RALPH GROVES' LETTERS
Letter to President Donald Trump
2015 Donahue Drive
Ocoee, Florida 34761
18 March 2026
President Donald J. Trump
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20500
Subject: Potential Regime Change in Iran
Dear Mr. President: Greetings.
Sir, I am Ralph Groves, the 2026 Candidate of the Libertarian Party of Florida for the 11th Congressional District of Florida. As a former U.S. Army Intelligence officer, a former DIA analyst of Iran, and a former resident of Iran during the late Shah's reign, I hereby share with you a summary of my analysis of Iran pertaining to potential regime change.
External pressure on Iran due to the current war will augment the authority of the regime as Iranians are nationalistic and will defend their national sovereignty. For the proximate future, the regime, composed of the clerical class (the Ulama) – with its thousands of clerics and hundreds of Ayatollahs – along with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), will likely remain embedded in all of Iran’s social and political strata. Their authority is respected by society at large, and will remain so even if any Supreme Leader, with the rank of Ayatollah, at the apex of national authority, is replaced by another leader from the Ulama. Broadly, the deeplyentrenched regime will endure.
Eventually, external pressure may prompt leadership change at the apex of national authority but not the kind of change the United States may prefer. A military officer, probably from the IRGC, with impeccable nationalistic credentials (a Napoleon type figure) coupled with fervent Shi'ite piety, may come to the fore. His ascendancy to national leadership will have to be approved by the Assembly of Experts. The historical precedent was the ascendancy of Reza Shah Pahlavi, a former Army officer, who became Shah in 1925, as approved by the Majlis(Parliament) that deposed the former Ahmad Shah Qajar. (Reza Shah Pahlavi was the father of the late Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who reigned until the 1979 Islamic Revolution when he was overthrown.) A Napoleon type figure would have to be scrupulously deferential to the Ulama as he would recall that the oppositionist Ulama (starting with the efforts by Ayatollah Seyyed Burujerdi in 1959) struggled for 20 years to overthrow the late Shah and could overthrow him, too.
It is unlikely that Iranians will embrace the exiled “Crown Prince” Reza Pahlavi, son of the late Shah, in a leadership role because the erstwhile ruling Pahlavi family was very unpopular. The Pahlavis' unpopularity was due to the common view that they were not sufficiently nationalistic and that they were irreligious. The “Crown Prince” is a Westernized figure and has called for a secular Iran, but these factors indicate that he is out of touch with Iranian history and culture – especially that most Iranians are religious and expect leaders to have divine favor to be legitimate. Therefore, Reza Pahlavi will lack broad popular support just like his overthrown father suffered.
The United States should not play an overt role in Iran’s regime and leadership as it would undermine the regime’s nationalistic credentials. A precedent exists: Iranians regarded the late Shah as a Western puppet commencing from the 1953 overthrow of his then Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, which was orchestrated by American and British intelligence services. This resulted in growing opposition against the Shah and increased anti-Western sentiments. Likewise, the current war will amplify anti-Western sentiments for many decades.
Thank you, Mr. President, for considering this communication.
Very Respectfully,
Dr. Ralph Groves
MAJ, U.S. Army (Ret.), Iraq War Veteran
Former DIA Analyst, Pentagon
Libertarian Candidate for Congress
11th Congressional District, Florida
cc: Vice President J.D. Vance
Secretary of State Marco Rubio
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard
Addendum: Ralph Groves knows the Middle East and Southwest Asia. He visited Israel, lived in Iran, and served in Armenia and Iraq as an Army officer. In addition, he majored in Middle East Studies while he was a college student. Prior to retirement, he served in the Pentagon as an Iran analyst. In retirement, he wrote two books on Iran. His experiences and education support his conformity to the Libertarian principle of a non-interventionist foreign policy.
One of Ralph Groves’ books is marketed via The Great British Bookshop and Amazon:
Iran’s Shi’ite Clerics’ Opposition to the Shah, 1959-1979
One of Ralph Groves’ previous books, co-authored with one of his sons, Justin Groves, is likewise marketed via The Great British Bookshop and Amazon:
Soviet Raison d’état and Relations with Iran’s Communist Parties, 1920-1979
His forthcoming book (not yet published):
The Demystification of Islamism.
Letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio
29 June 2025
To: Secretary of State Marco Rubio
Dear Mr. Secretary:
I am Ralph Groves, the 2026 Candidate of the Libertarian Party of Florida for the 11th Congressional District of Florida.
As a former DIA analyst of Iran, and a former resident of Iran during the late Shah's reign, I hereby share with you some of my knowledge of Iran pertaining to potential regime change.
Iran is susceptible to regime change principally because the theocratic Islamic Republic is an innovative type of government that is without precedent in Iran's history. Lacking precedent, the theocracy is contrary to the character of the Iranian people, who are mostly pragmatic rather than apocalyptic fanatics. During 2,500 years of Iran's history, the country always had a monarchy along with a socially and politically influential clerical class (at first the Magi of the Zoroastrian Religion, and later the Ayatullahs of Shi'ite Islam).
Regime change will likely occur when an Iranian military officer, with impeccable nationalistic credentials (a Napoleon type figure) along with fervent Shi'ite piety, will come to the fore. His ascendancy to national leadership, perhaps assuming the title of Shah, will have to be approved by the Majlis (Parliament). The precedent is the ascendancy of Reza Shah Pahlavi, a former Army officer, who became Shah in 1925, as approved by the Majlis, which deposed the former Ahmad Shah Qajar. Reza Shah Pahlavi was the father of the late Shah, Muhammad Reza Pahlavi, who reigned until the 1979 Islamic Revolution when he was overthrown.
It is unlikely, however, that Iranians will embrace the exiled Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, son of Muhammad Reza Pahlavi, to become Shah because the erstwhile ruling Pahlavi family was very unpopular. The Pahlavis' unpopularity was due to the common view that they were not sufficiently nationalistic and that they were secular. The Crown Prince is a Westernized figure, and has called for a secular Iran, but these factors indicate that he is out of touch with Iranian history and culture and apt to suffer the same lack of popular support as his overthrown father.
The United States should not play an overt role in regime change as it would undermine the potential new leader's nationalistic credentials. A precedent exists: Iranians regarded the former Shah, Muhammad Reza Pahlavi, as a Western puppet commencing from the 1953 overthrow of the then Prime Minister Mossadegh, orchestrated by the U.S. and U.K. This resulted in opposition against the Shah from many quarters, including nationalists, leftists, and clerics (the Ulama).
If the Islamic Republican regime were to be supplanted, the new leader, likely a Napoleon type figure, will have to be scrupulously deferential of the clerical class (the Ulama and its high-ranking Ayatullahs) as he would recall that the oppositionist Ulama (starting with the efforts by Ayatullah Burujirdi in 1959) worked for 20 years to overthrow the late Shah and could overthrow him, too.
If a new regime seeks to make Iran a nuclear power, it will likely obtain nuclear weapons from another country and will posture such weapons for deterrence against any potential adversary, not overt aggression.
Disclaimer: Ralph Groves supports the Libertarian principle of a non-interventionist foreign policy. Therefore, he opposes any military intervention in Iran, but he is not a spokesman for the Libertarian Party.
Note: Ralph Groves is very familiar with the Middle East. He visited Israel, lived in Iran, and was stationed in Iraq while he was an Army officer. In addition, he majored in Middle East Studies while he was a college student. Prior to retirement, he served in the Pentagon. In retirement, he wrote two books on Iran. The totality of his experiences and education supports his conformity to the Libertarian principle of a non-interventionist foreign policy and his forecast that regime change will occur in Iran under the leadership of a nationalistic Napoleon type figure who will be religiously pious.
cc: Lt. Col. Daniel Davis, senior fellow and military expert at the Defense Priorities think tank based in Washington, D.C.
Letter to Senator Josh Hawley
25 July 2025
To: Josh Hawley, U.S. Senator (R-Missouri)
Dear Sir:
I thank you for writing to me concerning the need to reduce abortions in our country.
I applaud your pro-life stance, and, in particular, your support for the Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America Organization.
Your effort to stop mail-order abortions -- via distribution of Mifepristone without medical supervision -- is commendable.
