|
June 28, 2004Top * Better Kennedy than Khrushchev I came across an editorial piece on your website regarding Kermit Roosevelt. I found the writer's remarks quite interesting. In fact I would agree that is a commonly overlooked aspect of Operation Ajax. Like most people of the third world we never take responsibility for our own actions. It's always, "someone else's fault." We're perpetual victims at the mercy and whim of "The Imperialists!" Kermit Roosevelt wrote a book about Operation Ajax, the coup d'etat that overthrew Mosaddegh, rightfully titled, "Countercoup". In it he points out the logistics and justifications for the intervention. Being at the height of the Cold War, the last thing the Western powers wanted was to lose Iran to the Soviet bloc. And although we may often pretend otherwise, the Tudeh Party was a clear and present danger to the territorial integrity of Iran. So the West intervened, of course for their own ultimate benefit, but we benefited from that intervention as well. If I'm going to lose my independence I would prefer losing it to the likes Eisenhower and Kennedy than Khrushchev and Brezhnev. Operation Ajax was a relatively bloodless event compared to most coups. There were no foreign troops engaged in street battle. There were mobs of Iranian monarchists, or people paid to play the role of monarchists, and they were confronted by another mob purported to support Mosaddegh. Thanks to a slush fund of about $100,000 dollars the monarchists prevailed and the rest as they say, is history. If you get a chance, I strongly recommend reading "Countercoup". Until the final phases of the operation, Mr. Roosevelt and Sec. Dulles didn't think they had a real chance. The Shah was a bit on the indecisive side, and things weren't falling in place as planned. But much to the surprise of all parties involved, with the use of 10% of the allocated funds they made it happen. The title is interesting. Countercoup sort of implies that a coup has already taken place, and the second coup is basically countering the first. That's an important detail we often leave out when we describe the premiership of Mr. Mosaddegh. According to the Constitution of Iran, the premier, was APPOINTED by the Shah, and confirmed by the Majles. The premiership of Mr. Mosaddegh was at no point voted on in a democratic fashion by the people of Iran! Mr. Mosaddegh never won a popular election! I often read in the Western press erroneous references to the democratic nature of Mr. Mosaddegh's government. That's rubbish. He was appointed by the Shah, and confirmed by the Majles, whose members were also appointed by the Shah, PERIOD! Our friends in the National Front would likely take offense to my comments, because Mosaddegh is basically Iranian Nationalism personified. But in the final analysis, to me, he was a just a rabble rouser that did more to threaten our independence and territorial integrity than he did to preserve it. And considering his actions, he still got to live the rest of his days in his family home in Ahmadabad in relative tranquility, alas as a prisoner. |
Archive By
subject June 28 Moore's Fahrenheit >>> More
letters in
June
|
|