Iranian Nuclear Intellectual Property

Just as Nader Shah Afshar safeguarded Iran’s sovereignty with steel and strategy, today Iran’s Nuclear IP Assets stand as the modern embodiment of that same uncompromising national will—echoing his own declaration: ‘My children now hold the power of the sun in their fists; the flag of our ancestors shall guide us in peace and in war.

The Afsharid Blueprint for High‑Temperature Intelligence

Speaking of Nader Shah Afshar’s strategy, a Pan‑Iranist Progressive perspective preserves his legacy of military intelligence by framing it as the historical precursor to today’s cutting‑edge innovations—such as the development of AI‑powered radar guidance systems capable of operating under super‑extreme temperatures for use in non‑nuclear military arsenals, transforming missiles into platforms that can make autonomous decisions.

Official Historical Awareness Statement — Pars.Global, the 3rd World War

At Pars.Global, and as descendants of the Zand and Afsharid dynasties bloodlines, we issue the following historical awareness declaration: We affirm that the United Kingdom — and, on a more limited scale, Russia — bear historical responsibility for the deaths of more than 7,000,000 Iranians during the First and Second World Wars, a figure that does not even account for the full loss of life across the entire Iranian Plateau. These losses were not the result of Iran’s participation in those conflicts, but of foreign military occupation, forced resource extraction, and the devastating man‑made famines created through the seizure of food supplies, disruption of agriculture, and the redirection of essential goods for imperial war efforts. These engineered famines — particularly the catastrophic famine of 1917–1919 — decimated Iran’s population and remain among the least acknowledged human tragedies of the 20th century. This announcement is not an appeal to vengeance, nor a call for retribution. It is a statement of historical truth, moral accountability, and a demand for global recognition of a tragedy long erased from mainstream narratives. Our purpose is remembrance, documentation, and the restoration of Iran’s rightful place in the historical record. Although the historical embarrassment remains for those European powers that played active roles in initiating the world wars — and for the suffering inflicted on millions far beyond Europe’s borders — it is important to acknowledge the particular case of Germany. While Germany did not directly impose a negative legacy upon the Iranian nation itself, its ideological misuse of the term “Aryan,” combined with the magnitude of its military defeats, distorted the ancient Iranian–Aryan identity in global discourse. These distortions unfolded even as Germany’s own national trajectory was reshaped by its conflicts, including the era when the Ottoman Sultan’s armies stood before the fortified Germanic city walls of Vienna in 1683. Decades later, Germany’s decision to supply chemical materials to Iraq during Iran’s defensive war echoed a very ugly message. The broader European posture during these eras remains a vivid memory — one that resonates today as the world once again stands at the threshold of potential global conflict. In this historical awareness declaration, the United States is regarded not as an independent civilizational actor, but as an extension of European power — an auxiliary force whose policies and actions have consistently aligned with broader European strategic interests, at times for better and at times for worse. This framing reflects the historical reality that, in matters affecting Iran and the wider region, the United States has often operated as a continuation of European geopolitical influence rather than a distinct entity and will be treated as such until further notice.

