Fact check: The REAL reason the US can’t beat Iran

The REAL reason the US can’t beat Iran

Original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DDbYSg0Alw

Fact checked on: August 21, 2026

Fact Check Analysis

Verdict

The transcript presents a broadly recognizable account of Iran’s modern history: foreign intervention, oil politics, the 1953 coup, the 1979 Revolution, and the Islamic Republic’s hybrid political system. However, it contains several important factual errors, misleading causal claims, exaggerated figures, and present-day assertions that require qualification.

Checked claims

“The regime has controlled [Iran] for almost 15 years.” — False. The Islamic Republic was established in 1979 and has governed Iran for approximately 47 years as of 2026. The apparent reference to “almost 15 years” may reflect a transcription or editing error.
“At least 65 people have been killed in demonstrations that began in Tehran almost two weeks ago.” — Unverifiable without the broadcast date. The wording appears to quote a contemporary news report, but no date or event is supplied. Several Iranian protest waves have produced figures in this range.
“Some 60 Americans bound and blindfolded are beginning their sixth day of captivity inside the U.S. Embassy in Tehran.” — Partly true. During the Iran hostage crisis, 52 Americans were ultimately held hostage, not approximately 60. The embassy seizure began on November 4, 1979. Some reports initially gave different numbers, and 66 people were seized at first, but 13 women and African American hostages were later released, leaving 52.
“More than 3,000 people have been killed according to the World Health Organization.” — Unverifiable and potentially misleading. The relevant crisis is not identified. The WHO has reported health and mortality information for some conflicts, but casualty figures in Iranian protest movements are often disputed and may come from Iranian authorities, opposition groups, or human-rights organizations rather than the WHO.
“For most of its history, Iran was a superpower.” — Partly true, but overly broad. Persian empires—including the Achaemenid, Parthian, and Sasanian empires—were major regional or world powers. Iran was not continuously a superpower throughout its entire history, and the term has a specific modern meaning that does not map neatly onto ancient empires.
“The Qajars ruled Iran in 1800.” — True. The Qajar dynasty ruled Iran from the late eighteenth century until 1925.
“Russia easily defeats Iran in a few wars.” — Misleading. Russia defeated Qajar Iran in the Russo-Persian Wars of 1804–1813 and 1826–1828. The wars were consequential, but “easily” oversimplifies the military and political history.
“Russia took the land and got access to the seas.” — Mostly true, with imprecise wording. The treaties of Gulistan in 1813 and Turkmenchay in 1828 forced Iran to surrender large territories in the Caucasus, including areas corresponding to modern Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. Russia gained dominant naval rights in the Caspian Sea, but this did not give it general access to all Iranian seas or automatically provide control of the Persian Gulf.
“Russian merchants did not have to comply with Iranian law.” — Partly true. The Treaty of Turkmenchay granted Russian subjects important extraterritorial and commercial privileges. The statement compresses a complex legal arrangement and should not be understood as unlimited immunity for every Russian merchant.
“Iran had to pay Russia back for the war.” — True. The Treaty of Turkmenchay imposed a substantial indemnity on Iran.
“The British fought several wars with Iran to stop it from getting the key to India.” — Partly true, but causally overstated. Britain fought Iran in the Anglo-Persian War of 1856–1857, largely over Iranian attempts to regain control of Herat. British policy was shaped by fears about Russian expansion and the defense of India. Britain did not fight a series of wars simply to prevent Iran itself from acquiring Afghanistan.
“The Great Game was a competition for influence between Britain and Russia.” — Mostly true. The term generally describes nineteenth-century Anglo-Russian rivalry in Central Asia, especially concerning Afghanistan, Persia, and the approaches to India. It involved diplomacy, intelligence, exploration, and political pressure as well as military conflict.
“Iran sold foreign powers concessions, including monopolies, in exchange for money.” — True. Qajar rulers granted major concessions to foreign individuals and companies, often in return for payments, loans, or financial benefits. These arrangements generated strong opposition because they appeared to transfer control over national resources and economic activity.
“The British telegraph line sent messages from Iran to India in minutes.” — Partly true. Britain developed telegraph infrastructure connecting India with Europe through routes crossing or bordering Persia. Telegraphy reduced communication times dramatically, but the exact route, operating arrangements, and “minutes” claim depend on which segment is meant.
“In 1890, the Shah sold Britain a 50-year monopoly on tobacco.” — Mostly true, but incomplete. Nasir al-Din Shah granted the 1890 tobacco concession to Major Gerald Talbot. It gave a British-controlled company broad monopoly rights over the production, sale, and export of Iranian tobacco. The concession was cancelled after the Tobacco Protest, but describing it as simply “Britain” holding the monopoly obscures the role of a private concessionaire and the Iranian state.
“The Shah cancelled the tobacco agreement because of the protests.” — True. The Tobacco Protest of 1891–1892 forced the government to revoke the concession, though Iran later had to compensate the concession holder.
“Iran’s Constitutional Revolution began in 1905 and created a parliament.” — Mostly true. The Constitutional Revolution began in 1905 and led to the establishment of a constitution and the Majles, or parliament, in 1906. The movement sought to limit royal authority and establish rule through law.
“Russia sent 12,000 troops to fire on Parliament, killing hundreds of lawmakers.” — False or seriously misleading. In 1908, forces loyal to Mohammad Ali Shah, with assistance from the Russian-led Persian Cossack Brigade, bombarded the Majles in Tehran. The attack killed and arrested constitutionalists, but the claim that 12,000 Russian troops stormed the parliament and killed hundreds of lawmakers is not supported by the standard historical account. Russian forces later intervened more broadly, especially in northern Iran.
“Britain and Russia divided Iran into spheres of influence.” — True. The Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907 divided Persia into Russian, British, and nominally neutral zones. Iran was not meaningfully consulted.
“Oil rights were sold to an Englishman in 1901, and oil was found six years later.” — Mostly true. William Knox D’Arcy obtained a major oil concession in 1901. Oil was discovered at Masjed Soleyman in 1908 after years of unsuccessful exploration.
“The British Navy switched from coal to oil, making Iranian oil strategically vital.” — Mostly true. The Royal Navy’s shift toward oil, particularly under Winston Churchill’s leadership before World War I, made secure oil supplies strategically important. Iranian oil was one important source, though the transition was gradual and not solely dependent on Iran.
“The British established BP.” — Partly true. The Anglo-Persian Oil Company was founded in 1909 to exploit the D’Arcy concession. It was renamed the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company in 1935 and became British Petroleum in 1954.
“Iran declared neutrality in World War I, but the war ravaged the country.” — True. Iran declared neutrality, but Ottoman, Russian, and British forces operated on its territory. The conflict caused severe disruption, famine, disease, displacement, and economic devastation.
