AHC WI: No 1979 Iranian Revolution

What if the Pahlavi dynasty and the Shah was not overthrown and replaced with an Islamist theocracy? How could this be done? How would a pro-US Iran influence the Middle East and the world? Would political Islam be as influential without the revolution? What if?
 
I have searched, this on AH.com as well, here are the answers, and also according to official documents:

1.) Having Khomeini killed will make the Islamist turn to theocracy impossible. It was because of Khomeini's hijacking that Iran turned Islamist.
(Do you know Khomeini was an obscure figure by the 1970s, that only an article in January 1978 made him known again?) Butterfly this, and you will not have the immediate cause of the protests.

2.) Having the status quo in place, so you won't have much protests for the late 1970s. But by 1980, the Shah will die. So his death sparks protests in Iran, but because the Islamists don't have a rallying figure, they don't take power in IOTL. Then, the new Shah, Reza Pahlavi, along with Empress Farah, acquiesces to the demands of the liberal opposition. He then pulls back the repressive acts of his father, and scales down some reforms that anger the Shia clergy and many in the muslim population.

3.) Having a pro-US Iran will butterfly away the Iran-Iraq war (no Khomeini purges), so much more peaceful Middle East).

4.) The Soviets will invade Afghanistan anyway, but it depends on the circumstances. [If Taraki (the moderate in the PDPA) manages to negotiate with the Muslim population of Afghanistan to scale down the reforms, the most extreme ones, we might have the Soviets win there in 1980, so more stable USSR, but Iran may or may not intervene]. Not sure what will happen here though. But since oil prices will not go through the roof, the Soviets will have less money, so maybe more sweeping economic reforms in the early 1980s. It could go either way.

5.) Political Islam will certainly be much less influential here.

6.) So in the long run, Iran turns to a democracy.
 
At home, Carter has a better shot at re election as there won't be a hostage crisis.

There is still a recession. So I think Carter still loses, but by a narrower margin. He carries Massachusettes, Rhode Island, New York, Delaware, Maryland, District of Columbia, Weat Virginia, North Carolina,South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louissna, Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky, Minnasota and Hawaii. Reagan is declare the winner after10pn. He has much Leeds of a mandate.
 
There is still a recession. So I think Carter still loses, but by a narrower margin. He carries Massachusettes, Rhode Island, New York, Delaware, Maryland, District of Columbia, Weat Virginia, North Carolina,South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louissna, Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky, Minnasota and Hawaii. Reagan is declare the winner after10pn. He has much Leeds of a mandate.

Well the election was close til october wasnt it? I think Carter may win it.
 
There is still a recession. So I think Carter still loses, but by a narrower margin. He carries Massachusettes, Rhode Island, New York, Delaware, Maryland, District of Columbia, Weat Virginia, North Carolina,South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louissna, Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky, Minnasota and Hawaii. Reagan is declare the winner after10pn. He has much Leeds of a mandate.

The economy was bad because of the Iran crisis. Prior to the revolution, the economy was recovering fairly well from the 1974-5 recession, with GNP and job growth fairly strong even if inflation remained somewhat high (though still well down from the highs of the early 1970s).

The revolution caused Iran's oil production to collapse, causing a massive supply shock, which sent oil prices surging. That caused inflation to surge back to double digits, which prompted Carter to appoint Volcker, who proceeded to jack up interest rates to kill inflation. That induced a sharp recession, leading unemployment to spike.

So absent the Iranian revolution, the economy likely remains fairly strong going into 1980.
 
So the race is about 1976-level close, I can see Carter winning. But, what about the alternate course of Iran and the Middle East? There would be no Iran-Iraq War, IMO, and therefore no Gulf Wars, so Saddam and his sons probably retain a brutal hold on Iraq to this day. Anymore ideas?
 
So the race is about 1976-level close, I can see Carter winning. But, what about the alternate course of Iran and the Middle East? There would be no Iran-Iraq War, IMO, and therefore no Gulf Wars, so Saddam and his sons probably retain a brutal hold on Iraq to this day. Anymore ideas?

I agree with the Iran Iraq war thing, but if for whatever reason it still happens, it's much briefer and if no revolution means Iran stays an ally, than we side with Iran. The middle east as a whole is less radical and more stable than it is today if there's no revolution.
 
I do think this would make a pretty interesting timeline. Not only because of how it would affect politics at home, but because of how it would affect the world as a whole.
 
Top