Advertise here

What Really Happened to the Shah of Iran

This is an interesting take for anyone interested in Iran:

 

http://www.payvand.com/news/06/mar/1090.html

By Ernst Schroeder

 

"In November 1978, President Carter named the Bilderberg group's George Ball, another member of the Trilateral Commission, to head a special White House Iran task force under the National Security Council's Brzezinski.  Ball recommended that Washington drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the fundamentalistic Islamic opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini.  Robert Bowie from the CIA was one of the lead 'case officers' in the new CIA-led coup against the man their covert actions had placed into power 25 years earlier.

 

Their scheme was based on a detailed study of the phenomenon of Islamic fundamentalism, as presented by British Islamic expert, Dr. Bernard Lewis, then on assignment at Princeton University in the United States.  Lewis's scheme, which was unveiled at the May 1979 Bilderberg meeting in Austria, endorsed the radical Muslim Brotherhood movement behind Khomeini, in order to promote balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines.  Lewis argued that the West should encourage autonomous groups such as the Kurds, Armenians, Lebanese Maronites, Ethiopian Copts, Azerbaijani Turks, and so forth.  The chaos would spread in what he termed an 'Arc of Crisis,' which would spill over into Muslim regions of the Soviet Union.

 

 

The coup against the Shah, like that against Mossadegh in 1953, was run by British and American intelligence, with the bombastic American, Brzezinski, taking public 'credit' for getting rid of the 'corrupt' Shah, while the British characteristically remained safely in the background.

 

During 1978, negotiations were under way between the Shah's government and British Petroleum for renewal of the 25-year old extraction agreement.  By October 1978, the talks had collapsed over a British 'offer' which demanded exclusive rights to Iran's future oil output, while refusing to guarantee purchase of the oil.  With their dependence on British-controlled export apparently at an end, Iranappeared on the verge of independence in its oil sales policy for the first time since 1953, with eager prospective buyers in Germany, France, Japan and elsewhere.  In its lead editorial that September,Iran's Kayhan International stated:

 

In retrospect, the 25-year partnership with the [British Petroleum] consortium and the 50-year relationship with British Petroleum which preceded it, have not been satisfactory ones for Iran ... Looking to the future, NIOC [National Iranian Oil Company] should plan to handle all operations by itself.

 

London was blackmailing and putting enormous economic pressure on the Shah's regime by refusing to buy Iranian oil production, taking only 3 million or so barrels daily of an agreed minimum of 5 million barrels per day.  This imposed dramatic revenue pressures on Iran, which provided the context in which religious discontent against the Shah could be fanned by trained agitators deployed by British and U.S.intelligence.  In addition, strikes among oil workers at this critical juncture crippled Iranian oil production.

 

As Iran's domestic economic troubles grew, American 'security' advisers to the Shah's Savak secret police implemented a policy of ever more brutal repression, in a manner calculated to maximize popular antipathy to the Shah.  At the same time, the Carter administration cynically began protesting abuses of 'human rights' under the Shah.

 

British Petroleum reportedly began to organize capital flight out of Iran, through its strong influence inIran's financial and banking community.  The British Broadcasting Corporation's Persian-language broadcasts, with dozens of Persian-speaking BBC 'correspondents' sent into even the smallest village, drummed up hysteria against the Shah.  The BBC gave Ayatollah Khomeini a full propaganda platform inside Iran during this time.  The British government-owned broadcasting organization refused to give the Shah's government an equal chance to reply.  Repeated personal appeals from the Shah to the BBC yielded no result.  Anglo-American intelligence was committed to toppling the Shah.  The Shah fled in January, and by February 1979, Khomeini had been flown into Tehran to proclaim the establishment of his repressive theocratic state to replace the Shah's government.

 

 

Reflecting on his downfall months later, shortly before his death, the Shah noted from exile,

 

I did not know it then - perhaps I did not want to know - but it is clear to me now that the Americans wanted me out.  Clearly this is what the human rights advocates in the State Department wanted ... What was I to make of the Administration's sudden decision to call former Under Secretary of State George Ball to the White House as an adviser on Iran? ... Ball was among those Americans who wanted to abandon me and ultimately my country.[1][1]

 

With the fall of the Shah and the coming to power of the fanatical Khomeini adherents in Iran, chaos was unleashed.  By May 1979, the new Khomeini regime had singled out the country's nuclear power development plans and announced cancellation of the entire program for French and German nuclear reactor construction.

 

Iran's oil exports to the world were suddenly cut off, some 3 million barrels per day.  Curiously, Saudi Arabian production in the critical days of January 1979 was also cut by some 2 million barrels per day. To add to the pressures on world oil supply, British Petroleum declared force majeure and cancelled major contracts for oil supply.  Prices on the Rotterdam spot market, heavily influenced by BP and Royal Cutch Shell as the largest oil traders, soared in early 1979 as a result.  The second oil shock of the 1970s was fully under way.

