The series of disappointments that have harassed the growth of Iran began with a poor foundation, its leadership and government, and has then snowballed with each coming failure and conflict, however it is the people who choose to stand on that foundation and continue on or rebuild it. Iran, throughout the last decade has had several shifts in how government is deployed, the indecisive tug and pull of religiously kept sanctions or a move towards further westernization, and the maintenance of the tight control on its population to maintain diplomatic control. The direction of Iran to become a world power is seen through the political moves of trying to gain stronger allies, such as the dependency of the British. "Mossadegh himself regarded Britain’s constitutional monarchy as the best model for Iran’s government. And yet his hatred for the British as a malignant force in his country’s affairs, and his intuition for what he regarded as the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company’s essential evil, was profound." (De Bellaigue, pp. 108)
In all fairness, the British Government was a power at the time with excellent executive leadership. Despite this, Mossadegh was right to have disgust for the British Government. Much of the Anglo- Persian Oil Company was based in Iran where the oil was extracted. Iran is an oil goldmine. The company, which was primarily British owned, paid money to the Iranian Government for oil that was extracted, however the profits from the taxed revenue that the
All the Shah’s Men by Stephen Kinzer details the 1953 American-orchestrated coup in Iran. Iran was under British economic control, but as it modernized, Iranians began fighting for their own control. Their fledgling democracy was working to modernize, until the UK and the US decided to interfere to protect Britain’s colonial holdings from Soviet influence. Because the US was not interested in protecting a British business, British politicians emphasized the threat the USSR held to Iran, leading to Americans inserting themselves into a nation’s politics in which they had no place. They successfully orchestrated a coup, however, the negative, long-term, anti-Western results overwhelm any positive effect. All the Shah’s Men by Stephen Kinzer paints a picture of the results of action without adequate attention to future results.
Iran was now unprotected, and a new power came into being. The Arabs invaded and the quality of life changed. “People fell into poverty as the greedy court imposed ever-increasing taxes. Tyranny tore apart the social contract between ruler and ruled that Zoroastrian doctrine holds to be the basis of organized life” (21). The Iranian people couldn’t survive with a ruler who had no sympathy or respect for them. Their life was being over run by foreigners.
With the shah still sick, it was hard to manage what was back in Iran. The speed of change in Iran was too hard to get command. “The shah was in trouble, reaping the harvest of years of brutal and unpopular policies, including the use of secret police that controlled dissent with arbitrary arrests and torture.” It was obvious that the shah had lost all control of his people of Iran, but the president had hoped for an alliance of opponents to be formed. A man
The complexity of America’s relationship with Iran increased steadily beginning in 1908, when Iran struck oil. The Shah, the king or emperor of Iran, after taking the place of his young predecessor Reza Shah Pahlavi with the help of the CIA, led Iran into a period of extreme wealth and prosperity, the likes of which the Iranian people had never experienced. However, with the growth of wealth in Iran came the growth of Iranian resentment towards the West, specifically the United States. The Iranian’s resented the uneven distribution of wealth that they felt existed and the United State’s influence in “westernizing” their society. In 1963, this growing hatred led to a conflict with the Islamic clergy. The conflict was quickly settled by the Shah, but he was unaware that this dispute was the beginning
Iranian hostility of United States can be traced back to the 1950s. The United States supported any regime that was not communist, even though they would be considered very unpopular with the people of their country. Because of this, Iran became an anti-communist country and the Shah became an ally of the United States. In 1950 the Shah left Iran when Mohammed Mossadegh was elected Prime Minister. After Mossadegh election, he used his authority and nationalized the oil industry in the country. This incident generated fear in the United States. The state department felt that communists could abuse this anarchy and Iran could turn against the United States. The Shah, who had been removed from power, contacted the United States and the Central
According to Mark C. Carnes and John A. Garraty’s “The American Nation: A History of the United States”, “During World War II, Great Britain, the Soviet Union, and later the United States occupied Iran and forced its pro-German shah into exile, replacing him with his twenty-two year old son, Muhammad Reza Pahlavi” (Carnes and Garraty). In the early 1950’s, executive power was relocated to the leftist Prime Minister Muhammad Mossadegh.
