VIEW

Mossadegh

Mossadegh was a true nationalist and patriot who was unable to effectively lead as Prime Minister. While his intentions were noble, his ability as the leader of government will always remain in question. No need for hero worship or demonization. One matter, however, should not be disputed: Mossadegh's errors in leadership led directly to the authoritarian twist evident in Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi's evolution as a dictator and the inevitable Islamic Revolution which followed in 1979. Prior to 1950 - 1953, Iran enjoyed a brief dalliance with parliamentary democracy, which began with Reza Shah's abdication in 1941 and the release of all political prisoners (Mossadegh included) by Prime Minister Mohammad Ali Foroughi. Remember: Leadership is an art and a duty to which few are called and in which endeavor, fewer still succeed.

Re: Arash MK

This was a good article. I commend you for thinking outside of our old and tired box of fantasy and misguidedness.

Our future leaders need to take heed. There is no need to view Mosadegh, the Shah or others as "evil", conversely, there is no need to view them as "hereos" either. They were only ordinary flawed Iranian citizens wanting to make change for the better.

Before we can change our country's politics, we need to "reform" our culture and ways of thinking. Sadly, we are badly off course.

Salute to Jaleho

dear Jaleho, thank you very much indeed for your extremely well argued response to the confusion and ignorance of our anti-colonial history on the one hand and the purposeful and treacherous distortion of it on the other:

"The coup of 1953 is to be studied together with its pre-cursor of 1921 British coup which defeated Constitutional Revolution by bringing Reza Shah, the removal of Reza Shah by the same powers after WWII and bringing Shah to power, removal of Mossadegh in 1953 by the same power, and the re-instating Shah to power". "I wonder the same Jebhe Melli sympathizers who are now making fun of Iran demanding an apology from the US recognize the historical similarities between Iran's 1978 revolution, its aspirations, and the methods foreign powers have used to defeat FORMER anti-colonial movements in Iran .....". I also deeply appreciated your insight into the allegations and insults against both Mossadegh and Kashani which even well intentioned and authentic academics such as Abrahamian repeat as established facts: "Ayattolah Kashani who was exiled by Brits and goes at least as far back as Mossedegh on anti-colonial fights, who was the most prominent part of the Jebheh melli in connection to Bazar and average people, the one who supposedly forced Shah to re-install Mosaddeq following 30 tir and was elected as speaker of majlis by Mossadegh, is said to have been sold to Brits for $10,000!!".
In fact not only Kashani's anti-colonial fight preceded his joint nationalist struggle with Mossadegh, but there is ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE, of Kashani having RECEIVED the pittance of $10,000 to sell Iran against his lifelong beliefs and struggles. What I would add, is the tendency on the part of many to view historical events and individuals involved in black and white of total denigration and slander or idealisation and worship. History is complex as are individuals and if we intend our understanding of our past to inform our present and future, we must be able to suspend certainties and simplifications of events and individuals. That attitude of modesty in respect of knowledge opens up space for genuine thinking and a much wider and clearer perspective for acting in the world.

Dear Jaleho

If there is one thing that we have all learned from the Islamic Revolution in Iran, then that would be: Politics and Religion DO NOT Mix.

By Mixing Politics and Religion, we essentially get an 'Ineffective' Government, together with the 'Corruption' of the entire Religious Establishment.

In short, by Mixing Politics and Religion, we get The 'WORST' of both Worlds - Pure and simple!

story maker Kinzer became historian GOD!!

I totally agree with Kuroush who is nauseated with the Iranians here who all of a sudden found Kinzer's western narrative of the 1953, imbued with his best-seller-book "stories" interjected with historical fact...as the bible of the 1953 coup! That despite the fact that years prior to that, Iranians themselves have written much better narratives, at least many different versions which reflects the myriad of different factions that existed back then; added to the fact that the National Archives has withheld most documents regarding the 1953 coup, even though 50 years after the events it is supposed to have release it all. Many of them are claimed "destroyed" thus not made available by CIA.

