Mossadegh and Ahmadinejad

Iran faces almost the same dilemma as 1953

Share/Save/Bookmark

Mossadegh and Ahmadinejad
by Ardeshir Ommani
01-Feb-2010
 

There is a stark similarity between some aspects of the political atmosphere dominant over Iran today and those under Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh right before the U.S.-led coup of 1953 that resulted in the overthrow of the legitimate government of Iran and the establishment of a U.S.-puppet government of the Shah. In the period between 1951-53, the U.S. in a close collaboration with the British colonial power through their channels within Iran's military and political apparatus, particularly the Shah’s court, was able to contrive division within the ruling circle and as a result the society at large.

The U.S.-U.K. sanctions of Iran's oil export at the time pursued a multitude of purposes: political instability, economic hardship, and international isolation. In the final year of Mossadegh's rule, the government was unable to pay the salaries of the civil servants in full, which had resulted in resentment towards the Prime Minister's policy of oil nationalism and his capability to rule. Secondly, Iran could not import consumer and industrial goods necessary for maintaining the normal course of economic and social reproduction. Thirdly, a layer of the ruling class whose interests were the extension of the U.S.-U.K. domination over Iran's natural resources and political system, made every effort to turn the wheels back or make the political system unmanageable. As a result, during the first eight months of 1953, Iran was in constant political turmoil and the ground was being prepared for a coup d'etat by the forces hostile to Iran’s nationalization plan, as well as to its independent direction in its domestic and foreign policies.

The U.S.-U.K. intelligence services under the covers of their diplomatic corps took advantage of the chaotic atmosphere, artfully promoted by the landed aristocracy and their spokesmen in the national congress and Mossadegh's administration. Iranian society in the early 50's was basically agrarian and hence a great majority, up to 65 percent were engaged in farming and played a miniscule role in shaping national policies. In a few large cities of Tehran, Isfahan, Tabriz, Kerman, Abadan and Shiraz, the politically active population was led by several political and ideological groupings. Among them the Tudeh Party that had organized a fraction of the workers, women and the intelligentsia under the banner of socialist ideals was a modern party merely in its infancy. The organizers of the Tudeh Party were Iranian intellectuals who were educated mainly in Western Europe, where the communist parties were strong during and after WWII, and the Soviet Union's army had effectively defeated the Nazi forces in Russia and Eastern Europe.

This party lacked experience and suffered from lack of deep understanding of the character of Iran’s social-economic development, the corresponding class forces and the necessary strategy for transition from a semi-feudal and a semi-colonial society to an independent and democratic social order. Although from the viewpoint of social justice, the Tudeh Party put the working class demands forward and achieved some successes, but in respect to the vital question of nationalization of the Iranian oil industry and the essentiality of forming a united front of working class and the national bourgeoisie which Mossadegh was the representative, the Tudeh did not seize the opportunity of uniting in time to prevent the success of the U.S. coup of 1953.

Ironically, this could be a useful lesson to be learned by all those Iranian groups today that wear the mantle of modernism and progress; however, in the recent unrest they joined the crowd whose aim was to overthrow the legitimate and democratically-elected government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Such association between pro-working class groups and counter-revolutionaries within the "Green Movement" makes some charges by the conservative elements against the "Marxists" and "Socialists" seem credible.

Tremors From Within

The second political grouping that associated itself with Dr. Mossadegh and his foreign policy was an amorphous amalgamation of individuals, tendencies and parties in a broad forum of what was known as the "National Front" of Iran. This conglomeration of loose political groupings represented mainly the interests of the merchant class that viewed the socialist movement and the Soviet Union as a "communist" neighbor with apprehension. In the camp of Mossadegh, in addition to the middle merchants, retailers, artisans, younger intellectuals and students who supported nationalization of Iran’s oil industry and hence Mossadegh's premiership against the Shah's despotism, there were big landlords, rentier strata, speculators, big businessmen, particularly in the import-export sector, and the families of the aristocracy and high echelons of clerics who hand-in-glove conspired to undermine the nationalization of oil movement.