“At least two million Iranians died from food shortages and disease caused by World War I.” — Unverifiable and disputed. Iran suffered catastrophic wartime mortality, but estimates vary widely. Claims of two million or more deaths appear in some accounts, while other scholars argue that the evidence is insufficient for a precise national figure. The number should not be presented as settled fact.
“Reza Shah worked with parliament to remove the old Shah.” — Partly true. Reza Khan rose through a 1921 coup, became prime minister, and gradually accumulated power. The Qajar monarch, Ahmad Shah, was deposed by the Majles in 1925, after which Reza Khan became shah. This was not simply a cooperative parliamentary transition.
“Reza Shah banned women from wearing any kind of veil in 1936.” — Mostly true, but too absolute. His Kashf-e hijab policy, introduced in 1936, prohibited public veiling and was enforced coercively. It did not literally eliminate every form of covering in every setting, and enforcement varied. The policy was deeply controversial and caused some women to avoid public life.
“Reza Shah modernized Iran while crushing opposition.” — True. His government expanded state institutions, infrastructure, education, the military, and secular legal administration. It also restricted political parties, censored the press, imprisoned opponents, and used coercion against tribal and regional groups.
“He demanded that outsiders call the country Iran instead of Persia.” — Partly true. In 1935, the Iranian government requested that foreign governments use “Iran,” the country’s name in Persian, in official communications. “Persia” remained historically and culturally valid in many contexts and did not instantly disappear from English usage.
“Britain and the Soviet Union invaded Iran during World War II and forced Reza Shah into exile.” — True. British and Soviet forces invaded in August 1941, citing concerns about German influence and the security of supply routes to the Soviet Union. Reza Shah abdicated under pressure and went into exile, eventually dying in South Africa in 1944.
“They replaced him with his 22-year-old son.” — Mostly true. Mohammad Reza Pahlavi became shah in 1941 at age 21 by the usual Western reckoning, or 22 depending on the date and counting convention. Britain and the Soviet Union accepted his succession because he was considered less politically threatening.
“Iran was a strategic corridor for Allied supplies to the Soviet Union.” — True. The Persian Corridor became a major route for Allied assistance to the Soviet Union during World War II.
“The Shah was Britain’s installed friend.” — Partly true and oversimplified. Mohammad Reza Shah’s position depended heavily on the wartime actions of Britain and the Soviet Union, and he later became closely aligned with the United States. However, calling him simply “Britain’s shah” reduces Iranian political agency and the complicated relationship among the monarchy, parliament, Britain, the Soviet Union, and the United States.
“Iran received only 16% of the oil company’s profits.” — Partly true, but imprecise. Under the 1933 concession, Iran received royalties and other payments, not a straightforward 16% share of all company profits. The figure is often used in popular accounts to describe Iran’s limited financial return, but the accounting basis and comparison are disputed.
“Mosaddegh rejected a 50–50 deal and demanded complete control of oil.” — Mostly true, with important nuance. Mohammad Mosaddegh supported nationalization of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, which Iran’s parliament approved in 1951. Britain later offered improved terms, including a possible 50–50 arrangement, but Mosaddegh and his allies considered national ownership more important than a profit-sharing formula. The negotiations were complex and neither side alone bears responsibility for the collapse.
“The prime minister opposed to nationalization was assassinated.” — True, with clarification. Prime Minister Haj Ali Razmara was assassinated in March 1951 by Khalil Tahmasebi, associated with the Fada’iyan-e Islam. His opposition to immediate nationalization was a major political factor, but the assassination’s precise organizational responsibility and political context were contested.
“Britain boycotted Iranian oil and used naval pressure.” — Mostly true. Britain imposed an embargo and pursued legal and diplomatic measures against Iranian oil exports after nationalization. British warships were deployed in the Persian Gulf, although the precise purpose and operational scope should not be reduced to a simple blockade.
“The CIA and Britain overthrew Mosaddegh in 1953.” — True. The CIA and Britain organized and supported Operation Ajax, which helped bring about the August 1953 coup. Iranian actors—including the Shah, sections of the military, politicians, clerics, business interests, and street mobilizers—also played important roles. It was not an entirely foreign-controlled operation, but foreign intelligence involvement was decisive.
“The CIA allocated $12 million in today’s money.” — Unverifiable and likely misstated. Declassified records document substantial CIA funding for the coup, including money for propaganda, political contacts, and mobilization. The precise amount depends on whether the figure refers to nominal 1953 dollars or an inflation-adjusted estimate. The transcript gives no source and presents a disputed calculation as definite.
“The CIA bribed politicians, paid crowds, and funded newspapers.” — Substantially true, though simplified. Declassified documents show covert funding, propaganda, political influence, and efforts to mobilize anti-Mosaddegh forces. The scale and direct effect of each activity remain subjects of historical debate.
“The Shah returned and took total power.” — Partly true. After the coup, Mohammad Reza Shah greatly expanded his authority and ruled autocratically. Iran retained formal institutions such as parliament and elections, but political competition was heavily controlled and later reduced further under the one-party Rastakhiz system.
“The oil profits were divided 50–50 after the coup.” — Mostly true, but incomplete. The 1954 consortium agreement gave Iran a nominal 50% share of oil profits, while foreign companies retained substantial operational and commercial control. The arrangement was not equivalent to full national control.
“The CIA helped create the Shah’s secret police.” — Partly true. SAVAK was established in 1957 with assistance from the United States and Israel. It became the monarchy’s principal intelligence and security organization and was involved in surveillance, detention, torture, and suppression. Saying the CIA “created” it overstates the institutional origins but correctly identifies important foreign assistance.
“The Shah gave Americans legal immunity.” — Mostly true. In 1964, Iran approved a status-of-forces arrangement granting U.S. military personnel and certain dependents diplomatic-style immunity. The issue provoked strong opposition, including from Khomeini. It was not literally unrestricted immunity for every American in Iran.
“The Shah imposed Western dress and lifestyle on society.” — Partly true. The Pahlavi state promoted secularization, Western-oriented modernization, and changes in dress and public culture. However, “imposed” describes some policies accurately but generalizes across a diverse society and period.
“Khomeini’s speeches blamed imperialism and called for overthrowing the Shah.” — True. Khomeini strongly opposed the monarchy, U.S. influence, Israel, and foreign control, and he called for the Shah’s removal. The transcript’s quotations should be checked against authenticated Persian texts and translations, because wording can vary significantly.
“Khomeini spread sermons into Iran on cassette tapes.” — True. Recorded sermons and religious networks helped circulate his message during exile, although cassette tapes were one part of a broader communication system involving mosques, clerics, pamphlets, and political organizations.
