized a broad coalition beyond just the deeply religious.

Despite widespread internal protests and instability, history shows that an external attack is one of the few things that can unify the Iranian population. A potential Israeli strike, meant to weaken the regime, could backfire by creating a 'rally 'round the flag' effect that shores up support for the Ayatollah.