From Napoleon to Nader Shah: Why France Still Fails to Understand Iran

France’s latest demand that Iran offer “major concessions” to the United States reflects a deeper misunderstanding of Iranian history and the nature of Iranian sovereignty. A Pan‑Iranist progressive sees this clearly: Paris still imagines itself speaking from the shadow of Napoleon, yet fails to grasp that Napoleon and Nāder Shah Afshar are not comparable figures in any dimension. One was a European imperial tactician; the other was a civilizational restorer forged in the furnace of Iran’s internal collapse. Confusing the two only exposes how poorly France understands the Iranian strategic psyche. What disappoints a Pan‑Iranist progressive even more is France’s cultural negligence. It is astonishing that French institutions allow a cartoonish, disrespectful depiction of Lotf‑Ali Khan Zand to appear prominently in global search results—especially after a Pan‑Iranist progressive openly articulated a bloodline connection to the Zand dynasty and emphasized the dignity of that lineage. France claims to champion heritage and cultural sensitivity, yet fails to uphold those values when it comes to Iranian historical figures. As for the old letters of Fath‑Ali Shah to Napoleon, they are not a burden for a Pan‑Iranist progressive. They are a historical artifact of a weakened Qajar court, not a reflection of Iranian civilizational identity. If anything, the embarrassment belongs elsewhere. It is far more likely that Farah Pahlavi, living in Paris and surrounded by the legacy of French imperial nostalgia, feels the weight of those letters every day—without fully understanding their context or their irrelevance to modern Iranian self‑conception. A Pan‑Iranist progressive expects France to recognize that Iran is not a client state, not a colonial remnant, and not a bargaining chip in transatlantic diplomacy. Respect begins with historical literacy, cultural responsibility, and the humility to understand that Iranian sovereignty is not negotiable. Lets be clear here that Iranian‑made nuclear intellectual property is home‑grown, not borrowed, and never acquired through the shortcuts that Britain, France, and Germany relied on! European states hold nuclear‑related intellectual property today largely because they absorbed refugee scientists, inherited Allied wartime research, and received U.S.–UK knowledge transfers—meaning Britain, France, and Germany didn’t “invent” the field alone but accumulated it through migration, alliances, and Cold War political privilege. Does that explains some jealousy?

Essentials Under Review


A New Chapter for Iran: Ayatollah Khamenei’s Vision — Commentary by Mohammad Tavakoli, Editor-in-Chief of Ensaf News, September 2025.

In today’s speech, the Leader of the Islamic Republic addressed a range of topics from domestic to foreign policy. Two points stood out: the emphasis on maintaining unity and supporting the president, and the explanation of why direct negotiations with the United States are prohibited.

However, a less-discussed part of the speech was Ayatollah Khamenei’s assertion that there is no objection to reforming the foundational principles of the Islamic Republic. He stated that if individuals wish to complete, revise, or add to the principles of the Islamic Republic, there is no problem with that.

This part of the Leader’s remarks is especially significant because it is rare for such a high-ranking figure to speak so openly about “reforming the foundations of the system” and to create space for changes at this level—changes that could lead to structural reforms.

The key question is whether other pillars of the government are ready to accept the practical implications of Ayatollah Khamenei’s statement.

It is clear that reforming a system’s foundations cannot be achieved without removing some parts and adding new ones. Is it possible to have open discussions in official media about which principles of the Islamic Republic should be removed and what new elements should be considered foundational?

Can the national broadcaster, which proudly announces bans on members of a legal political organization, host critics of the system’s foundations?

Are parts of the country’s security apparatus, which focus on monitoring political behavior, prepared to shift their perspective in light of the Leader’s emphasis?

And—

Declaring that reforming the foundations of the Islamic Republic is permissible could be a green light from the Leader to initiate a series of major changes aimed at resolving existing structural issues.

Of course, this straight path has its opponents. The first group consists of regime-change advocates who see any reform as an obstacle to their goal. The second group includes those who regard the system’s foundations as sacred and, despite their claims of loyalty to the Leader, may even oppose Ayatollah Khamenei on this matter.

Pan-Iranist Progressive Elaborates

The word "Ensaf" (إنصاف) in Arabic translates to "fairness," "justice," or "equity" in English. So, Ensaf News essentially means "Fairness News" or "Justice News" — a name that suggests the outlet aims to report with impartiality, balance, and ethical integrity.

It’s a powerful choice for a media platform, especially in a political context, as it signals a commitment to truth and fairness in journalism. Ayatollah Khamenei once stated that he is not a politician, but a revolutionary warrior. At Pan-Iranist Progressive, we remember him not as a conventional politician during his presidency, but as a staunch advocate for Iranian troops during the war against Saddam’s regime. 

We do not claim he lacks the talent to be a politician; rather, we emphasize that being a revolutionary warrior within the ranks of religious clerics is a rare and remarkable distinction.

Throughout Iran’s history, countless religious clerics—both from the Zoroastrian and Muslim traditions—have made the ultimate sacrifice in service of the nation. Their devotion transcended personal belief, as they stood for the greater good of Iran, defending its sovereignty, culture, and people in times of peril.