The political organizations that made up the National Front headed by Dr. Mossadegh were: Iran party, Pan-Iranist Party of Nation of Iran, Islamic Mojahedin Party, and Toiling Masses Party of Iran. The leaders of some of the organizations served as representatives in the Iranian Parliament and spokesmen of Mossadegh’s Cabinet. In this group, representatives Shams Ghanatabadi, Abdol-ghadir Azad, Mozafar Baghaee, Hassan Imami, the leader of the House, actively opposed Dr. Mossadegh's plan for nationalization and hand-in-glove collaborated with the agents of foreign powers in undermining the national security and government stability from within the system. Before the final attack against the government of Dr. Mossadegh, on August 19, 1953, the U.S.-U.K. axis with the support of the domestic military and civil agents of foreign powers carried out several "mini-coups" that were neutralized by the great support of the Iranian people.

Patriotic Forces on Guard

Today, 57 years later, Iran faces almost the same dilemma in which the imperialist forces are planning to undermine Iran's political and economic system, using the UN sanctions, while the well-to-do classes frightened by President Ahmadinejad's pro-working class and national independence policies, are engaged in activities aimed at fostering insecurity domestically and weakening Iran's position internationally. The unceremonious role of this segment of the population led partly by the "reformists", is in fact preparing the ground to enhance U.S. influence in Iran, strengthen its supremacy in the Middle East region and change the balance of forces in Central and East Asia. The leadership of this "movement" attempted to use the tenth presidential election as a stepping stone to seize state power by slandering the result of the election, in which President Ahmadinejad with 63% of the votes defeated the reformist candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi.

But here is where similarities between Mossadegh's period and today's situation under Ahmadinejad ends and important differences begin. In sharp contrast to the liberal government of Dr. Mossadegh, President Ahmadinejad's government is an outcome of a revolution. Secondly, Iran is much more developed in comparison and the U.S. in the last 30 years has not been able to bring down Iran's social-economic system and lastly, but not the least important, the Islamic Republic's security forces are the result of the revolution and are trained, equipped and ideologically armed by the world outlook of the Islamic leaders, while the Shah's military forces were trained by the colonial and imperialist powers and were at the service of the monarchy allied with foreign interests. Finally, the economic sanctions of the West have been to some extent derailed by China and Russia that have lost their potency in undermining the Iranian economy.

AUTHOR
Ardeshir Ommani is an Iranian-born writer and an activist in the U.S. anti-war and anti-imperialist struggle for over 40 years, including against the Vietnam War, and now the Iraq war. During the past seven years, he has participated in the U.S. peace movement, working to promote dialogue and peace among nations and to prevent a U.S.-spurred war on Iran. He holds two Masters Degrees: one in Political Economy and another in Mathematics Education. Co-founder of the American Iranian Friendship Committee, (AIFC), he writes articles of analysis on Iran-U.S. relations, the U.S. economy and has translated articles and books from English into Farsi, the Persian language.

Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by Ardeshir OmmaniCommentsDate
The Great Heist
6
May 17, 2012
Boom!
3
Mar 01, 2012
Can the U.S. Swallow Syria?
8
Feb 12, 2012
more from Ardeshir Ommani
 
mamadali

Yes, there are similarities

by mamadali on

I'm glad to see this article.  This should serve as yet another 'tazakor' to those 'influenced' to understand the potential harm they may cause.  Today we are independent and our governement is OUR son of a bitch.  Not theirs.  Seems like there are a vocal few on this board that are sitting in SoCal and tending the foreigners biddings.  

BTW, congratiulations to all patriotic Iranians on another excellent space launch!  We're only the 8th nation in history to accomplish what we have accomplished!

Javedan Iran!

Mamad Ali


ahvazi

The difference between Mossadegh and Ahmadinejad

by ahvazi on

 

Mossadegh was overthrown by a coup planned by the Americans and the British.

Ahamdinejad stayed in power by a coup by the Sepah and Basiji forces led by Khamenei.


Fatollah

actually I enjoyed his interview from 2006

by Fatollah on

which planet is he from?


Omid Parsi

Shameless Hypocrite ...

by Omid Parsi on

How can the author mention the cockroach Ahmadinejad and Dr. Mossadeq in the same breath? Does he think people are that stupid and blind to the facts? Just the juxtaposed pictures above are worth a million words...

Dr. Mossadeq led a NATIONALIST movement to restore Iranian's rights to their resources. Ahmadinejad is a bona fide psychopathic thug who has led nothing but an outrageous coup d'etat to perpetrate the biggest terror attack yet on Iranian self-esteem, human rights and national interests.