“The Shah developed Iran’s economy, infrastructure, education, and military.” — True, with nuance. The Pahlavi state made major investments in infrastructure, education, public health, industrialization, and military capacity. These gains were unevenly distributed, accompanied by authoritarian rule, corruption, rapid social change, and substantial dependence on oil revenue.
“Iran became the world’s number-one buyer of military equipment.” — Likely true for some years, but requires qualification. Iran was among the largest arms buyers globally and was the biggest purchaser of U.S. arms during parts of the 1970s. The exact ranking depends on whether purchases are measured by value, volume, or period.
“The 1979 protests united people from all walks of life.” — Mostly true. The revolutionary coalition included religious activists, nationalists, leftists, liberals, bazaar merchants, workers, students, and many urban residents. These groups had sharply different visions for Iran, and Khomeini’s faction ultimately marginalized or suppressed many of them.
“The Shah fled in January 1979 and never returned.” — True. He left Iran on January 16, 1979, and did not return. He died in Egypt in 1980.
“Khomeini returned to Tehran and was greeted by millions.” — Broadly true. Khomeini returned on February 1, 1979, to enormous crowds. Estimates of crowd size vary, and “millions” is difficult to verify precisely.
“The revolutionaries seized 66 Americans and held them for over a year.” — Partly true. Sixty-six people were initially taken when the embassy was seized. Fifty-two hostages were held for 444 days, from November 1979 until January 1981. The distinction between those initially seized and those held long-term is essential.
“Khomeini dissolved the monarchy, parliament, and the old government.” — Partly true. The monarchy was abolished after the revolution, and the provisional government eventually gave way to the Islamic Republic. The Majles was not permanently abolished; a new parliament was established under the 1979 constitutional order. Existing institutions were suspended, transformed, or replaced rather than simply eliminated in every case.
“The Islamic Republic combines elections with unelected religious oversight.” — True. Iran holds elections for the presidency, parliament, and Assembly of Experts. The Supreme Leader is selected by the Assembly of Experts, while the Guardian Council vets candidates and reviews legislation. The system is therefore electoral but highly constrained and not a liberal democracy.
“The Supreme Leader appoints many major officials.” — True, but incomplete. The Supreme Leader appoints the head of the judiciary, members of the Guardian Council indirectly or directly through appointments, military commanders, state broadcasting leadership, and other officials. The president and parliament retain substantial formal powers in some areas.
“The 88-member Assembly of Experts can appoint or remove the Supreme Leader.” — True in constitutional terms. The Assembly of Experts is constitutionally empowered to select and dismiss the Supreme Leader if he no longer meets the required qualifications. In practice, its membership is itself vetted by the Guardian Council, and there has been no competitive removal process.
“There are courts to protect people’s rights.” — Partly true. Iran has a formal judiciary and constitutional rights provisions, but judicial independence is limited, especially in politically sensitive cases. Revolutionary Courts and security institutions have been widely criticized for due-process violations.
“The morality police enforce dress codes.” — Mostly true, but current status varies. Iran has enforced compulsory hijab and public morality rules through police and other state bodies. The formal morality-police presence has fluctuated since the 2022 protests, but compulsory dress requirements and enforcement mechanisms remain part of the state’s legal and political system.
“The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has its own ground, air, and naval forces.” — True. The IRGC maintains separate ground, aerospace, and naval forces, as well as the Basij militia and the Quds Force.
“The Basij operates throughout cities, towns, villages, and neighborhoods.” — Broadly true. The Basij is a nationwide paramilitary and mobilization organization with local networks. Its actual presence and activity vary by location and period.
“Iran has over half a million active military personnel and more than a million including volunteer militias.” — Plausible but source-dependent. Estimates commonly place Iran’s active personnel across the regular military and IRGC in the hundreds of thousands, with Basij membership figures ranging from active cadres to much larger nominal or voluntary rolls. A combined total above one million depends heavily on how “active” and “voluntary militia” are defined.
“Iran fought an eight-year war with Iraq after the revolution.” — True. The Iran–Iraq War lasted from 1980 to 1988 and caused very large military and civilian casualties.
“Iran developed a proxy network across the Middle East.” — Mostly true, though ‘proxy’ is debated. Iran has provided funding, training, weapons, and political support to organizations including Hezbollah in Lebanon, various Iraqi militias, the Houthis in Yemen, and Palestinian armed groups. These groups have their own agendas and are not all controlled in the same way.
“Iran has secretly pursued nuclear weapons for 40 years.” — Misleading and not established as stated. Iran has conducted uranium enrichment and had undeclared nuclear activities that raised serious international concerns. The International Atomic Energy Agency has not established that Iran made a final decision to build a nuclear weapon. U.S. intelligence assessments have often distinguished between nuclear weapons capability or option-building and an active weapons program.
“Israel and the United States have recently fought a full-on war with Iran.” — Time-sensitive and unverifiable from the transcript alone. The claim requires a date and specific events. The United States and Israel have engaged in direct and indirect confrontation with Iran, including strikes and proxy conflict, but whether particular events constitute a “full-on war” is a characterization that must be assessed against current reporting.
“Israel’s goal is to topple the Iranian regime.” — Partly true, but too categorical. Some Israeli leaders and officials have advocated regime change or expressed hopes that the Islamic Republic will fall. Israeli governments have also publicly emphasized stopping Iran’s nuclear capabilities and weakening its regional military network. A single, continuous official goal of regime overthrow should not be assumed without identifying the speaker and date.
“The regime is coup- and revolution-proof.” — False or unverifiable. Iran’s institutions are designed to protect the Islamic Republic and make sudden leadership decapitation difficult. Nevertheless, no political system is literally coup-proof or revolution-proof. This is an analytical judgment, not a verifiable fact.
“If Israel kills a hundred top officials, a hundred more will replace them.” — Unverifiable and rhetorical. This is an expert’s prediction or metaphor, not a measurable factual claim. Iran has succession mechanisms and multiple power centers, but the effects of decapitating strikes cannot be known in advance.
“Eighty percent of Iranians do not support the regime.” — Unverifiable and likely overgeneralized. Some independent surveys have found low levels of support for the Islamic Republic or its institutions, but polling Iran is difficult because of repression, sampling problems, question wording, and access restrictions. A specific figure such as 80% requires a named, methodologically transparent survey and should not be treated as representative without qualification.