Everyone who has read Kinzer's book or who has read few pages about 1953 coup, or whose father has told his own version of the events, comes out here as a historian and writes garbage instead of history.

Considering that Iran has been the chess board for colonial powers for years, many Iranians also have a bit of an exaggerated "Dai jon Napoleon syndrome," which makes the events of 1953 even more complicated than it is. That is, just like Iranian.com, whoever disagrees with another person's opinion can brand the characters as "agents of US or Britain, or Russia." Considering that the Coup has in fact been imposed on Iranians by foreign agents, these accusations are much more serious and confusing than the accusation of IRI agent on Iranian.com!!

This is even made more complicated by the fact that the many followers of Mossadegh have made a demi-God out of the truly national hero of Iran, while many documents of the past, mainly by foreigners who intended on weakening Jebhe Melli, Mosedeq, and its allies would make opposite propaganda, calling Mosadeq himself "crazy," "sentimental fool," and accusing many others "British agents. Then, different scholars (and I mean real scholars like Abrahamian or Shahbazi caliber, not the petty scholar wanna-bees who appear in Iranian.com and write articles) get part of the propaganda that fits their very own narrative, rejecting the rest!

This make a reader go WOW, upon coming to so many contradictions regarding the events! Ayattolah Kashani who was exiled by Brits and goes at least as far back as Mossedegh on anti-colonial fights, who was the most prominent part of the Jebheh melli in connection to Bazar and average people, the one who supposedly forced Shah to re-install Mosaddeq following 30 tir and was elected as speaker of majlis by Mossadegh, is said to have been sold to Brits for $10,000!! Maki of Hezb Tudeh who was another power base of Mosadeq, organizing the Abadan demostrations which empowered Mosadegh is similary branded jasoos. Same with Baghai who was the strongest member opposing RazmAra, who got the "Sedan's house document" which was used at the Hague as evidence of British clandestine affairs in Iran, was later shortly put in prison accused of the terror of Afshartous (which Kurush mentions as head of police), Hosein Fatemi was accused of being a homosexual who used to get bribes, Fadyan Islam who killed RazAra supposedly would get their instructions from the Brits, Khalil Maleki supposedly weakened the Tudeh part of Mossadeq base by joing Baghai's zahmatkeshan,  Mossadegh himself was accused of "having Jewish background" and accused of single-handedly making the coup possible by being fooled by the American agent Henderson.....

 Hidden in all of this is the fact that Jebhe Melli was never a uniform party from the start and as its name indicates, it was composed of different factions, each with its own ideology, and the fact that CIA-MI6 actually had the clandestine affair in Iran making the coup.

The revisionism that Kurush refers to is indeed nauseating, but worse than that it is the secular Jebhe Melli groups who have their very own narrative and documents from Iran, but all of a sudden you hear Kinzer become their supporting god, just because Kinzer's narrative of how "defeat of seculars led to Khomeini" which sounds sexy and best-seller-material in the US, also is in tune with those Jebhe Melli’s in the west now who announce Mossadegh God and the present regime evil !!

Kinzer's "star and crescent" book about Turkey is exactly in the same vein misleading! You read that one as the real history of Turkey, you'll conclude that "military coup" although bad, but is very good in Turkey because it keeps nationaliss over the crazy religious groups. Thus all of the military coup personals there are the cutest thing since creation! And of course the later events in Turkey prove Kinzer to be a complete clown.

Similarly, no one can understand Iran's 1978 revolution, 1951-53 nationalization movement, without a proper understanding of Iran's Constitutional Revolution of 1905--- the participation of singularly Iranian elements and their class interest of  urban workers and peasantry ---the religious (olama and Tollab) and in particular their Baazar connections---the intellectual and educated--- and the ashayer leaders--- and the more modern comprador and foreign educated minority.