The demise of Dr. Mossadeq had more to do with saving Iran from domination by 2-bit soviet-backed traitors of the Tudeh Party (of which I take Ardeshir Ommani to be a likely mouthpiece) than selling out to the west...

 To that end, I cannot help but thank the "Western Imperilaism" for a job well done. Indeed I am thankful and proud to have grown up under the SECULAR tyranny of the Pahlavi because it afforded me enough education and dignity not to take part in the shameful 30-year failing attempt at dissolution of Iran from the proudest Nation to a sewage-sucking "Omma" led by illiterate thugs and mullahs... 


Paykar

JJ , your censoring

by Paykar on

habits are surfacing again. Granted I pile on this Mozdoor called sargourd; people on the streets say and do worse to the thugs who support the Coup government. Would you tell them to stop it? Do you delete youtube footage posted on your site, where one can clearly hear profanities?

If you can give a platform to enemies of the movement ,  the paid and unpaid agent of the IRR, then you gotta be man enough to let us vent our anger.

Apparently certain things are sacred JJ.


aynak

With friends like Ardeshir who needs enemy?

by aynak on

>There is a stark similarity between some aspects of the political atmosphere dominant
>over Iran today and those under Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh right before the
> U.S.-led coup of 1953 that resulted in the overthrow of the legitimate government
> of Iran and the establishment of a U.S.-puppet government of the Shah.

Incorrect, The biggest contrast is that the coup in 1953 was orcestrated by outsiders
and the coup in 2009 by Ahmadi-Nejad and revolotionary guards, in both cases
against Iranian people.

>In the period between 1951-53, the U.S. in a close collaboration with the British
>colonial power through their channels within Iran's military and political apparatus,
>particularly the Shah’s court, was able to contrive division within the ruling circle
>and as a result the society at large.

Correct.

>The U.S.-U.K. sanctions of Iran's oil export at the time pursued a multitude of purposes:
>political instability, economic hardship, and international isolation. In the final year of
>Mossadegh's rule, the government was unable to pay the salaries of the civil servants in full,
>which had resulted in resentment towards the Prime Minister's policy of oil nationalism and his
> capability to rule. Secondly, Iran could not import consumer and industrial goods necessary
>for maintaining the normal course of economic and social reproduction.
>Thirdly, a layer of the ruling class whose interests were the extension of the U.S.-U.K.
> domination over Iran's natural resources and political system, made every effort to turn the
> wheels back or make the political system unmanageable. As a result, during the first eight months of
> 1953, Iran was in constant political turmoil and the ground was being prepared for a coup d'etat by
> the forces hostile to Iran’s nationalization plan, as well as to its independent direction in its
> domestic and foreign policies.

In correct.   Unlike Mosadegh governmetn which was only in power for about 3 years, Islamic Regime has
been in power for 31.  While Iran during Mossadegh had no oil outcome due to embargo, Ahamdi Nejad with
oil prices as high as $140 and averaging well over $60 has billions of unaccounted for money.

Still Mossadegh governmet managed to turn in a positive cash flow after its third year!   Yet inspite
of huge, Oil, Gas and other natural resource like copper etc, Ahamdi Nejad governmetn is not even
accountable to --Accounting office-- of Isalmic regime!

> The U.S.-U.K. intelligence services under the covers of their diplomatic corps took advantage of
> the chaotic atmosphere, artfully promoted by the landed aristocracy and their spokesmen in the
> national congress and Mossadegh's administration. Iranian society in the early 50's was basically
> agrarian and hence a great majority, up to 65 percent were engaged in farming and played a m
> iniscule role in shaping national policies. In a few large cities of Tehran, Isfahan, Tabriz, Kerman,
> Abadan and Shiraz, the politically active population was led by several political and ideological groupings.
> Among them the Tudeh Party that had organized a fraction of the workers, women and the intelligentsia
> under the banner of socialist ideals was a modern party merely in its infancy. The organizers of the
> Tudeh Party were Iranian intellectuals who were educated mainly in Western Europe, where the communist
> parties were strong during and after WWII, and the Soviet Union's army had effectively defeated the Nazi
> forces in Russia and Eastern Europe.
> This party lacked experience and suffered from lack of deep understanding of the character of Iran’s
> social-economic development, the corresponding class forces and the necessary strategy for transition
> from a semi-feudal and a semi-colonial society to an independent and democratic social order.
> Although from the viewpoint of social justice, the Tudeh Party put the working class demands
> forward and achieved some successes, but in respect to the vital question of nationalization of
> the Iranian oil industry and the essentiality of forming a united front of working class and the
> national bourgeoisie which Mossadegh was the representative, the Tudeh did not seize the opportunity
> of uniting in time to prevent the success of the U.S. coup of 1953.

