398
this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2026
398 points (94.4% liked)
Europe
11036 readers
1221 users here now
News and information from Europe 🇪🇺
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
Rules (2024-08-30)
- This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
- No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
- Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
- No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
- Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
- Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
- No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
- Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
Posts that link to the following sources will be removed
- on any topic: Al Mayadeen, brusselssignal:eu, citjourno:com, europesays:com, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Fox, GB News, geo-trends:eu, news-pravda:com, OAN, RT, sociable:co, any AI slop sites (when in doubt please look for a credible imprint/about page), change:org (for privacy reasons), archive:is,ph,today (their JS DDoS websites)
- on Middle-East topics: Al Jazeera
- on Hungary: Euronews
Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com
(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)
Ban lengths, etc.
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the admin that applied the rule (check modlog first to find who was it.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
And the government made clear there won't be an official meeting. Instead, he met with selected members of the Bundestag (parliament). What are you trying to say?
What they were saying is in the sentence following the one you quoted.
Of course, as you point out, they're making wrong assumptions or deliberately mislead. With that, what they were saying falls apart.
The way he is paraded around in the German media suggests strong political support, though.
Supporting the Shah is a bit of a political tradition in Germany, he was a well liked (by the political caste) state guest back in the day when he was running the regime in Iran. His state visits even gave the German language a new word: "Jubelperser" - "jubilant Persians", a euphemism for agents of his security service who would beat up counter demonstrators with iron rods under the watchful benevolent eyes of the German police.
Sure, there is strong political support for the idea of Pahlavi taking over again. But just not by 'Germany', as the user made it seem.
Important members of the biggest ruling party meeting with him suggests otherwise.
It's a whole lot of support while still allowing some deniability.
As far as I read, he met with several foreign affairs politicians from various parliamentary groups in the Bundestag. The only named participant I know of is CDU's Laschet. He was cited with "Of course I want to talk to Pahlavi, as he's a person of relevance when it comes to transition in Iran." Green's Nouripour said, while he himself wouldn't have attended that meeting, he yet thinks it is ok and even sensible of Laschet to speak with the various facets of Iranian opposition and that other members of his party will also attend the meeting. There are very critical voices from Laschet's party as well as other parties. At least I do not know what they actually discussed in that meeting, so I am cautious to blindly assume they fully supported him and did not voice any concerns. Meeting a political figure from abroad does not automatically equal supporting them.
What are you trying to say? That that isn't support? Laschet is the former chancellor candidate. That's the highest ranking member of the CDU that still allows some form of denial. Obviously it works but why? How can the meeting be interpreted any different but as support?
So? Laschet is the current chair of the Bundestag's Foreign Affairs Committee. Call me crazy, but I guess meeting with influential foreign political figures might have more to do with that than some election a couple of years ago.
And while he might support Pahlavi, not even his party is unanimously doing so. Meetings of political figures can also be used to voice concerns and criticism.
Hence, to insinuate that Germany supports him is at best uninformed, at worst malicious.
Of course, the meeting can be held for the personal goals of Laschet but how likely is that? Current chair of the Bundestag’s Foreign Affairs Committee, it can't be much more official while the war is illegal.
No one here said that. When the current chair of the Bundestag’s Foreign Affairs Committee meets such a person (together with foreign affairs politicians from other parties), the most obvious reason for that meeting would be their respective function in foreign affairs.
Given the criticism from across a plethora of parties - involved and uninvolved - and the clear message by the government to not meet him, your statement of 'Germany' supporting is false: either uninformed or malicious.
The government doesn't meet Pahlavi because it looks bad. How does it not look bad if somebody else meets him who has deep ties to the government?
Problem is that you keep on filling the circumstances with your own personal opinions/assumptions and then confuse these for facts. It is your choice to interpret these things in the most negative way possible or suspecting a conspiracy/"something bigger", but don't be surprised if others won't follow you on that path and grow tired of you trying to keep that wheel spinning.
The facts are: the government explicitly stated they won't meet Pahlavi. Pahlavi met with foreign affairs politicians / members of the Bundestag from various parties. These parties also raised concerns about this meeting. Laschet himself was cited with “Of course I want to talk to Pahlavi, as he’s a person of relevance when it comes to transition in Iran.” Details of this meeting and participants beyond Laschet are not known.
Yet, for you this is all clear and you'll happily interpret it as a sign of support. Not only by Laschet, but the whole of Germany. What's there left to say to that?
If the meeting doesn't mean anything why has the government not met him? Adding one layer of indirection doesn't change much.
Because the government meeting Pahlavi is something else than Laschet meeting Pahlavi. One is our official government, where a meeting would undoubtedly convey some sort of support they apparently don't want to display. The other is current chair of the Bundestag’s Foreign Affairs Committee, where a meeting is much more normal and does not convey that gravitas. Isn't that pretty obvious?
If there is need for talks, why not a nameless Parliamentary State Secretary who meets a nameless member of the Iranian opposition?
The support consists in legitimizing Pahlavi. Meeting the current chair of the Bundestag’s Foreign Affairs Committee has less gravitas than being received with full military honors but there is still gravitas. It not fully confirms but suggests that he inherited the leadership and that the reign of his father was legit. It also signals that regime change is possible. If we would oppose the war we wouldn't do that.
Pahlavi is a relevant figure of the Iranian opposition, whether you and I like that or not. Whether he meets Laschet or not. Especially for Iranians in exile, he's the most prominent figure for an alternative to the current Mullah regime. And of course, regime change is possible - and desired by Iranians. Don't forget that the regime had to kill more than ten thousand people on the streets who were protesting against them only three months ago and that after the news emerged that Khamenei is dead, people in Iran filled the streets to celebrate.
So, what exactly is your problem here?
I have no problem. To me the reception of Pahlavi just means that we support him and do our part to maintain the momentum of the revolution. The revolution doesn't seem to be very successful right now so that any assurance helps to keep the people motivated.
That can be your opinion. But you shouldn't rule out other interpretations.
Everything is possible. As you mentioned, Laschet could just have voice concerns, we don't know.