The [Bush] administration found it consistently difficult to get the measure of Tehran. Bush depicted it as a “nation held hostage by a small clerical elite that is repressing and isolating its people,” but the reality was far more complex. (482)
In her essay, Shareen Brysac tells the story of the 1950 coup of the Iranian government through a particular lens which paints Persians as too simple-minded to see the overthrow coming; while also implying that the CIA coup of the Mossadegh was a result of the Cold War and not US interest. On the other hand, Ervand Abrahamian asserts that the US has actually been hiding information about the Coup because people wouldn’t want to really know what is going on, furthermore he views the overthrow of Mossadegh as a strategic move to protect US oil interest in Iran, because as doctor Varzi explains in her note to the reader, he was advocating for the nationalization of Iranian oil. Furthermore, she discusses how the rule of the Shah who was attempting
The American government is known to promote democratic values throughout the world. Though the ideals America was fighting for during the Cold War, the government still managed to participate in the overthrow of democratically elected Prime Minister, Mohammed Mossadegh. Mossadegh threatened to nationalize Iran’s oil in 1951 and later gained the support of the Iranian government. The British companies had many investments in Iranian oil. It is with the approval of nationalization that the economies of both British and Iran were ultimately harmed. The British government requested the help of the US so that they could perform a coup to overthrow Mossadegh. With suspicions of Mossadegh supporting communism, and being supported by the Tudeh Party, the United States government was willing to sacrifice their democratic ideologies and credibility in the region for the insurance of an anti-communist leader. This would prove to cause problems that still resonate in today’s political and military negotiations in this region.
Back in 1950, when Mossadegh was Prime Minister of Iran, he nationalized Iran 's oil industry, reducing the European influence throughout the nation over the oil commodity. This sparked great fear throughout the United States; they feared the communists would turn the Iran democracy against them. After three years in exile, in 1953 Shah Mohammed
backed coup, his relationship to the U.S. became an even greater source of disapproval with the Iranian people. Many Iranian began to echo the thoughts of the exiled Khomeini, who preached that that reliance on the U.S. or any other foreign nation was devastating Iran. He pointed to the benefits the British and the Americans were getting from Iranian oil while thousands of people were dying because of the Shah. For several decades the U.S. would support the Shah’s economic development and regional leadership plans. These plans would be paid for fully by exporting the country’s enormous oil wealth. The Shah would use also billions of dollars from the exporting of his oil reserves to purchase modern and more deadly weapons developed within the United States. Weapons he would use on his own people and as a deterrent for other nations to become involved in Iranian
In response, the rest of the world started a boycott of Iranian oil, and the British began planning a military operation to wrest control from Mossadegh. They worked with President Dwight Eisenhower and the American CIA to organize a coup of sorts, by funding and inciting pro-shah supporters to take to the streets and demand the removal of Mossadegh, who was an erratic and unpredictable ruler. The operation was successful and threw Mossadegh out of power, but not without many unintended consequences (Farber, 56). Within Iran, Islamic fundamentalists following Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini were greatly angered by the American influence and disruption, and the seeds of revolution were planted.
The Pahlavi dynasty in Iran lasted from 1925-1979. In 1925 Reza Shah Pahlavi was appointed and reined until 1941 when his son Mohammed Reza Shah Pahlavi succeeded him after the Anglo-Soviet invasion of Iran. Mohammed Reza Shah Pahlavi was considered pro – Western, who worked closely with many U.S. Presidential administrations. In 1951 the European educated Mohammed Mosadegh, Prime Minister of Iran wanted to nationalize Iran’s oil industry. This political, economic and ideological conflict resulted in Mohammed Reza Shah Pahlavi being forced into exile for a short period of time. Mosadegh’ s policies would have adversely affected the British and American governments who had previously been in control of Iran’s oil. Therefore the Intelligence
As Michael Axworthy states on the back cover of his book, A History of Iran: Empire of the Mind, Iran is a “land of contradictions”. As this is true these contradictions is what makes Iran, Iran. Iran today is looked as the pinnacle of the Islamic faith in the form of a Government structure. Since 1979, Iran has been known as the Islamic Republic of Iran and Iran will continue being an Islamic Republic for centuries to come. Iran has a rich history of intellectuals and scholars. Iran is known for its vibrant culture that dates back longer than the Western Ideals were even conceived. However Axworthy asks a question about Iran and its impact on the world’s history and the current events that we see in Iran today, Axworthy asks “Is Iran an aggressive power, or a victim?” This statement is a true paradox, can Iran be the next Nazi Germany, the next Soviet Union or the next Great Islamic Caliphate or is Iran just fighting to keep its culture alive from a vast array of attacks from foreign entities and internal struggles.
Iran has always, it seems, been the breeding ground for some kind of political upheaval or another. In recent times, back in 1979, there was a major revolution which was, in some ways, similar to the revolution we are seeing today. The people were angry and they were tired of being controlled by the government that was in power. They had concrete ideals and were incredibly passionate about their revolution. The revolution Iran is experiencing today does not appear to be quite as passionate and does not appear to maintain a belief in any real solid political system. They just know they want something different. In the following paper we present an illustration of the current revolution that is taking