Abroad and at odds: How the war has divided Iranians in the diaspora | US-Israel war on Iran News

Peyvand Khorsandi was only four years old when he and his family left Iran for the United Kingdom in 1976, three years before the Islamic revolution.

His father, Hadi, a well-known Iranian satirist and poet, was the target of a failed assassination attempt, allegedly orchestrated by the Iranian government in 1984. The attack was foiled by London’s Metropolitan Police following a tip-off from a senior Iranian official, who soon went into self-imposed exile.

Despite that history, Khorsandi still opposes the US-Israel war on Iran and says it has granted the government a new lease of life while delivering a serious setback to pro-democracy Iranians.

“It’s disappointing and depressing,” he told Al Jazeera.

Khorsandi is one of many Iranians in the diaspora caught in the paradox of opposing both the government and the war on Iran.

The conflict, which began six months ago on February 28 when the United States and Israel launched joint strikes on Iran, has upended the global economy, caused energy prices to spiral and killed thousands of civilians, mostly in Iran and Lebanon.

The region is stuck at a crossroads of continued uncertainty, and the war has left the Iranian diaspora divided, with many in Western countries supporting the attacks on their ancestral homeland, and others opposing the war.

Supporters of the strikes have mostly rallied around Reza Pahlavi, the son of Iran’s deposed shah, or king. Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was toppled in 1979 following decades of rule.

Others, like Khorsandi, reject Pahlavi’s politics.

“What Pahlavi supporters represent is dangerous. I think he [Pahlavi] is a willing servant of the Israeli government,” Khorsandi told Al Jazeera.

“Like Iraq, this is a racist war. The lives of Global South people are expendable. We are as expendable to them [the US and Israel] as Palestinians. It’s a war fought for colonial sensibilities. Some diaspora Iranians made the mistake of thinking that the West sees them as equals.”

Humanitarian case for attacks begins to unravel

The US-Israel war on Iran is widely seen as a one-off choice. US intelligence had already concluded that Tehran was not trying to weaponise its nuclear programme before the conflict was launched.

Nevertheless, US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attempted to justify the conflict at the outset on human rights grounds, suggesting that they sought to help common Iranians. However, that argument began to unravel just a few hours into the war when an elementary school for girls in the southern city of Minab was bombed.

At least 170 people were killed in Minab, most of them children. Evidence examined by news outlets and rights groups overwhelmingly suggests that the school was hit by a US air strike. Pahlavi failed to condemn the attack and said Tehran was to blame, accusing the government of using the victims as “human shields”.

“It has created a lot of discord,” Khorsandi said.

Netanyahu remains the subject of an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes and crimes against humanity over Israel’s war on Gaza, which an independent United Nations inquiry has concluded amounts to genocide.

Meanwhile, Iran’s human rights record remains abysmal. Amnesty International has accused Tehran of exploiting the war to carry out “systematic repression”.

The rights group says thousands of people have been arbitrarily detained, including activists, protesters, journalists and lawyers, among others. It alleges that forced confessions have been used in “unfair sham trials”.

The latest US intervention in Iran has reminded many Iranians of Mohammad Mossadegh’s legacy, the country’s democratically elected prime minister, who was overthrown in a coup masterminded by the CIA and MI6 in 1953. The US and British intelligence agencies conspired to remove Mossadegh after he nationalised Iran’s vast oil reserves, which were controlled by the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, now named BP (British Petroleum).

Former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright acknowledged in 2000 that the US had played a “significant role” in the coup, describing it as “a setback for Iran’s political development”.

According to the Roosevelt Institute for American Studies in the Netherlands, Mossadegh’s ousting helped shape “the environment in which the Iranian revolution of 1979 was able to take hold”. Iran has been heavily sanctioned since then, going from a key US ally to an archenemy.

The impact on the economy has been catastrophic, with common Iranians bearing much of the cost. The international isolation has left many in and outside the country disillusioned, while the government’s repression has further fuelled discontent and a desire for change.

“There were those inside Iran who believed Trump would really bring help. There were similar aspirations and hopes on the part of those in the diaspora who supported the war. And I think in many cases, they’ve been disappointed,” Roxane Farmanfarmaian, who teaches international relations of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) at Cambridge University, told Al Jazeera.

“I think there’s very little expectation at this point that, should there be a change of government in Iran, the diaspora would see eye to eye across its different groups,” she added.

‘Iran is confronting empire’

Naz Radboy’s parents are Iranian. She was born in the US and splits her time between there and the UK. Despite not growing up in Iran, she maintains deep ties to the country. For her, the war is a form of US imperialism against a government that refuses to bow to Washington.

Radboy supports the country’s leaders and says she has paid a heavy price for doing so.

“Iran is confronting [the] empire, and I stand with Iran and the institutions defending it,” she told Al Jazeera.

“Iran does not exist in a vacuum. It exists inside an international order dominated by an empire that has surrounded the region with military bases, imposed devastating sanctions, carried out regime-change operations across the Global South and repeatedly asserted its right to determine which governments are legitimate. So when Iran builds the capacity to resist that order, I understand why.”

The war remains deadlocked. Despite overwhelming US military power, Iran still controls traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, which has emerged as its greatest leverage in negotiations with Washington.

Moreover, Iran has been inflicting enormous economic costs on the region and the global economy. As a result, Gulf leaders are eager for a deal that avoids further escalation and leads to the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20 percent of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas is usually exported.

However, for Radboy, it is not just the war that needs to come to a close, but also the calls for the destruction of Iran from her fellow Iranians.

“I have watched people become so consumed by hatred of the Islamic Republic that they seem willing to sacrifice Iran itself. [In their view] civilians can die, the economy can collapse and infrastructure can be destroyed as long as it weakens the government,” she says.