Context and nuance

The transcript’s strongest theme—that Iranian politics has been shaped by the interaction of domestic authoritarianism, nationalism, foreign intervention, and resource politics—is historically defensible. However, it presents a highly linear narrative in which foreign powers repeatedly control Iran and popular movements repeatedly seek sovereignty. That framework captures important realities but leaves out competing domestic interests, class conflict, ethnic and regional politics, clerical institutions, economic management, and ideological divisions among Iranians.

The Qajar period was not simply a story of Iran being passively exploited. Qajar rulers, merchants, clerics, provincial elites, and foreign powers negotiated, competed, and sometimes collaborated. The state was weak in many respects, but it retained meaningful agency.

The 1953 coup is correctly identified as a major turning point, and the role of British and American intelligence is well documented. Still, the coup resulted from an interaction between foreign covert action and Iranian political conflict. Mosaddegh faced opposition from parts of the court, the military, parliament, landlords, clerics, bazaar interests, and other political factions. Foreign intervention was decisive, but the domestic context should not be erased.

The transcript also risks portraying the 1979 Revolution as a unified democratic uprising that Khomeini then single-handedly converted into a theocracy. The revolution was a broad coalition, but its participants differed over monarchy, socialism, liberal constitutionalism, Islamic government, ethnic autonomy, and economic policy. Khomeini’s movement used elections and popular mobilization while simultaneously building institutions that enabled clerical supremacy and suppressing rival factions.

The term “religious regime” is also too imprecise for analytical purposes. The Islamic Republic is a theocratic-republican hybrid: it contains elected institutions, but unelected religious and security bodies possess decisive powers. Its legitimacy has varied over time, and public opinion is not identical to either support for the regime or opposition to every aspect of its religious and national identity.

Finally, the transcript mixes historical narration with current political claims and sponsored content. Statements about recent ceasefires, wars, nuclear intentions, casualty figures, and Iranian public opinion need dated sources. The Ground News advertising claims—such as coverage by “over 650 outlets,” recognition by the Nobel Peace Center, and the absence of corporate influence—are promotional claims and should be independently checked rather than accepted as part of the historical argument.

Closing takeaway

The transcript is useful as a broad introduction, especially on the 1907 spheres of influence, the tobacco protest, oil nationalization, the 1953 coup, and the 1979 Revolution. It should not be treated as a fully reliable history without correcting the hostage figures, parliamentary-attack account, World War I death toll, nuclear-weapons claim, polling statistic, and several overly simple explanations of Iranian politics.

