Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas M. who wrote (2276)	10/2/2001 7:42:13 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Oh come on Thomas... things are never as simple as you would like to have us believe. First off.. the plan to overthrow Mussadegh was proposed by MI6, and later adopted by the CIA, when it became apparent the Mossadegh could not control the communist Tudeh party which had been holding massive demonstrations in the streets of Tehran. It was AN OVERWHELMING FEAR that the Tudeh's would seize power (overthrow Mossadegh) and provide the USSR a reason to militarily intervene that led to the Shah removing Mossadegh from power and seizeing the full reins for himself. There's no doubt that the overriding concerns of the US were stability and order in the country, with the protection of British and US oil interests to be preserved. But what you conveniently ignore is the fact that the Soviet Union had also OCCUPIED Azerbaijian in 1920, and latter parts of norhern Iran in 1941, in conjunction with the Allies attempt to establish supply routes to Stalin. It was the US that pressured Stalin to remove his troops from Iran in 1946. However, Stalin refused to give up Azerbaijian (he had already exploited the oil reserves there). Mossadegh was a noble and ethical individual, from all accounts. However, he was constantly playing all sides against one another and never distancing himself from the Tudeh party. In fact, he used the Tudeh's as leverage against British and US interests in the region and he was notoriously difficult to pin down with regard to what his intentions were for Iran's alliances in the world. So while Mossadegh felt that he could play an extremely dangerous game of sitting on the fence, it was pretty obvious that with the US just emerging from the Korean conflict and facing the prospect of a nuclear arms race with the Soviets, that it was in our interests to create certainty... Was it right? Not particularly... Was it smart?? Most definitely, considering the circumstances of having an aggressive soviet russia showing little restraint towards destabilizing governments around the world for their own interests. The bottom line is that the US and Britain decided that Mossadegh would not be able to maintain his precarious "balancing act" forever and that it was likely the Tudeh party would overthrow him anyway... Afterall, the Russians had a tremendous desire to create a communist Iran, with the access to oil reserves, and a warm water port into which they could base their fleet. And Iran was just too undeveloped and unable to defend itself politically from such social pressure upon its borders. The bottom line is that EVERYONE with an interest in Iran was "meddling"... Except that there was already a precedent, represented by Soviet occupation of Azerbaijian, which demonstrated the degree to which Stalin was willing to press his agenda. Iran would not have survived as a nation had the Shah not assumed control. And while he and his SAVAK was extremely brutal to dissident groups, the level of prosperity enjoyed by Iran far exceeds the economic policies of the Ayatollahs who replaced him. And in comparison to the Shah... Khomeini and his fellow Ayatollahs have been responsible for more human suffering, including sending children into Iraqi minefields, than anything the Shah ever inflicted. I know this for a fact because I have numerous Iranian friends, many of who fought against Iraq and saw first hand the human tragedy. Hawk