When I am elected to Congress, I will work with you and pro-life organizations to promote a culture of life to welcome all babies into the world.
Very Respectfully,
Ralph Groves
2026 Libertarian Candidate for Congress
11th Congressional District, Florida
P.S. I am endorsed by the Pro-Life Caucus of the Libertarian Party of Florida.
Disclaimer: Candidate Groves exercises his right to protected free speech, but is not a spokesman for the Libertarian Party of Florida.
Letter to Editor, Orlando Sentinel, about Carter's failure in Iran
5 January 2025
Dear Editor, Orlando Sentinel:
The recent passing of President Jimmy Carter prompts recollection of one of his unfortunate legacies: His lack of support for our ally, the late Shah of Iran, which emboldened anti-Shah militant Islamists in that country.
Without continuity of U.S. backing, Carter weakened the Shah, who had been a rock of stability in the Middle East and a staunch U.S. ally. Iranian clerics who were willing to work with the Shah were undermined. These were “accommodationists” who cooperated with the Shah provided he ruled according to Iran’s Constitution rather than by royal decree. The key figures of this group included the Imam Jum’ah of Tehran and Ayatullah Mahdavi, who avoided confrontations against the Shah. Other clerics, especially strict Islamists, such as the “justice group” led by Ayatullah Khomeini and Ayatullah Shirazi became more vehement against the weakened Shah. Khomeini ultimately succeeded in overthrowing him in 1979 via the Islamic Revolution, which I personally witnessed when I lived in Iran.
Since then, with Iran ruled by Islamist militants, starting with Khomeini, the region and the world have suffered repercussions. The immediate one was in Iran itself when militants seized the U.S. Embassy in 1979. Later in 1979, the first regional repercussion was in Afghanistan. The then-Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan to protect its pliant regime there from Iranian Islamists. During subsequent decades, the Soviets and its pliant regime were defeated, the country was racked by civil war, and various Islamist groups became ascendant and terroristic against the West, including the Mujahedin, Taliban, al-Qaeda, and Isis-Khorasan. This led to a decades-long U.S. intervention, resulting in the deaths of thousands of U.S. soldiers. In 1980, Iraq’s Saddam Hussein perceived that Iran’s armed forces were in disarray after the Shah’s overthrow and invaded Iran, precipitating an eight-year-long war and the deaths of half a million soldiers on both sides. Meanwhile, Iran became assertive against Israel via proxy groups, including Hamas and Hezbollah, which continue to endanger Israel.
Carter’s weakness and lack of support for the Shah resulted in a cascading effect of repercussions that the world has been suffering for decades. Carter’s tragic legacy is his betrayal of our ally, which resulted in regional instability, revolution, the rise of Islamism, invasions, wars, and the deaths of millions of people.
Ralph Groves, Doctor of Arts
U.S. Army Major (Ret.), Veteran, Iraq War
Letter: Bulwark against militant Islamism in West Africa
PUBLISHED: July 12, 2018 at 6:15 p.m. | UPDATED: December 13, 2018 at 3:25 a.m.
As a former analyst of West Africa, I was interested in your article “Islamist terror groups eye West Africa” (Orlando Sentinel, July 6). The article correctly stated that Islamist militant groups threaten West African countries. As you mentioned, these groups include Boko Haram and al-Qaida affiliates (e.g. al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb, a Salafi-Islamist group). Though not mentioned, Ansar al-Din, an Islamist group in northern Mali, is also a threat.
More important, your article’s discussion about security forces (with American and European assistance) and about the fragility of some countries’ governments left out the main bulwark against militant Islamism: the cultural factor of Sufism, the variant of Islam prevalent in West Africa.
Over centuries, Sufism accommodated African traditions, has been tolerant of Animism and Christianity, and has emphasized spirituality instead of overt control of governments — therefore opposing militant Islamism in these regards.
While Sufism in West Africa has been the main bulwark against Islamist militants, its cultural influence may be eventually undermined.
Saudi Arabia and Iran fund expansion of Wahhabism and Shi’ism, respectively, eroding the influence of anti-Islamist Sufism.
Security forces and governments will never be strong enough to counter Islamist militants if Sufism loses its predominant position in West African culture.
Ralph Groves Winter Garden