Also, the coup of 1953 is to be studied together with its pre-cursor of 1921 British coup which defeated Constitutional Revolution by bringing Reza Shah, the removal of Reza Shah by the same powers after WWII and bringing Shah to power, removal of Mossadegh in 1953 by the same power, and the re-instating Shah to power.
Only if one studies the REAL history of colonial intentions in Iran starting by Oil concessions given to D'arcy in 1901, followed by Iranian awakening reflected in Constitutional Revolution of 1905 can one follow the real flow of the subsequent event like the 1921 coup, and 1953 coup and the 1978 revolution. And, only then one can get the REAL lessons to prevent future events like the 1953 coup!
 
I wonder the same Jebhe Melli sympathizers who are now making fun of Iran demanding an apology from the US recognize the historical similarities between Iran's 1978 revolution, its aspirations, and the methods foreign powers have used to defeat FORMER anti-colonial movements in Iran:

--1951-1953 movement of oil nationalization which threatened the British control over that important source of energy, and the current efforts of Iran regarding Iran’s nuclear energy and the western insistence that the nuclear energy and its global control should remain in the hand of few western powers; the same is true for oil-pipelines and the control of its path as was in the past for oil itself,

--The heavy sanctions that the British imposed on Iran back then leading to economic disaster during Mossadegh and weakening him in preparation to the 1953 coup,

---frezzing of Iran's Sterling assest......

oh yeah we heard it before

he was comunist because he said oil belong to his countrymen

he was a MAOIST because he dresed like MAO

and Salvadr Alende of chili was a comunist too

so CIA had to remove both , as result 200,000 died or dis-apearados

Raah e Mosadeq

Hamvatanan e Irani, Nagozarid Raah Va Khoon e iin BOZORG MARD payemal Shavad...

Mosadeq var Zendegi Koneed va Mam e Vatan ra be AJNABI nafrooshid...

pool,ghodrat,magham mandegar nakhahad bood ancheh mandegar ast SHARAF va ENSANIEAT e shomast...

Dar ghair e inn soorat Sarneveshti joz Sadaam va Shah nakhahiid dasht...

Payendeh Iran

Arash Monzavi-Kia

1."a similar fate as Razmara!" should read:
a similar fate "to" Razmara!

2. "Ludicrously" is rather a cheap word to be used in this context and should be replaced by preposterously or better still, ironically.

3. "the frail Mosaddegh " should be replaced by "a" frail Mosaddegh.

4. "But he could not afford to lose the lucrative AIOC, or force a military solution! You mean to say:
But he could not afford to lose the lucrative AIOC "revenues", or "to" force a military solution!

5. "nor the legal actions could change the old man’s views by a millimetre!" should change to:

nor the legal actions could change the old man’s views by "an inch"! The Imperial Units are better understood on both sides of the Atlantic.

6. You seem to be confused between the American and British spelling:

nationalization, sympathizer (American) and Labour, unfavourable (British). Please be consistent.

There are many more errors or poor stylistic cases in your text but I leave them for another time.

MPD

"And also the book, as here, does not go into any detail why Kashani broke racks with him, and went from supporter and ally to his opponent. "

should read:

And also the book, as "in" here, does not go into any detail "as to" why Kashani broke "ranks" with him, and went from "a" supporter and ally to "an" opponent.

And

Mosadegh is incorrect: it should be written as: Mosaddegh

Yes, the Conventional Iranian history needs a revision, because

Yes, the Conventional Iranian history needs a revision, because its 'wisdom' has failed us so thoroughly that we have consistently failed to establish a stable, humane and rational state.

Yes, the sanctity of the three Holy Cows of contemporary Iranian history (Reza Shah, Mosaddeg, Khomeini) should be sacrificed at the alter of wisdom and truth, in order for us to break the bounds of ignorance and self-congratulation; to see ourselves and the world the way it really is, and to move forward, not backwards into the doomed marshes of our failed history! 