Video transcript

- [Johnny] When you think of Iran, you probably think of this. (intense music) - [Newsreader] At least 65 people have been killed in demonstrations that began in Tehran almost two weeks ago. - [Newsreader] Some 60 Americans bound and blindfolded are now beginning their sixth day of captivity inside the U.S. Embassy in Tehran. - [Newsreader] So far, more than 3,000 people have been killed according to the World Health Organization. - [Johnny] Today, our perception of Iran is dominated by the regime that has controlled it for almost 15 years. (protestors chant in foreign language) I want to show you a different Iran, the Iran that existed long before this regime. I want to show you what led up to it. Because understanding that Iran is key to understanding how we got this brutal religious regime and how it has survived for so long. You might think that the story of modern Iran is going to be about religion, but in fact, the story I'm about to tell you is about power and fear. Because for most of its history, Iran was a superpower, an advanced civilization ruling over huge swaths of land that today we call the Middle East and Central Asia. - [Pundit] They have been culturally, militarily, politically at the center of things for a very long time. - Oh, and this was starting like over 2,000 years ago. But empires rise and fall and this empire eventually was in decline, which gets us to our story, which starts here. (serious music) This moment, the year 1800, Iran is ruled by a family dynasty called the Qajars and they find themselves in between two big empires, both of them expanding pretty quickly. If you look at these empires' old maps, you'll see that both of them called this place Persia. That's what outsiders called Iran. The Russian Empire had been fighting to get access to this land between these two seas. Seas that, by the way, are usable during winter, unlike Russia's other ports in the north. They're gonna have to control this land if they want to control Central Asia. Russia easily defeats Iran in a few wars and they take the land and get access to the seas. And in doing so, Russia makes Iran sign some treaties that gives Russia exclusive military control in the Caspian Sea. The treaty also says that Russian merchants can do what they want. They don't have to comply with Iranian law. It was a lot. Oh wait, and I almost forgot, if this wasn't enough, Iran has to pay Russia back for the war. So it's still the early 1800s and Russia has just leveled up its strategic position in Central Asia, not just by conquering this land, but by solidifying major leverage within Iran. Now over here, the British are watching. They're watching closely and they're getting nervous. Russia now has access to these seas and it has leverage within Iran that means easier access to this Gulf, the Persian Gulf that leads to the rest of the world. Even worse, this land east of Iran is strategic high ground. They call it the key to India, meaning if Russia got access here, it would threaten the British Empire's most valuable colony. Iran might take this over and give Russia access. This would be a nightmare for Britain. A British general calls Russia a, quote, "disagreeable and even dangerous neighbor." So the British Empire jumps into a competition for influence in this region that would come to be known as the Great Game. They fight several wars with Iran to stop them from getting the key to India. And this is where you start to see a really important pattern that we need to pay attention to. It's the reason I'm making this video. It's the thing that explains the modern-day Iran and its conflict with its neighbors. (subdued music) The British openly say that, quote, "We do not want to occupy Iran, but we cannot see it occupied by our foes," a.k.a. Russia. Iran is too big and mountainous to actually conquer. They just need to control it from the outside. Meanwhile, the king of Iran is struggling. He needs money to run his country. So he sees an opportunity to play these two competing empires off each other by selling them different forms of influence inside Iran, like the exclusive right to control key industries inside the country, basically monopolies in exchange for cash. These are called economic concessions and they give the empires influence in Iran without having to invade all while making money in the process. Let me just tell you something really quick. The U.S. and Iran signed a ceasefire agreement last month, but a ceasefire doesn't necessarily bring certainty. And the issue for most of us back home is that this is a story that's so complex and the effort required to understand it can feel overwhelming or impossible. Is it a good deal? Is it a bad deal? What does it even include? Every outlet seems to cover it differently. They have a different take, a different takeaway. And if you really want to figure out what's going on, it could take hours of work. That's why I'm a big fan and have partnered for years with today's sponsor who is Ground News. Their mission is to help you understand the news, to make it easier to decode and demystify what's actually going on. They're an app and a website that pulls from thousands of articles and organizes them by story and then provides insights into things like political bias, reliability, who owns the outlet that's reporting on this stuff, even specific differences in the reporting itself. They've been recognized by the Nobel Peace Center for advancing media literacy. So let me show you how this works using that US-Iran ceasefire story. You can see here on Ground News that the story was covered by over 650 outlets. Ground News lets me filter by ownership, factuality, location, so that I can see the full context and angles on these stories before I decide what to think. They have this biased comparison. It's a feature that lets me see specific differences in the reporting itself. For example, left-leaning outlets are highly critical of the Iran deal. And then you can quickly see that right-leaning outlets use much more positive language calling this deal, quote, "a historic peace deal." Every outlet chooses their narrative and they use language and facts that reflect that narrative. What Ground News does is it just makes that all visible to you very quickly and easily. I've been using their app for years because it actually gives me full transparency into the barrage of news that we all face every day. It's something I can't get anywhere else and allows me to be a more critical thinker. It's completely funded by all of us subscribers so there's no corporate influences deciding what you see. You can get in on the Vantage Plan, which is the one that I use, and you can get 40% off if you use the link in my description. It's ground.news/johnnyharris, or you can just scan the QR code here on screen. Thanks, Ground News, for sponsoring today's video. (subdued music) So over the next few decades, British and Russian engineers, bankers, merchants, and soldiers flood into Iran. They're exploiting natural resources, making money off everything from railroads to dams to bridges to factories. They're collecting tolls on customs and taxes. They're running lucrative banks. They build some infrastructure, but much of the benefit flows outward. Britain builds this telegraph line across the country, but it's run by British subjects and it's a game-changer for Britain. Messages that once took months traveled to India in minutes. And the Iranian king is making money for the country, but he's using a good amount of it for his personal lifestyle. By the way, I'm gonna start using the Farsi word for king to describe this leader. The word is shah. And even though this guy's basically a king, he is a king within the particular political context of Iran. It's the same reason we use like czar to talk about Russian kings or sultan to talk about an Ottoman king or pharaoh in Ancient Egypt or emperor in China. You get the point. So the king going forward is the shah. Okay, so the Shah is selling all of these industries and monopolies to both empires. And then in 1890, the Shah sells Britain a total monopoly on tobacco for 50 years. Tobacco is a major part of daily social life in the country, but now everything has to go through a British middleman. (tense music) This really hits a nerve. The people are starting to become fed up with outsiders controlling their country. So they band together and protest. And it works. The Shah cancels the tobacco agreement with Britain. Iranians are starting to realize that mobilizing together can bring about change. They rise up again in 1905 demanding a constitution. They want to put limits on the king's power. They want to create a parliament. They want to have representation. And they want to limit all these secret deals that the Shah has been making, selling off their country to foreigners. This