Letters

Write for The Iranian Editorial policy

Wednesday
May 2, 2001

Molla apologist

Ms. Seterah Sabety in her second article, "Reza Shah was no Mossadegh" leaves us no doubt that she is an apologist for the current Islamic government in Iran. With all due respect, it is disappointing to read an article that is so full of elitism, hypocrisy and historical inconsistency. Ms. Sabety claims that her late father was a senator during the rein of Reza Shah! This is can not be. Ms. Sabety, the 1905 Constitution did not provide for a bi-cameral parliamentary system. The First Senate convened in 1949 after the Supplemental Laws to the Constitution provided for an upper house. (Later Dr. Mossadegh dissolved the Senate and he the dissolve the Majlis and sought to rule by decree.)

Even if your father was in any position of legislation, this is a lucid barometer of the level of your hypocrisy. There is no argument that Reza Shah would not allow any independent thinker to occupy the seat of a legislator. If Reza Shah was so bad, how come your father chose to become a rubber stamp parliamentarian? The Late Shah had many faults but his worst shortcoming was his tendency to surround himself with "magasan dor shirini!" These inner-circle opportunists encouraged him to do his wrongs to gain his favor. However, later they abandoned him hoping new rulers would grease their pot. By her own admission, Sabety family was part of this inner-circle of opportunists.

Ms. Sabety excuses the crimes of mollas as merely a "reaction" to the modernization efforts of Pahlavis. She is more concerned about the plight of landowners who lost their land during the Pahlavi era than what our people have suffered during the Pahlavis and the past 22 years. For your information, akhoonds made very little noise when Reza Shah forcibly removed the hejab. However, in 1963, they could take it no longer when Mohammed Reza Shah gave women the right to vote, and abolished serfdom in Iran by giving the land to peasants. Landowners and bazaar merchants have been steadfast allies of clergy since the inception of Islam in Iran. In fact landowners are the most reactionary segments of any society. No country was ever able to liberate and modernize itself without ridding itself of this class of parasites.

No wonder Ms. Sabety is such a molla apologist. She is practically dropping her tears as she writes about the predicament of those poor landowners who lost their land during the reign of Reza Shah. Fortunately, Ms. Sabety, I am from a more humble background, my family was not landowners, they did not abuse and exploit the masses of peasants in Iran. No, I have no tears for the landowners that you mention more than once in your article. In 1957, Mohammed Reza Shah bestowed all the Imperial Land to the peasants who worked the land and in 1963; reactionaries, mollas, landowners, Mr. Bazargan and the likes of Ms. Sabety tried to lead a rebellion so the liberation of women and Land Reform would not take place in Iran. Just think what mollas and molla apologists would have done if they gained power before women could vote and peasants could work their own land. Babak is right on the point in his "A Saint Compared to Ataturk." When Reza Khan marched on Teheran; our country was in the most disheveled status ever. The central government was utterly bankrupt and powerless.

Chieftains ran the country. There was no security. My maternal grandparents could not even go from Najaf-Abad to Isfahan. The outlaws ruled the countryside. Roads were non-existent. My paternal grandparents were prisoners in Baha'i quarters in Sangesar. They could only survive at point of gun against Muslim fundamentalists.

All of Iran's industries: post, telegraph, oil, transportation, custom services, and banking even the police force were run by foreigners; Belgians, British, Swedish, and Russians. As if that was not enough, Britain sought to turn Iran into a protectorate in her dominion. There was no public education, no legal system, no national registry, and no sign of modernity in Iran. Khuzistan, the birthplace of our civilization, was practically an independent sheikdom. Gilan had become a Soviet Republic. It would not't be long before Azerbaijan, the birthplace of Prophet Zoroaster would be part of Soviet Azerbaijan.

This is in total contrast to Turkey. Turkey had already experienced an era of reform known as Tanzimat. Turks still were very aware of their status as a former global power. Ataturk did not have a nation as poor, as backward, as hopeless and as illiterate as Iran. Think about it, Turkey was able to fight a 3-year war against giants: Britain, Russia and France. Iran was so poor that Qajar shahs would borrow money from merchants to go on their European trips. In 1800's, Qajar kings vacationed numerous times in Europe.

Reza Shah only made one trip abroad to Turkey. In ten years, Reza Shah created a national registry system in Iran, we all got last names, created Ministries of Health, Justice, Education, and Transportation. He created a national army to protect our borders and our internal security. With the exception of oil, he delivered all other industries to the hands of Iranians.