Arash M-K

Revisionism and its objective

Revisionism seems to be the weapon of the moment for the neo-fascist, pro-monarchy, Western stooges in the emigre Iranian community. Never good at the details of history & devoid of any respect for the truths of history and its hard facts, this revisionism is exhibited in this flimsy essay. Respect for Mossadegh and his legcy is optional, of course, but when history is twisted to fit the concocted thoughts expressed above, then a feeling of repulsion is induced. The author of this essay takes a lesson from the playbook of the Western thugs who set about toppling a legitimate and highly popular, nationalist government under Dr Mossadegh. This lesson may be titled: Character Assassination. Words such as 'neurotic', emotionally 'unbalanced' are applied to Dr. Mossadegh; and, his supporters referred to as 'emotional' & 'mesmerized.' The author could have been so disingneous, had he referred to these Iranian patriots as bunch of lunatics, for that is what he essentially means to imply. The Anglos of course denigrated Dr Mossadegh as a despot and dictator in the Media, as they were applying the same psychological warfare that they had used in WWII. Never ever was the Shah in his long reign referred to as a dictator in the Western Media (which he of course was) because, of course, he was a subservient & useful stooge for his puppet masters in Washington and London. So if we believe the falsificatins and character assassinations perpetrated here, Dr Mossadegh was 'unbalanced', i.e. crazy & his followers 'mesmerized', i.e insane. But the author defines neither 'neurotic' nor 'mesmerized' for us, but lets their negative connotations damage the essence of a vastly popular national movement to get rid of Western thugs. Again, character assssination a la Anglos. The British had a visceral hatred for Dr. Mossadegh. He had violated certain taboos. He not only nationalized the oil industry, but he kicked out all the British technicians & managers; even worse, he kicked out the British embassy staff and severed diplomatic relations, unheard of in the Moslem World where the Britsh were feared, although hated as well. The British, for instance, spread a rumour that Mosadegh was a Jew, since they knew well that was effective character assassination amongst the ignorant masses. This is not a proper forum to go into the details of those harrowing months and weeks when a courageious old man, enfeebled by his age, was determined to accomplish the natinal dream of restoring Iran's sovreignty. But a few points suffice, however. After the British put Iran under a worldwide embargo, not unlike the US sanctions in the past 30 years, Dr Mossadegh devised a very ingenious economic program of national self sufficiency. The success of this program moved the British to choose violence and sabotage as their next weapon to destablize Iran. The British (Anglo-Saxons in general) had a deep racist worldview and everywhere they went they took with them their racist paraphernalia. In Abadan, there was a de facto apartheid state. The Iranians were not allowed to have technical & mangerial jobs or skills. Iranian workers were not allowed to drink from the same fountain or use the same restroom which were used by the British, laws which one would have recognized in the South as Jim Crow laws. Mossadegh however called the British bluff, and showed them that Iran can survive, and surprisingly quickly adapt to the new economic conditions. Mossadegh did what a competent economist would have advised: he drastically reduced imports of luxury and non-essential goods, and began a program of non-oil economy, lessons of which could have been of wise council to the present leadership in Iran who have yet to wean Iran of its dependency on oil exports. The Achilles' Heels of Mossadegh was a formidable one. The British for the past 30 years had been using the prooceeds of oil to bribe into collaboration a wide swath of the Iran's ethnic groups & politicians. So while the British were kicked out, their agents under their pay, all native Iranians, were still active in Iran. When Kermit Roosvelt entered Iran, these agents were released to him to do his biddings. This is a dimension of the coup which is not fully explored due to the secrecy the British have maintained over the years. One of the most sever acts of sabotage & psychological warfare that the Anlo-American operatives committed was the abduction and gruesome murder of Tehran's police chief who was loyal to Mossadegh. This sent a chill through the ranks of the nationalists who now feared their lives. If it was so easy to abduct and lynch the police chief , then anybody was a fair game. Incidentally, this modus opernadi was applied to Salvador Allend and his supporters, as when one of the important generals of Chilean army loyal to Allende was abducted and killed in very much the same manner. It had worked in Iran, the CIA knew it would work in Chile as well. Revisionism that is being promulgated (above essay) has been a component of destablization of Iran by the Anglo-American saboteurs. In case of successful coup aginst the present leadership of Iran ( highly unlikely, of course), the whole history of Iran would be re-written, Mossadegh would resume his villanous status which the Anglo-Saxons have historically assigned to him; the Shah, and not Mossadegh, would become our national hero, etc. But the struggle Mossadegh waged against the Western oppressors was not his alone: as a young man he was an eyewitness to the heroic sacrifice of the Iranian patriots in the 1905 Revolution. He did not forget why they had begun their revolt and knew theirs had succeeded only partially. The flame had been passed to him and he passed it on to the future generations of Iranians who did finally succeed in 1979 Revolution to sever the pilfering fingers of the Western thugs.