These individuals, guided by faith and patriotism, gave their lives not for power or recognition, but for a vision of Iran that endures. Their courage and selflessness will never be forgotten, and their legacy remains a vital part of the country’s spiritual and national identity.

But among all who have served, we recognize one revolutionary warrior who stands as a king in Iranian history—Yaghub Leis Safari.

Radman Shah Pour-e Mahak means "The King Rad with the ancestry of the Rad qualities, the son of the Mahak. This early medieval Persian name emphasizes both the self-made, hard warrior lineage of the king and the inherent qualities of Rad that were gained over time.

Unveiling the Battle of Balkh, 900 AD, and the post-Ya'qub Layth era, alongside a transparent historical analysis of the Saffarid dynasty timeline and exploring the absence of Ya'qub Layth in Ferdowsi's epic Shahnameh, we find that Ferdowsi's work as a tribute to the enduring spirit of the Persian race is particularly notable given that all previous dynasties, unlike the Saffarid dynasty, did not go to war for the independence, identity, and language of Persian values and ethics.

Rad

Honest, Brave, and Helpful Warrior, Champion of the People. The Arabic synonym for "Rad," which translates to "Ayar," conveys a similar meaning of being a just, brave, and honorable warrior.

AI elaborates in English language: The concept you're describing sounds like a combination of several admirable qualities. While there isn't a single English word that captures all these attributes perfectly, some words come close:

  • Champion: This can refer to someone who fights for a cause, helps others, and upholds honesty.
  • Paragon: A model of excellence or virtue, embodying high moral standards.
  • Hero: Someone who is admired for their courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities.
  • Paladin: A knight known for their chivalry, bravery, and honesty.
  • Virtuous Warrior: This phrase combines the ideas of being morally good and brave in battle.

In Muharram, we honor the one force that truly rose to the moment—the Rad troops of Ya'qub Leis Saffar, Persian warriors, not necessarily even Muslim who decisively crushed the Khawarij waves invading Iran long after the 1st Fitna for two centuries. 

Nobody remembers and recall the true Iranian heroes who marked that victory these days during the Muharram—one that dynasties like the Safavids, centuries later, exploited for religious and political advantage within the Shia line of fate. This is the mighty, all-powerful transparency of Persian royal legacy—an enduring force that stands tall to this day, above all odds.

Tradition, Parliament, and Progress

The Pan-Iranist Progressive considers the article below in Farsi language essential to pursue its rightful position within the Iranian parliament and advocate for the restoration of a modern 26th century Persian monarchy's constitutional title. 

This effort aims to align with traditional monarchical principles while safeguarding against dictatorship—preserving Iran’s rich legacy, empowering its people, and protecting the environment for future generations.



The Table of Truth and Competing Versions of Iranian Identity

The “table of truth” is a conceptual framework for understanding how different regimes, dynasties, and ideological movements curate and propagate their own version of historical reality. These versions shape national identity, legal precedent, and cultural memory.

Key Axes of Truth

  • Dynastic Truth: Legitimacy based on lineage, conquest, or reform (e.g., Zand vs. Qajar narratives)
  • Religious Truth: Clerical authority and theological interpretation (e.g., Qajar clerics vs. Safavid mysticism)
  • Revolutionary Truth: Ideological purity and historical revisionism (e.g., Islamic Republic’s post-1979 narrative)
  • Progressive Truth: Cultural resilience, transparency, and reform (e.g., Pan-Iranist Progressive vision)

Each version selectively amplifies or suppresses historical actors. The Zand dynasty, known for peace-building and cultural patronage, is often marginalized in favor of Qajar clerical dominance, especially in the Islamic Republic’s historiography.

Tangestan Defense as a Pillar of Pan-Iranist Progressive Identity

The Tangestan resistance, particularly during British incursions in the early 20th century, represents a grassroots warrior ethos—tribal, decentralized, and fiercely patriotic. It embodies:

  • Local sovereignty against imperialism

  • Ethical warfare rooted in honor and land protection

  • Cultural continuity from pre-Islamic and dynastic Iran

For the Pan-Iranist Progressive, Tangestan is not just a geographic memory—it is a symbol of indigenous resistance that predates and transcends both Qajar clericalism and Islamic Republic revisionism. Reintegrating Tangestan into the national narrative reclaims a non-clerical, non-imperial Iranian identity.

