From Budapest to Tehran: When the United States Encourages Revolt—and Walks Away |
When Iranians flooded the streets chanting “Woman, Life, Freedom,” many believed the Islamic Republic was facing its most serious challenge since 1979. The protests were nationwide, intergenerational, and openly defiant. Women burned headscarves in public. Workers joined students. The regime responded with mass arrests, executions, and lethal force. From Washington, moral language flowed freely. Donald Trump spoke of standing with the Iranian people and repeatedly hinted that military action against Tehran was possible.
It never came.
According to press reports, US military aircraft that had been positioned for possible action were ordered to turn back. No strike followed. Trump did not attack Iran to protect the protesters. The regime survived. The movement was crushed. For Iranians who had dared to believe that global rhetoric might translate into real support, the aftermath brought not only repression but disillusionment. History, it turns out, had already offered a warning.
In 1956, Hungarians rose up against Soviet domination in one of the Cold War’s most tragic episodes. Workers, students, and reformist communists demanded political freedom and national sovereignty. Western broadcasts, especially the U.S.-operated Radio Free Europe, encouraged resistance and suggested that help might arrive if Hungarians held their ground. They did. The United States did not. Soviet tanks rolled into Budapest, killing thousands and ending the revolution. The West issued condemnations. It did nothing.
The parallel with Iran is not mechanical, but the moral structure is strikingly similar. In both cases, the United States encouraged popular resistance rhetorically........