Dear Kaveh, your presentation is as thorough and succinct as that of a physicist, which I assume you are going to be very soon, if not yet. Thank you. I have a few questions, with some controversial comments: 1) Your presentation duly refers to the possibility of a causal relationship between the coup and the 1979 revolution, it is upon this premise that many historical narratives branch out to criticize the Imperialist component of the Iranian elite and the pro-UK/US ones in defeating a popular regime. However, if I may get into some technicalities of humanities and social science in modern terms, I believe one's historical narrative can be very selective about historical facts and thereby one can offer different ones: A) Is not this a fact that those leftist intellectuals in and outside the Iranian community who correctly criticize the US and the UK, play down the destructive... [more at the permalink of the entry above]
Dear Saoshyant, I have no sense of nostalgia for Mossadegh's era. To me too, he is a symbol of hesitation and also a character who was never sure where to put his trust. I think he just got lucky with the nationalization of oil. Here I have only presented a narrative of the events, mind you, that appeals best to the current situation in Iran. The mysterious role of the Soviet Union in this affair is a speculation (the Tudeh presence in army ranks was real and contributed much to the Americans' fear and many others' as well) that was never realised; This being said, are you trying to imply that a communist coup d'etat would have had more dire consequences? Maybe and myabe not, but still I can conclude that foreign intervention is always a dodgy business that can never be forgotten. Mossadegh himself was not even representing... [more at the permalink of the entry above]
I just wanted to introduce this new book written by S. Kinzer, a veteran correspondent for the New York Times, "All the Shah's Men" (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0471265179/qid=1061316267/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/104-7843204-2775950?v=glance&s=books&n=5078). I haven't read the book myself yet but the author was on ABC News couple of weeks ago and he was talking about the idea that american sponsorship of 1953 coup has resulted in the rise of the new terrorist activities in Middle East. He also mentioned that British government which was losing its influence in the Middle East and needed American help in that situation, had tricked Americans in supporting the coup by convincing them that Mossadeq is supporting communists groups (they couldn't say "hey we're losing the oil there!"). seems to be a nice book.
I just read a brief informative review in The Economist of the book mentioned above.Un4tun8ly, it doesn't exist online! But can do what I did: Go to your hood's bookstore, read the review, and then kindly put the magazine back on the rack. :> The review starts like this: THE overthrow of Saddam Hussein may seem to herald a new era of intervention, but America and Britain have been partners in pre-emptive regime change before. Fifty years ago this week, the CIA and the Secret Intelligence Service toppled the democratically elected Iranian prime minister, Mohammad Mossadegh. His government had nationalised the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (the forerunner of BP) in protest against working conditions and British unwillingness to share profits evenly. Check http://economist.com for other articles.
is that picture taken in the millitary court? or is it during his premiership?
It is his trial afterwards.
Cool, I learnt a lot of interesting facts here. I have been some how skeptical of the level of praise for Mosaddegh, compared to his real contributions. However, my knowledge of historical facts fall far short of making any informed judgment on his real contributions and mistakes. Meanwhile, I think we can recognize him as one of the only symbols left for bringing together people with democratic aspirations in Iran. This unifying and aspirational role may make some people with historical knowledge reluctant to open up the discussion on possible shortcomings of Mosaddegh. To finish, let me give you a first hand experience of my father about mosaddegh which was interesting for me to hear. At 1330, my father has been a 7 year old boy, considering himself pro-mosaddegh (this obsession with politics is apparently not anything new in our culture!). His uncle, a prominent political figure, takes him... [more at the permalink of the entry above]
I think the US coup was an important factor for radicalization of the Islamic revolution. Events like US embassy hostage crisis or 9/11 are echoes of history and US is partly responsible for the formation of these radical movements.
Dear Kaveh: I appreciate your response and I find it very well put. I myself am not sure how much the Soviet's possible intervention was exaggerated to justify the coup or not. The most important thing about the 1953 Coup, I would say, is that much more historical research is yet to be done. Dr. Javad Sheikholeslami, a prominent Professor of Political Science at the Tehran University, who I think died a few years ago in his 80s, argued that both the Pahlavi coups (the 1922 and the 1953) were more or less the emergent result of the anti-communist concerns of the then English-speaking power (either the US or the UK or both). Would a coup by the Communists have more sever consequences for the overall historical future of Iran, well my crystal ball is no better than yours. However, when I look at the present situation in the... [more at the permalink of the entry above]
This message was removed by the FToI editors for violating the rule 2 of the comment policy.
Bravo to dilignet moderators. :-) I think you should put it in square brackets, though! I was confused for almost 5 minutes what message mohsen jamshidi is referring to!
Eh.... between ourselves, what was that censored message, I'd like to know?
glaspie to saddam 1990 prior to kuwaiti invasion--we don't interfere in interarabic affairs ha!
I think Mossadegh has approached the TUdeh party because he had no choice. He played with them... and he lost. But he was not a communist, definitely not !