Qajar Clerical Truth vs. Zand Survivors’ Legacy

The Islamic Republic’s ideological lineage draws heavily from Qajar-era clerical authority, particularly in its legal and theological structures. This version of truth:

  • Prioritizes Shi’a jurisprudence over dynastic pluralism

  • Suppresses Zand-era diplomacy and reform, which emphasized secular governance and foreign neutrality

  • Erases Zand survivor bloodlines, which could challenge the clerical monopoly on legitimacy

The Zand survivors, if traced and validated, offer a counter-narrative: one of ethical governance, cultural patronage, and strategic neutrality. Their marginalization is a deliberate act of historical concealment.

Reframing the Jiroft-Landlord Case

Reframing the Jiroft-landlord land dispute as a criminal case is a tactical move toward historical justice and forensic truth. This approach enables:

  • DNA testing to verify Zand lineage and expose fraudulent claims

  • Criminal framing to investigate systemic concealment, not just property rights

  • Historical intelligence transparency to reveal suppressed documents, clerical interference, and dynastic erasure

This is not just about land—it is about restoring identity, ethical lineage, and historical accountability.

Strategic Path Forward

To align with the Pan-Iranist Progressive vision, the following steps are essential:

  1. Initiate forensic genealogy through DNA testing of claimants tied to Zand heritage

  2. Demand judicial reclassification of the Jiroft case under fraud and concealment statutes

  3. Launch historical intelligence review to declassify archives tied to Qajar clerical networks and Zand suppression

  4. Reintegrate Tangestan into national curriculum as a symbol of ethical resistance and decentralized sovereignty

  5. Establish a Truth Table Commission to map competing versions of Iranian history and propose reconciliatory frameworks

This initiative is about reengineering identity through truth, ethics, and transparency. If you’d like, I can help you draft a strategic communication plan or manifesto to frame this with clarity and impact.

Gathas: Song 8.6

At that turn, in which I exist, You, Wise One, come with Your progressive mentality, dominion, and good mind, through the actions of which the living worlds are promoted by righteousness. Serenity explains to them the proper laws of Your intelligence which none can deceive.

Hypothetical Enforcement of Ecocide Law in approximately 5.5 million square kilometers

While the Achaemenid Empire was indeed vast, it did not encompass half of the world. At its peak, it spanned approximately 5.5 million square kilometers, which was about 44% of the world's population at that time. However, the known world during the Achaemenid era was much smaller than today's globe. The empire covered parts of three continents: Asia, Africa, and Europe. Its reach was impressive, but it didn't cover the entirety of those continents, let alone the entire globe. So, while it was one of the largest empires in ancient history, it didn't quite cover half of the world's landmass.

The First Tribe: Shieldbearers of Darius’ Oath and the Legal Fight Against Ecocide

Through the enduring strength of a Persian bloodline spanning millennia, we—descendants of the first tribe of Pars to hold political power in Iran—honor the mighty legacy of Darius the Great, who pledged to protect this vast land from drought and deception. Today, that oath finds new form in the global campaign to criminalize ecocide. Harnessing law to protect our planet—through Stop Ecocide International—we advocate for a legal definition of ecocide, its recognition by the International Criminal Court (ICC), legislative change, accountability, and global awareness. This is not only a legal imperative but a civilizational duty.