 

Indications are that the actual planners of the Iranian Khomeini coup in London and within the senior ranks of the U.S. liberal establishment decided to keep President Carter largely ignorant of the policy and its ultimate objectives.  The ensuing energy crisis in the United States was a major factor in bringing about Carter's defeat a year later.

 

There was never a real shortage in the world supply of petroleum.  Existing Saudi and Kuwaiti production capacities could at any time have met the 5-6 million barrels per day temporary shortfall, as a U.S. congressional investigation by the General Accounting Office months later confirmed.

 

Unusually low reserve stocks of oil held by the Seven Sisters oil multinationals contributed to creating a devastating world oil price shock, with prices for crude oil soaring from a level of some $14 per barrel in 1978 towards the astronomical heights of $40 per barrel for some grades of crude on the spot market.  Long gasoline lines across America contributed to a general sense of panic, and Carter energy secretary and former CIA director, James R. Schlesinger, did not help calm matters when he told Congress and the media in February 1979 that the Iranian oil shortfall was 'prospectively more serious' than the 1973 Arab oil embargo.[2][2]

 

The Carter administration's Trilateral Commission foreign policy further ensured that any European effort from Germany and France to develop more cooperative trade, economic and diplomatic relations with their Soviet neighbor, under the umbrella of d�tente and various Soviet-west European energy agreements, was also thrown into disarray.

 

Carter's security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and secretary of state, Cyrus Vance, implemented their 'Arc of Crisis' policy, spreading the instability of the Iranian revolution throughout the perimeter around the Soviet Union.  Throughout the Islamic perimeter from Pakistan to Iran, U.S. initiatives created instability or worse."

 

-- William Engdahl, A Century of War:  Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order, � 1992, 2004.  Pluto Press Ltd. Pages 171-174.

 

Balatarin

Comments 9 Pending 0

Sort comments:
amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

amirparvizforsecularmonarchy I Love Waterfalls and Find One of the most humorous things in the world; is the notion that Americans are a greater force for good & more civilized than Nazi's, Mullahs and Communists.

With Assad out of the way, the Love for the IRI does not disappear, they still stay, but Syrians and Iraqi's become expendable as Iranians are.

ajabroozegari

laylajoon Biologically produced. Life is a sexually transmitted disease and 100% fatal.

Egypt also would be in the sunni mix against Shia Iraq and shia Iran.

amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

amirparvizforsecularmonarchy I Love Waterfalls and Find One of the most humorous things in the world; is the notion that Americans are a greater force for good & more civilized than Nazi's, Mullahs and Communists.

Sad how a great violator of human rights Obama is mislabeled as a Democrat and the late shah is mislabeled as a dictator!

amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

amirparvizforsecularmonarchy I Love Waterfalls and Find One of the most humorous things in the world; is the notion that Americans are a greater force for good & more civilized than Nazi's, Mullahs and Communists.

Yes , but the goal is not that, as Egypt has no money for itself. The goal is to take/seize a large part of the 1 trillion dollars a year that is going to 8 countries in return for arms sales in war, the increase in manufacturing helps the west climb out of its problems, egypt has no money to give really although politically it would back syria. This is why Assad is wanted dead and why IRI backs him they see right in front and are wanting to avoid it.

amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

amirparvizforsecularmonarchy I Love Waterfalls and Find One of the most humorous things in the world; is the notion that Americans are a greater force for good & more civilized than Nazi's, Mullahs and Communists.

The majority sunni people of syria under salfist leadership and GulfCC countries money will be used to start a war against Shia Iraq backed by iran and so this is a gutless plan to help lift the G7 countries out of their current long depression by sucking the oil money out of the entire region instead of being used on the people, having it spent on over priced war technologies and weapons the region does not need.

sayyad.shaer

Sayyad Sha'er visit: www.sayyadshaer.com

So a war between Syria and Turkey against Iraq and Iran?

amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

amirparvizforsecularmonarchy I Love Waterfalls and Find One of the most humorous things in the world; is the notion that Americans are a greater force for good & more civilized than Nazi's, Mullahs and Communists.

Iran and Turkey can't be made to fight directly at this point, but yes IRI would back shia Iraq and Turkey and 6 other oil rich arab states will back syria 2 states in direct war, 8 states having all their resources funneled our to the west for parts and labor. None of these 8 states can remain neutral and none of them can fight each other directly as it would threatened their regimes survival which is a Priority for the west.

amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

amirparvizforsecularmonarchy I Love Waterfalls and Find One of the most humorous things in the world; is the notion that Americans are a greater force for good & more civilized than Nazi's, Mullahs and Communists.

Yes we know. The facts alone are crystal clear. What Iranians don't realize is in the long term the real policy wont change as a result of the reason all this was done which has been concealed from most. Iranians are in the cross hairs for at least 200 years.