What is the purpose of the above anyway?   How does that above paragraph even fit within the contrast?
What you fail to observe here, is that under democratic governmetn of Mossadegh, ALL POLITICAL PARTIES
WERE FREE TO OPERATE, including the traitor party of Tudeh.  Where is the contrast here?   Which party
has the freedom to operate in Islamic Regime?   They are even closing down Mosharket and their own
semi-parties.   

>Ironically, this could be a useful lesson to be learned by all those Iranian groups today that wear t
>he mantle of modernism and progress; however, in the recent unrest they joined the crowd whose aim
>was to overthrow the legitimate and democratically-elected government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Hmm?  According to regimes own admission, they counted no more than 10% of the vote, after all the
objections.   But more to the point, all major cities according to Regimes own admission came against
Ahmadi Nejad.   In city of Tehran, even according to their own engineered data, Mousavi won.

The bulk of opposition to Ahmadi Nejad according to the regime is coming from KHAVAS.   The students!
The intellectuals.  How is that comparable to support Mossadegh was getting, which was ALL from the
top notch thinkers of the country?   My friend you are so tainted by your aynak that you can not
see the reality.

>Such association between pro-working class groups and counter-revolutionaries within the "Green Movement"
> makes some charges by the conservative elements against the "Marxists" and "Socialists" seem credible.

As a socialist, I am amazed that you can not question Ahmaid-Nejad for eliminating subsidies for the
poor and privatizing with no accountablitiy the largest governmetn entities like Telephone system?

Hello?  What kind of pro-working class has Ahamdi-Nejad put in place?   Didn't his first move involve
making Gasoline ration and the rest at 400 float?   What are you smoking Ardeshir khan?

>Tremors From Within

> The second political grouping that associated itself with Dr. Mossadegh and his foreign policy
> was an amorphous amalgamation of individuals, tendencies and parties in a broad forum of what
> was known as the "National Front" of Iran. This conglomeration of loose political groupings
> represented mainly the interests of the merchant class that viewed the socialist movement and
>the Soviet Union as a "communist" neighbor with apprehension. In the camp of Mossadegh, in addition
> to the middle merchants, retailers, artisans, younger intellectuals and students who supported
>nationalization of Iran’s oil industry and hence Mossadegh's premiership against the Shah's despotism,
>there were big landlords, rentier strata, speculators, big businessmen, particularly in the import-export
>sector, and the families of the aristocracy and high echelons of clerics who hand-in-glove conspired to
>undermine the nationalization of oil movement.

I am amazed you see contrast, when none exist.  If anything, the open/free socieity that we enjoyed for
a few years under Mossadegh is anything but what we have under IRI.   For instance, you as a so called
"anti-war anti-imperialist" activist, would find your attempt to run for ANY office in Iran blocked
by the ruling Mafia.   If you tried to organize workers, like the bus driver union did, you will wind
up in jail (like the head of Bus drivers union did, and is still in jail).   What the fck are you
smoking?  (This did not happen after election, this happened a year before)

>The political organizations that made up the National Front headed by Dr. Mossadegh were: Iran party,
> Pan-Iranist Party of Nation of Iran, Islamic Mojahedin Party, and Toiling Masses Party of Iran.
>The leaders of some of the organizations served as representatives in the Iranian Parliament and spokesmen
>of Mossadegh’s Cabinet. In this group, representatives Shams Ghanatabadi, Abdol-ghadir Azad, Mozafar
>Baghaee, Hassan Imami, the leader of the House, actively opposed Dr. Mossadegh's plan for
>nationalization and hand-in-glove collaborated with the agents of foreign powers in undermining
>the national security and government stability from within the system. Before the final attack
>against the government of Dr. Mossadegh, on August 19, 1953, the U.S.-U.K. axis with the support
>of the domestic military and civil agents of foreign powers carried out several "mini-coups" that
>were neutralized by the great support of the Iranian people.

And your point?   Where do you see the contrast between Mossadegh coalition government in power, with
all its diversity, and Ahmadi-Nejad's governmetn in power with all of it ranking revolutionary guard
members?   How do the two even compare?