People want to make a martyr of Dr. Mossadegh. He tried to nationalize one industry without success. Dr. Mossadegh is a hero and I respect him. But no body is Reza Shah. Reza Shah successfully nationalized custom services, transportation, banking, and fishery. The list goes on. It was the result of his tireless efforts that Iranian troops and police protected our national borders not British and Russian soldiers or Swedish police. Under Reza Shah, we gained a national and modern education and legal system.

When Reza Shah opened schools for women, akhoonds made some noise that education is forbidden for women. Against this background, Sabety excuses the akhoonds for merely reacting against "impulsive decisions of Reza Shah!" Why can't Iranian women get an education like women in India, Europe and America?

It is sad to see a woman who has lived in America so viciously attack the efforts of a man who tried to better the lot of his people by educating them, free women and religious minorities and give us economic sovereignty!

One cannot even begin to compare Reza Shah with his son or any body else. In the summer of 1953, Dr. Mossadegh could not even protect his regime. He did not have enough loyal followers to protect him. Iran was the only case where CIA had success. And in fact, scholars have argued that American/CIA plan failed. The success was the fruit of loyal army officers who executed their own operation. By comparison, Reza Shah had more loyal and devoted followers. In 1941, Reza Shah's Army faced the daunting challenge of fighting super powers: Britain and Russia. Nevertheless, against all odds, they fought for three days against invaders. Men like General Zanganeh fought till the end.

Dr. Mossadegh dissolved the Senate and dissolved Majlis. Historical facts, as published by New York Times, point to the fact that for months Mohammed Reza Shah resisted the British and American appeals for him to take actions against Mossadegh. However, once Dr. Mossadegh wanted to take full control by completely dissolving all institutions of parliamentary system and have control over the military too, he was alarmed. He had the right to be alarmed because Mr. Mossadegh had a the foul-mouthed foreign minister in the name of Dr. Fatemi and furthermore, he was a Qajar prince. We would never know how far Dr. Mossadegh wanted to go. Why did he want so much control? Reza Shah and Mohammed Reza Shah never went as far as dissolving the Majlis. Even during their most dictatorial days, they gave a pretence of a parliamentary system. In fact, it could be argued that Dr. Mossadegh might have hurt Iran's opportunity for democracy by dissolving the Majlis. Once he dissolved the Majlis, even an indecisive Mohammed Reza Pahlavi was pushed into action. Yes, by comparison to Bazargan, Sanjabi and many others National Front leaders and of course his own son, Mohammed Reza, Reza Shah the Great had little schooling. He never went to fancy schools in Europe. But Sabety's elitism has blinded her to the fact that many great men come from humble origin with little formal education. Reza Shah the Great, Andrew Jackson, Harry Truman, Bill Gates, Jesus Christ, Ataturk, Lech Walesa were visionaries. They did not carry elitist degrees, but they changed the world with their determination. With all their education, Dr. Sanjabi and Engineer Bazargan kissed Khomeini's hand and delivered our country to a koranic preacher, a man who preached that America has exploited Iran for 2500 years. Khatami holds a Ph. D. But does he have the vision or the determination to stand up to Khamenii? The Unabomber has a Ph. D. Ted Bundy was a lawyer.

The allegation of Sabety and opportunists that Reza Shah admired Hitler is utterly unfounded. No one can produce a shred of evidence to this outrageous fabrication. Reza Shah never met with Hitler or Mussolini. There were no formal treaties between the Imperial Government and the fascists. Iran merely engaged in trade Germany who provided favorable terms.

In 1940, few people knew about the true nature of Hitler. Charles Lindbergh admired Hitler as the "greatest thing that happened to Germany." Ex-King of Britain met with Hitler and showered him with praise. Britain and France sold Austria and Czechoslovakia to Hitler. Joseph Kennedy tried to dissuade USA from going to war with nazi Germany. And many Jewish businessmen dealt with Hitler. Sabety's claim is nothing but a cheap shot to cover her aristocratic behind.

I wish Ms. Sabety would take some responsibility. Her articles are poorly reasoned and lack any evidence. She, by her own admission, was part of the ruling class in the Pahlavi system. I am a defender of Reza Shah the Great but a critic of Mohammed Reza Shah's rule. However, I find no reason or excuse for the excess of the revolution. Mohammed Reza was not as effective because, amongst many other shortcomings, allowed opportunists raise his ego. Many of them became traitors to him and our nation very early on and are the current internet/book critics of the past and apologists for the present. Why were you so quiet then?

H. M. Jalili

Comment for The Iranian letters section