is among the first constitutional revolutions in the Middle East and it's looking like it's working. It's the early 1900s and Iran has a parliament. The Shah is letting this happen, but very soon after, he dies, and the next guy, his son, hates the parliament, doesn't like how it's limiting his power. You know who else hates all of this democracy? The empires. Especially Russia whose influence in Iran the new parliament wants to diminish. So Russia sends in 12,000 troops to support the Shah. They show up to the Parliament with a bunch of cannons and they open fire on the Parliament building. They kill hundreds of lawmakers and constitutional revolutionaries. They arrest many surviving revolutionaries. Others are executed. The Shah is killing his own people with the help of outsiders. And unfortunately, this is something we will see again. But the Iranians striving for democracy fight on and they gain back some power in the country. It's early 1900s and this pattern that we've seen for a hundred years continues, the struggle for influence in strategically located Iran. (soft music) Germany enters the scene and Russia and Britain realize that they need to team up to keep German influence out. So instead of fighting each other, they divide Iran into spheres of influence and promise not to cross into each other's area. Of course, Iranians had no say over these lines of influence. And then a year after the empires slice up the country into spheres of influence, there's a discovery that will make Iran even more valuable to control. Oil, lots of oil. Now the Shah had sold the rights to explore for oil to a wealthy Englishman in 1901. And after six years of searching, he finally found it. Now the British Navy would be switching from powering its ships with coal to oil. So look what happened here. Iran went from being a buffer zone that protected British trade routes and their vital colony to holding the key to Britain's naval dominance, which is their global dominance. Britain is not leaving Iran anytime soon. They would go on to establish a company we know today as British Petroleum or BP. And of course they send troops to protect this vital resource right in time for a war to break out in Europe. (stirring kinetic music) When World War I begins, Iran declares neutrality. They want no part in this fight, but the fight comes to them anyway. Iran is too strategically important, especially with all this oil. The war ravages Iran's economy and at least two million Iranians die from food shortages and disease caused by the war. Once again, Iranians are paying the price while the empires fight to protect their wealth and influence. After the First World War, Russia is going through a communist revolution turning into the USSR or Soviet Union and they leave Iran. But they're just next door. They could come back at any time. But for now it's just the British Empire who wants to increase their influence here even more due to the vast oil reserves they're discovering. Oil had been a game-changer in World War I. It's one of the reasons the British won, and Germany, who didn't have access to nearly as much oil, lost. Oil is a strategic weapon. They can't leave Iran. But Iranians are fed up with what has been over a hundred years of foreigners running their country from the outside. So this military man rises up. (subdued music) He works with the parliament to throw out the old Shah and promises to make Iran great again, trying to get the people to remember that this was a superpower. They need to restore that greatness. His name was Reza Shah. At a time of rising nationalism everywhere, Reza Shah emphasizes Persian identity and greatness, reminding people that the majority of Iranians speak Farsi, not Arabic like much of the Middle East. And this Shah says that Iran was great before the Arabs brought Islam to Iran. So he wants to reduce the influence of religion in the society. He wants to make the secular state the only political and legal power. In 1936, he bans women from wearing any kind of cover or veil. He wants to modernize Iran and push back against all the humiliating foreign influence that has been stopping the country from being able to determine their own destiny for decades. It feels like a new era for the country. He's building hospitals and schools and roads and a university. Farsi becomes the official language. Nomads are forced to settle down. He builds a railway across the country. He builds a strong centralized bureaucracy, a secular court system, a powerful army, and he demands that outsiders call it Iran instead of Persia. And he crushes anyone who opposes his modernizing efforts. Okay, but not too fast. This is where we're gonna see that pattern again. As part of all of this modernizing effort, the new leader brings in German engineers. And look at the date. Back in Europe, Germany just started a war with its neighbors. This is World War II. (serious music) So here comes Russia and Britain again. They demand that Reza Shah expel the Germans who could easily sabotage these weapon supply lines that the Soviets need to fight back against Germany in Europe, or maybe they could sabotage Britain's valuable source of fuel for the war. Reza Shah doesn't want to give into the big empires. He's done with that. So he stalls, tries to negotiate with them, tries to play these empires off each other, and tries to remain neutral once again, but the British and Soviets are not having it. They pull a familiar act of pressure, this time invading Iran and forcing Reza Shah off the throne and into exile in South Africa. They replace him with his 22-year-old son who is more willing to do what they want. So much for getting rid of foreign influence. During World War II, Iran is once again too weak to resist and too important to be left alone. A strategic corridor, a buffer zone between empires, a massive oil reserve, and these big powers occupy huge swaths of the country, all a part of their global chessboard. Okay, so World War II is over and I want you to pay attention to this guy, Mohammad Reza Shah. Remember, he's the new Shah, the one that the Soviets and the British installed right in the run-up to World War II. Yeah, he's a big part of the next chapter of this story, so just keep an eye on him. Oh, and let's update his photo. He's not 21 anymore. World War II is over. (soft disquieting music) The Iranian people come out of World War II with even more motivation to stop this seemingly forever cycle of outsiders controlling and ravaging their country. Their democracy movement is now four decades old and the people are developing a stronger and stronger culture of protest, intellectual discourse, politics, national pride, but it's never been able to take root because it's always disrupted by outsiders meddling in the country. And look, even though the war is over and the British are decolonizing around the world, they're still here, pulling huge amounts of oil from Iranian soil, protecting it with troops, and shipping it around their empire. And the Shah is okay with this, because remember, the British installed this shah, their friends, but the people really don't like this shah. He's Britain's Shah, not Iran's. He's a symbol of more of the same, foreigners controlling the country. But you know who they do like? This guy, (subdued music) Mohammad Mosaddegh. He's a political leader and he rises up with a strong voice calling for Iranians to reclaim their country. Mosaddegh wants to reject all imperial powers so that Iran can chart its own course. And item number one on his list is oil. Britain is pumping loads of oil out of Iran, but Iran is only getting 16% of the company's profits. So the Iranian parliament asks to renegotiate the oil deal to more of an even split. They want it to be more like fifty-fifty. Britain's open to negotiation. They'll give more money, but not 50%. So the Iranian prime minister accepts this. But when he goes to parliament for approval, who stands up to reject it? Mohammad Mosaddegh. Who argues that this valuable resource is Iran's. They should control it completely. Uh-oh. Britain's starting to get nervous. They say, "Okay, okay, fine. We'll do the fifty-fifty split," but it's too late. The political and public momentum towards Iran getting full control is too strong. The prime minister who was opposed to nationalization of the oil gets assassinated. And who does the parliament elect to be the new prime minister? Mosaddegh. Mosaddegh looks like the guy who's gonna finally put an end to foreign control, to usher in a new Iran, one that's run by the people, not by the empires. It's 1951 and Mosaddegh's proposal to take back the oil company goes to Parliament and they approve it. And now Britain is really freaking out. The U.S. and the World Bank step in to try to mediate, try to find a peaceful deal, but neither side gives