>Patriotic Forces on Guard

>Today, 57 years later, Iran faces almost the same dilemma in which the imperialist forces are planning
>to undermine Iran's political and economic system, using the UN sanctions, while the well-to-do classes
>frightened by President Ahmadinejad's pro-working class and national independence policies, are engaged
>in activities aimed at fostering insecurity domestically and weakening Iran's position internationally.

"Pro-working class"?   Can you name --ONE-- policy and I hope you do not consider the  promise of
free-potato by Ahmadi-Nejad during his campaign a "pro-working policy" that benefits working people in
Iran.   The teachers, nurses and government empoloyes are the most hard hit by Ahmadi-Nejad's mismanagement,
corruption and theft!   Please provide fact instead of slogan.   Where is the data?

What is the current inflation rate?   What is the unemployment rate?   How much was the governmetn income
from our resources?   How about all the taxes collected on car sale, deducted from fixed income peoples
paycheck, etc etc.

>The unceremonious role of this segment of the population led partly by the "reformists", is in fact
>preparing the ground to enhance U.S. influence in Iran, strengthen its supremacy in the Middle East
>region and change the balance of forces in Central and East Asia. The leadership of this "movement"
>attempted to use the tenth presidential election as a stepping stone to seize state power by
>slandering the result of the election, in which President Ahmadinejad with 63% of the votes
>defeated the reformist candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi.

If you knew even a bit about Mousavi's policy during his tenure as prime minister, his economic
policies during war and $7-$8 oil per barrel where much more geared toward insuring basics for the
most vunarable in the society.   I guess you are a new brand of socialist that focuses less on actual
economic policy than your self created view of fight against the West mentality.

> But here is where similarities between Mossadegh's period and today's situation under Ahmadinejad ends
>and important differences begin. In sharp contrast to the liberal government of Dr. Mossadegh,
>President Ahmadinejad's government is an outcome of a revolution. Secondly, Iran is much more
>developed in comparison and the U.S. in the last 30 years has not been able to bring down
>Iran's social-economic system and lastly, but not the least important, the Islamic Republic's
>security forces are the result of the revolution and are trained, equipped and ideologically
>armed by the world outlook of the Islamic leaders, while the Shah's military forces were
>trained by the colonial and imperialist powers and were at the service of the monarchy
>allied with foreign interests. Finally, the economic sanctions of the West have been to
>some extent derailed by China and Russia that have lost their potency in undermining the Iranian economy.

Somehow somewhere, the grand idea of socialism which means to create a socieity where all humans can have
their basic needs (have a job, shelter,  feed themselves and their family, have healthcare, be free to
express themselves without fear) fullfilled have been turned by your to support a
backward Taleban regime of revolutionary guards, only because you see them as fighting with imperliast
enemies.   

The conspircisit in me can't help but wonder, you are as much an anti-war activist and anti-imperialist
as Ahmadi-Nejad is anti-Israeli.   Both of your "reasoning" and "logic" helps your supposed enemy more
than it helps your supposed friend.  So the working people of Iran have to wonder with firends like you who
needs enemy?


Paykar

Massoud

by Paykar on

Hey kid. It's been 26 years since I saw you last; and I have not even thought of you once. lol

Guess who ? I think my handle should give you an accurate clue. 

Hope all is well with you. 


bushtheliberator

the limitations of pacifism & moral suasion in Iran

by bushtheliberator on

   I know very little about Iran, but I accept your link's analysis of the power equations in Iran.I'm a jingo on the sideline, and tho I wish the Green pacifists well, I don't believe in flying carpets.or the effectiveness of pacifism against Thugocracy.Unless some solution is found,then sometime in the future some of the guns will flip, and we will remember this time as the slow march toward civil war.


Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

Harpi-Eagle

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on

It's too bad shah turned a deaf ear to these recommendations and
subsequently allowed the disease of Islam take over our beloved country
first and eventually all of middle east.  Jimmy Carter and Cyrus Vance
should be put in prison for this treason to their own country and the
rest of humanity.