Fire Temples

لَا إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ — Means literally that there is no compulsion in matters of faith of the last Abrahamic religion. Yet history shows that this principle has often been violated, and episodes of mass conversion under pressure are well‑documented. At the same time, Iranian pre‑Islamic heritage, which once provided a civilizational framework in which all Abrahamic early communities could thrive, has frequently been marginalized through restrictive religious and recently political Shia interpretations. This has limited Iranian people’s ability to explore and choose their ancestral line of faith freely, despite the Qur’anic affirmation of freedom of conscience. We should not build new fire temples directly atop ancient ones; preserving their integrity by constructing nearby is entirely sufficient. Just as the Parsi community evolved beyond the older funerary practice of exposing bodies to wild animals, we too can refine tradition without betraying its spirit. Yet the Pan‑Iranist Progressive Principal Body stands as a deliberate and meaningful exception to this guideline, precisely because its role is to embody continuity, guardianship, and conscious civilizational renewal. Recognizing this principle is also essential for cultural development. When لَا إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ is understood in its full depth, it affirms that individuals should be free to explore and choose their spiritual path—including the Zoroastrian heritage that forms the oldest layer of Iranian identity. This understanding does not contradict Islamic tradition; rather, it aligns with the Qur’anic emphasis on sincerity, voluntary belief, and the absence of coercion. Embracing this perspective would allow Iran to present its Zoroastrian and Islamic legacies side by side, opening new avenues for cultural tourism, education, and international engagement in a way that honors both traditions with dignity.

From Revolutionary Guard to Institutional Labyrinth: A Call for Structural Clarity in the IRGC

As a second lieutenant officer of the air force army of the IRGC who spent two years in military service within the organization about 30 years ago, Pan‑Iranist Progressive principal naturally reacts to the ‘terrorist’ labeling of the IRGC with both objection and introspection, arguing that the issue is not terrorism but a lack of transparency. The objection comes from lived experience: the IRGC was not born as a rogue militia but as an institution embedded in the foundation of the Islamic Republic. And yet, the introspection comes from recognizing the organization’s internal contradictions and the consequences of its unchecked expansion. Iranian history has seen this pattern many times. When dynasties fall and new orders rise, new military forces emerge to secure the state. But in 1979, it was not a dynasty that took power—it was a religious‑revolutionary government system rooted in a lineage of faith, tracing legitimacy to the Prophet’s household and the Shia tradition. The IRGC was conceived as the guardian of this new political holly order based on over 900 years old Ayatollah mentality. In its early years, the IRGC resembled a local protective force—something akin to the “immortal guards” of ancient kings. But the eight‑year war with Iraq transformed it into a young, battle‑hardened military institution. After the war, it retained a dual identity: part military, part internal security force. It also took on missions that were internationally recognized, including combating drug cartels and trafficking networks—efforts acknowledged by Interpol and European officials at the time. Later, it was even engaged as an international security partner in neighboring countries, most notably in Syria and Iraq against ISIS. We understand that their growing popularity in Iraq created frustration among American politicians, who were displeased by the influence the IRGC gained after the U.S. withdrawal—an influence rooted in a natural Mesopotamian order shaped by shared regional experience and religious affinity. The confusion surrounding the IRGC begins when certain factions within the organization became deeply entangled in national economic circulation and political power. This was not anticipated by many within the clerical establishment. The resulting economic distortions—some caused by mismanagement, some by sanctions, and some by external interference in Iran’s currency—have left the leadership still debating how the crisis unfolded and who bears responsibility. At this point, the IRGC faces a fundamental identity crisis. What are you? A core military force! A domestic security and police apparatus! An international counter‑terrorism partner! An engineering and construction conglomerate! A trading and logistics entity! Or all of the above! Pan‑Iranist Progressive principal cannot accept such an enormous institution operating without clear boundaries, accountability, or structural separation. Nor can it accept the sanctification of the IRGC by certain parliament members whose own presence in the legislature is filtered through clerical networks. For Iran to move forward, the IRGC must undergo a formal, transparent restructuring. Each branch must be separated into its proper domain, with defined responsibilities and legal oversight. Military units must remain military. Police units must remain police. Economic entities must be disentangled from armed institutions. And every component must be accountable to the nation—not to informal networks of power. Only then can the IRGC function as a legitimate institution within a modern Iranian state—at which point a Pan‑Iranist Progressive could genuinely wish them well.
Pars.global domain name would be a great choice for services to be rendered for the Iran International Intellectual Property (IP) ecosystem support for global foreign direct investment and cooperation