in. Britain will pay more, but they will not give up control. And Mosaddegh won't budge on Iranians controlling their oil completely. Britain then tries to punish Iran by boycotting their oil, sending Royal Navy warships to this choke point in the Persian Gulf to deter any tankers that are considering transporting oil out of Iran, hoping that this will hit them economically and give them leverage in the negotiation. But Iran doesn't budge. Oil is the ultimate symbol of Iran taking the country back from this 150 years of foreign meddling. So Britain decides it's time to play dirty. The American CIA is in the middle of the Cold War trying to counter Soviet influence around the world. And the CIA's Middle East guy is in London. The British Intelligence Agency gets a meeting with him and they try to convince him that Mosaddegh could be an asset to the communist Soviet Union. Brand new President Eisenhower wants to do anything he can to counter Soviet influence anywhere on earth. What if Mosaddegh is sympathetic to the Soviets and they let them get access to the oil? We can't have that. And they conclude that they need to get rid of Mosaddegh. This is basically a rerun of several previous episodes of this story where the big empires use Iran as a playing field to counter the influence of their geopolitical rival. So the CIA allocates $12 million in today's money to do whatever it takes to get Mosaddegh out. They sneak people into the country who start quietly bribing politicians, paying organizers to bring crowds into the street against Mosaddegh. They give money to newspapers to attack him. And when the moment's right, the Western-friendly Shah steps up and tries to fire Mosaddegh from being prime minister. And it totally backfires. The people keep supporting Mosaddegh and the Shah flees the country for Rome. The CIA regroups and continues their secret campaign of influence. And they eventually get enough of the military to flip. Getting the military on board is usually the defining feature of a coup. And now enough of the Iranian military supports the Shah and not Mosaddegh. They go to Mosaddegh's house. They arrest him. They run him through a military trial and charge him for treason because he didn't obey when the Shah tried to fire him. They sentence him to life under house arrest. He is officially silenced. (curious music) And then the Shah, remember the same Shah that Britain installed in World War II to be their shah, he flies back into the country and takes total power once again. He remains Britain's guy, but now he's loyal to the Americans who just reinstalled him as the leader by throwing out the person that the democracy had chosen. Britain keeps control of Iran's oil business, but they do start sharing 50% of the profits with Iran. And to avoid future backlash, the British divide their share of oil between other big nations, giving a huge share to the U.S. who had just spent a lot of money to help them save the oil. Mosaddegh almost did it. He almost broke the cycle of outsiders controlling Iran's government, resources, and economy. But once again, he was thwarted by the more powerful empires. And the Shah goes on to do a version of what his dad did to Iran, to modernize the country and the society in a Western direction, trying to reduce the influence of Islam on the society. He allows women to vote, increases rural education, but does all of this with an iron fist. He eliminates his political opposition, he censors the press, and he imposes Western dress and lifestyle on the society. The CIA helps him create a secret police that he uses to capture and torture and spy on anyone who opposes his regime. And the Shah gives Americans in Iran legal immunity, which is a perfect echo of the humiliating treaties that Iran was forced to sign with Russia over a hundred years earlier. And the oil keeps flowing. Iran is getting rich. But its tens of millions of people are becoming increasingly resentful that their leader is clearly a Western puppet. And one of the most vocal critics of all of this, Ruhollah Khomeini. (serious music) A religious leader who abides by a strict conservative interpretation of Shia Islam. He starts giving speeches against the Shah. Now, if you look at Khomeini's speeches, and I have looked at and listened to many, you start to see frustration, not just with the Shah, but frustration and anger at this entire story that we've been telling so far. These years and decades and centuries of Iran being sold to outside powerful empires. He says that the empires have, quote, "invaded Iran and occupied our country. The property of the people was exposed to danger. The government has sold our independence, committed treason against this country and against Islam. Before, it was the British that brought our misfortune and now it's the Soviets on one hand and the Americans on the other. All of our miseries are caused by those imperialists." He calls on the religious leaders to rise up to avoid, quote, "this nation to be slaves of Britain one day and America the next." He says that, "A number of foreign states carry off our oil after drawing it out of the ground, and the negligible sum that they pay to the regime they have installed returns to their pockets by other routes. They have reduced the Iranian people to the level lower than an American dog." And all in all, the people must, quote, "throw the Shah out of Iran." It's a call for revolution. Now I told you at the beginning that modern-day Iran is not all about religion and religious beliefs, and that's true. And yet this man, Khomeini, is a religious cleric, an imam, a leader in the Shia Islamic tradition. And in that tradition, there is a particular emphasis on martyrdom. So while Khomeini's rhetoric echoes a lot of the anti-imperial revolutionary language that was happening, by the way, in a lot of parts of the world at this time, Khomeini's revolutionary language is anchored particularly in religious doctrines of the oppressed rising up against the oppressor, divine justice, skepticism of secular governments, and this mix of religious and revolutionary language resonates among the people. (stirring music) Khomeini is arrested and almost executed, but the people rise up in protest. The Shah responds with soldiers and open fire. The Shah's people worry that executing Khomeini will make the uprising worse. So Khomeini is released, but forced to leave the country. He's now in exile, but he continues to spread his message to the Iranian people by smuggling sermons into the country on cassette tapes. Now his speeches about imperialists imposing an unjust order on Iran are echoing through villages and mosques. People are listening to the cry to overthrow the tyrannical and corrupt regime. Meanwhile, thanks to surging oil prices, things are going pretty well for the Shah over the next decade. He's developing the economy. There's new infrastructure, roads, dams, ports, airports. There's a middle class that's emerging. There's schools and universities. Students are going abroad to study. The U.S. even encourages Iran to start a nuclear energy program. The Shah also spends a lot of the oil money on building a huge military. He becomes the number one buyer of military equipment on earth, becoming completely reliant on U.S. weapons, and Iran becomes a significant military power in the Middle East. The Shah is also spending money on opulent oil-funded palaces, throwing extravagant parties in the middle of the desert where guests fly in on helicopters and French chefs serve luxury food. The rest of the country is watching this and resentment is simmering. Khomeini is continuing to rally people from his exile. And by the late 1970s, people are routinely taking to the streets. Like the tobacco protests in 1890, this is transcending any one group. People from all walks of life are coming together. The shop owners, the working class, the students, the intellectuals, the religious. They don't all agree on what the future of Iran should be, but they all agree on one thing, that the Shah is a foreign puppet who can no longer be tolerated. He's losing control. He tries to crack down by declaring martial law to stop the protestors, but they don't stop coming. Even after the military opens fire, the oil workers then go on strike, which is a huge blow to the government who relies on a constant flow of oil for its revenue. And as a last-ditch effort, the Shah tries to appoint a moderate opposition figure as prime minister, but it's too late. The people have turned against the monarchy. It's January 1979 and the Shah flees the country once again. He claims he's only going on vacation and that he would be back, but he would never return to Iran. This is Khomeini's moment. He flies back to Tehran and he's greeted by crowds of millions of people. (crowd roars) This is what a revolution looks like. He gets the military to flip, to stop supporting the old government, and he quickly consolidates some control over the chaos. Foreigners flee, especially British and Americans who are enemy number one. Though the revolutionaries do seize 66 Americans and hold them hostage for over a year. Khomeini dissolves the old government, the monarchy, the parliament, and he replaces it with a new system, one that he developed while in exile. Hey, if you're still watching, you are probably somebody who wants to better understand the world. So do the thousands of members of our club called Newpress. Newpress is where smart, curious people get a deeper version of what we do across all of our channels. In-depth interviews with experts we speak to, conversations between creators, and a place to connect with other members directly. And I just launched a podcast with Iz that only Newpress members get access to. Right now, it's 60 bucks a year to become a founding member. That money goes directly to support work like this. You can go check it out at newpress.com. The link is in the description and I'll see you over there. (stirring music) This is a huge moment in the story. The people just overthrew a Western-backed regime, not with force and a war, but through sheer will of the population. 