I agree with everything you said. The Shah trusted the wrong people: the Carter Administration. You missed one arch criminal in the Carter Gang. That is Brezinsky. He more than any other person was responsible for the Green Belt strategy. Reason: to sacrifice Middle East to free Poland. To this day the unrepentant criminal boast of it. 


shushtari

HARPI JAAN....

by shushtari on

YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT....

in fact, I would go further as say that, the shah should have nodded saddam hussein to have khomeini the mullah ran over by a truck or something while he was in iraq!

you are absolutely correct that vultures like these aftabeh-dozd thugs who have taken over our beautiful country should have been wiped out....that was the solution...

and also the shah should not have shown his 'hand' by expressing his policies about oil, etc......that pissed off the brits and the americans.....he should have continued his policies under the table....once the new generation of educated iranians came into being, there was no way in hell that a dirty mullah would be able to take over the country......and that is what you see today, millions of brave iranians who have suffered under the oppression of the akhoonds are standing up to take over the country....

 

here's to a free iran in 2010!!!! 


thexmaster

I don't get it.

by thexmaster on

If Ommani is infact a communist sympathizer as many claim, doesn't he realize how many leftists and communists the IRI killed?  It's perplexing how any leftist can make excuses for this regime or put them in the best light.  They seem to have very short memories.


mehdi2009

Ommani, Take the Hammer and Sickle out of your Butt

by mehdi2009 on

It seems that every time Ommani writes an article he demonstrates how out of touch he is with today's realities of Iran. Get off the stuff which you have been smoking for so long. you had no credibility to begin with, however, Comparing Mossadegh with this Thug, Khameneie's Malijak, has completely illustrated your Fossil thought process. 

Man it is over with your beloved USSR. Your beloved Stalin, Lenin, Brezhnev are dead. As well as your Masters at CHEKA, OPGPU, NKVD and KGB; Derzhinsky, Yagoda, Yezhov, Beria and Andropov are also dead. If anything your masters were some of the most brutal Imperialists/Fascists on this planet.

Great examples of that fascist behavior when people were seeking freedom and independence are East Germany 1953, Hungary 1956, Czechoslovakia 1968 and Poland 1981 to name a few.

As many of the TRUE Iranians in this forum have stated: Get over it, Soviet Union will not come back again; and why aren't you living in the Stalinist North Korea?

Salutations to ALL True Sons and Daughters of Iran.

Mehdi2009


Harpi-Eagle

To VPK, Re: Shushtari ...

by Harpi-Eagle on

VPK,

It is not wise for any nation to learn every history lesson the hard and costly way as you defined.  I too wish the Shah, had shown more resolve in 1978 (Note that I said 1978 not 1979, it was too late by 1979).  As matter of fact there were solutions proposed by some of the inner circle and high ranking general officers of Iran's different military branches that would have put out this destructive fire that befell our nation in its infancy.  One example was the suggestion by Admiral Habibollahi (Of Iran Imperial Navy) that proposed arresting about 2000-3000 of the head instigators and Khomeini stooges in Iran and summarily executing them all and hence eliminating the executive and communication agents of the Khomeini movement.  People on this list included thugs like Rafighdoost, and some of the main Rozeh Khoon like Khamenei, Rafsanjani, Beheshti, etc.

It's too bad shah turned a deaf ear to these recommendations and subsequently allowed the disease of Islam take over our beloved country first and eventually all of middle east.  Jimmy Carter and Cyrus Vance should be put in prison for this treason to their own country and the rest of humanity.

Payandeh Iran, our Ahuraie Fatherland


Farah Rusta

They are incomparable

by Farah Rusta on

 For all the wrong reasons!


Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

Shushtari

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on

you said: I just wish the shah had unleashed hell on these akhoonds and wiped them out

So do I! But at that time many people did not feel this way. It took 30 years of torture to drill it in. Now people finally have come around.

I remember the 70's. People thought very differently then. Marxism was very fashionable among the "Annteletucals" and "Students". In addition the idiotic ideas of Shariati with his political Islam were popular. Next was Al Ahmad and his "gharb zadeghi". Not to mention all the people who thought Shah was a puppet of US. Remember all the songs by Farhad? No one saw the good the Shah was doing. But any mistake he made was magnified by 1000 %.

The environment was different. People were ready  to embrace the disaster. Now it is the opposite. People are ready to embrace sanity and move forward.

That is why writings by Ommani get such negative reception. That is why the left and the Islamists are so angry. They are running very much scared. Writing is on the wall.


shushtari

rpRoshan....

by shushtari on

you're dead on!

what you wrote are the FACTS.......