anonymous American: How did

anonymous American:

How did you learn to write in Persian?

سخنی کوتاه از مصدق عزیز

تقدیم به دوستان و هم وطنان

Dear Ali P: we should be sad, as we have often been, but ...

We should be sad, not just because Mosaddeg failed; not just because Shah failed, not just because his father had failed before him, not just because his successor (Khomeini) has failed since; but because we as the intelligentsia of a nation have failed so consistently, to govern ourselves in a logical manner!

Yet, tomorrow is another day and another chance. Let sadness be our guiding master, lest we fail again. 

Arash M-K

از دیدگاه آمریکا و انگلیس

بیشتر ایرانیان درون گرا هستند و بویژه به افکار انتزاعی رغبت فراوان دارند. بشدت احساساتی هستند و خیلی زود به هیجان می آیند، اما پیوسته در کار تطبیق تخیلات خود با واقعیات دچار عجز می شوند. مداومتی از خود در کارها نشان نمی دهند و زود به دام تعصب و خشونت افتاده، توانایی ایجاد و تثبیت یک دمکراسی پایدار را ندارند. آنها همواره آماده اند تا خارجیان را آماج سرزنش قرار دهند و برای بی کفایتی خود مقصر اعلام کنند.

مصدق یک ایده آلیست خیالباف بود که می خواست اندیشه های انتزاعی خود را با زور هم که شده، بر کشور وسیاست و اقتصاد آن اعمال کند . وی لجوج و احساساتی بود و همیشه یکدندگی می کرد و اگر به خواستش نمی رسید، خود را به غش و ضعف میزد تا جلب ترحم کند و مردم را متأثر نماید. احتمالاً عقده شهادت داشت و چون میدانست که از عهده گرداندن کشور برنمی آید، آرزو میکرد که مثل امام حسین شهیدی جاوید شود.

re:Excellent summary as usual

the author's statement : (( the beaten British were begging for a compromise, but Mosaddegh stubbornly refused any negotiation,)) is correct. Mossadegh ran out of time as he dismissed the news of new oil discoveries in SE Asia or that Kuwait's oil was coming on line. He was sure only he had all the winning cards. With passage of time the West shifted to other oil producers while the collapse of Iran's finances and economy,led the Bazaar block to withdraw their support, and so his time was soon over.

Excellent summary as usual

I’ve read the book “All the Shah’s Men”, but I don’t believe it refers to what happened after Holland defeat as “...the beaten British were begging for a compromise”. I think the British were as stubborn as Mosadegh was, even referring to Iranians as if we were sub-human.

And also the book, as here, does not go into any detail why Kashani broke racks with him, and went from supporter and ally to his opponent.

Well, ...

You found it very hard to hide your disdain. I mean you tried to come across as a no nonsense critic with a fresh point of view who is rather objective and stays on the sideline but you failed.
That is sad!
You give yourself away with the barrage of backhanded compliments that makes you insincere just when you want us to see otherwise.
That is sad!
One should have the courage to come clean with his convictions.
You may be right in assessing his gullibility and his mistakes. But he gave us our oil! May be it is because you think nothing should be nationalized.

So....

Should be be happy that the coup prevailed, or sad?