40 million people who are tired of this story of being controlled by outsiders. I want to take a moment to show you what they built next, the inside of the regime. (gentle music) Because the regime that Khomeini built is the regime that today exists, it's the one that has been fighting a war with Israel and the United States, and it is the one that is more difficult to topple than outsiders believe. And I want to show you why. This system is unique and that's because it's a reaction to Iran's story up to this point. This is a system that protects the country against foreign intervention. The intervention that Khomeini and his religious followers see as the source of moral corruption in the society. To prevent that from happening again, Khomeini says that there must be religious leaders who sit at the top of the system, specifically this one leader, the Supreme Leader, the guardian of the system. Iran's new constitution gives him a lot of power. He gets to appoint all these other government leaders. But look, there's also a democracy tucked into this system. People vote. They elect members of a parliament. They elect a president. They even elect the 88 people who have the power to appoint or remove the Supreme Leader. There's even courts to protect people's rights. This seems like a balanced democracy, right? Well, not quite. This is actually what we call a filtered democracy. It's filtered through religion. There are at least two religious councils who are appointed by the Supreme Leader that control who actually gets to run for office or which laws get passed. And once you dive into it, you see that this whole system is built to prevent any future revolutions from overthrowing this religious government. The system has multiple ways to keep people in line. Local religious leaders and state media carry the regime's message. There's a morality police that enforces dress codes like women covering their hair. And in addition to a conventional military that protects the borders and deters invasions, the regime itself has its own military. It's called the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and it has its own ground forces, air force, and navy all dedicated to the survival of the regime. And perhaps most effective, they have this volunteer militia that helps exert control of the regime inside every city, village, town and neighborhood in Iran. And finally, one last special unit in the Revolutionary Guard Corps is dedicated to spreading Iran's power and influence outside of Iran's borders. All in all, Iran has over a half a million active military personnel and well over a million if you include the voluntary militia networks. And so since 1979, this system has survived. (subdued music) It has survived invasion. It survived a bloody eight-year war with Iraq right after the revolution. And to deter anyone else in the region from threatening their survival, the Iranian regime keeps expanding its proxy network throughout the Middle East, funding militias that help it survive. Then the regime survived the death of its founder in 1989 and the new Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, carried on with this same system. The regime has grown more and more unpopular over the decades, which has led to mass protests, but the regime survives every time. And during all of this, Iran has been watching as their formal rivals and their neighbors build the ultimate survival tool. Iran realized that if they really wanted the ultimate deterrent from foreign intervention, they too needed nuclear weapons. So for the last 40 years, this has been a story of a paranoid regime who is resentful towards the West and supercharged with apocalyptic religious fervor secretly pursuing nuclear weapons and using its big network of militias that it funds throughout the region to project power in the Middle East, to threaten its enemies, all in the name of stopping this centuries-long cycle of foreign intervention in their country. All while the West, specifically Israel and the United States, try to stop them through a combination of cutting them off the global economy, making diplomatic deals, and most recently through a full-on war. These most recent wars between Iran and its enemies, Israel and United States, have really been a part of Israel's strategy to weaken Iran. To not just stop their nuclear capabilities, but to also weaken this network of proxy militias they have around the region. And ultimately, if you listen to the leader of Israel for the last 20 years, the goal is to stop this standoff once and for all by toppling this regime, by getting rid of it altogether. Israel's wanted to do this for decades and they finally got the U.S. on board. But this is where the long story that we just went through starts to teach us some lessons about what might happen next. First, remember that this country comes from what was, for most of its history, a civilizational superpower, the dominant power in the region. And for the last 200 years, it has been humiliated, controlled by outsiders who have dominated it through coercion. That memory, that resentment is woven into modern-day Iran, especially the regime. A regime that rose in a burst of anger in 1979. A regime that yes, is fueled by apocalyptic religious fervor and belief. But as we now see, it is also fueled by this story, by ensuring that this never happens again, that outsiders will never again control Iran, coerce Iran and its people and its government, and who have built a paranoid, high-control regime full of multiple parallel governments and layers of different militaries who centralize the power around this Supreme Leader. And so what we see, as one expert told me, if Israel takes out a hundred top officials in an airstrike, there'll be a hundred more waiting to take their place. This is a regime that is designed to be coup and revolution-proof. And the last thing I must say is that this has been a story mostly about Iran's government and its conflicts with outsiders. I have said nothing about the people. When I was in my 20s, I studied Farsi and I got to know a lot of Iranian people. And I learned a lot about the difference between the regime and the people. (child laughing) Iranians are some of the most generous, kind, enthusiastic, brilliant people I've ever met. And I learned that the vast majority of them, 80% according to some polls, do not support this regime. And yet these people continue a centuries-long tradition of Iranian people being stuck, stuck between the government and the outside powers that want to control them. (subdued music) Thanks for watching, everyone. Couple things. First off, 50% of you watching are not subscribed. If you like this stuff, please subscribe for free. It really helps what we do here, helps support. Also, I just want to say one more time, thanks to Ground News. Ground News makes it easy to compare global perspectives. I can see how sources in Iran cover stories versus how it's reported in the U.S. all in one place. You can go to ground.news/johnnyharris to get 40% off the unlimited access Vantage Plan and see for yourself. And I just lastly want to let you in on something that I haven't fully talked about yet, but if you've made it this far in the video, I'm gonna tell you, I'm working on a big documentary series called "The Human Element." It's gonna launch later this year. There's more info on that over at Newpress, our club of curious people. You can go check it out at newpress.com. Thank you all for being here. I'll see you in the next one. (subdued music) (subdued music continues)