 

I just wish the shah had unleashed hell on these akhoonds and wiped them out 


thexmaster

Sargord Payrooz and Hass

by thexmaster on

There is a difference when millions of people call their selected "leader" a dictator, and a WSJ article calls a foreign politician a dictator.  But keep trying with your futile comparisons.  It just makes your arguments seem more pathetic and desperate.  Not that Pirouz is new to outlandish comparisons.

 

There should be an option to rate articles here.  This is definitely one of the most disingenuous that i've read here.  


Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

cyclicforward

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on

I think this Ommani guy is an ex hippie and he is still froze in 1965. He supports anything that is anti-US andpro his soviet master. He still can't believe that USSR imploded years ago.

You are right. Many of us went through that phase. Some of us had long hair and did a lot of mighty stupid things. But most of us grew up and are over our "youthful indiscretion ". It is truly sad to see someone at the ripe age of 50+ still holding on to ideas which go discredited when the USSR went to bust. 

Personally I find it funny because it is so out of touch. Mr Ommani: the very Soviet people rejected the anti-imperialist cause. Just as Iranian people reject the Islamism!


بت شکن

حالا که گفتی‌ بذار بگم

بت شکن


(۱) مرحوم مصدق مثل محمود خان خودمون  پا پیولیست بود

(۲) هردوشون دکتر بودن ولی طبیب نبودن

(۳) مخالفاشون قبلا با خودشون همدست بودن

(۴) هردوشون در سازمان ملل نطق کردن

(۵) ولی‌ چیزی که برای اردشیر خان خیلی‌ مهمه اینه که ارباب سابق ایشون (یعنی اتحاد جماهیر شوروی سؤ سیالیستی) از مصدق حمایت میکرد و ارباب فعلی‌ ایشون (یعنی روسیه) از  محمود خان حمایت میکنه.

 


rpRoshan

FG

by rpRoshan on

FG writes, "Actually neither the current revolution or the one in 1979 shows any trace of being foreign inspired." 

With all due respect, you're dead wrong on this analysis. There's plenty of evidence out there proving that as of 1977, with the Islamification of Central Asia ("green belt theory"), an idea promoted by the likes of British neocon jew, Bernard Lewis, Western powers manipulated events so as to turn Khomeini into Gandhi and sell him to the Iranian people as a savior and a saint.

A lot of this was of course because of oil, and some of it was to safeguard Iran against Soviet aggression through the use of a religious fundamentalist regime in Tehran, ala the Mujahedin in Afghanistan. Bottom line is, the US and Uk, even the Soviets (through the Tudeh), were deeply involved in the success of the revolution.

There is a reason mullah Khomeini was known as "Ayatollah BBC" in those days. There is a reason why the BBC became the mouthpiece of the revolutionaries for over a year before the revolution. There are plenty of reasons why the CIA, the MI6 and the western Oil companies wanted the Shah out of Iran, starting in 1975 in fact (as a result of his exceedingly independent oil policies). And of course, the Shah made some serious mistakes that seriously reduced his chances to overcome all of these unholy alliances.

In fact, Khomeini had help from: Lybia, the Palestinians, Cuba, East Germany, UK, and the US. Indeed, the Iranian people in 1977 were not after revolution (and by "people" I mean the people of Iran, the middle-class, NOT the intellectuals, the leftists and Mujaheds). The majority of the people just wanted a return to the dictates of Constitutional Monarchy as laid out in the 1906 revolution. It was only after the manufactured tragedies of Cinema Rex and Black Friday, two incidents that were inspired by the mullahs and their Palestinian thugs, that the People turned to revolution.


Masoud Kazemzadeh

1953 coup and 2009 coup

by Masoud Kazemzadeh on

There are no significant similarities between Mossadegh-JM and Ahmadinejad-fundamentalist tyranny.

In 1953, Mossadegh-JM represented the desire of the democratic Iranians for independence and democracy.

In 2010, the Green Movement represents the desire of the democratic Iranian for independent and democracy. Our enemy today is the coup regime. Ahmadinejad-Khameni represents the primary obstacle for the achievement of the desire of the Iranian people for democracy, freedom and justice.

Mossadegh was the most democratic and the most liberal government leader we have had in many centuries.

Ahmadinejad is the most dictatorial and the reactionary government leader we have had in many centuries.  

In 1953, the democratic forces supported Mossadegh-JM and opposed the coup.

In 2010, the democratic forces OPPOSE Ahmadinejad-Khameni and their June 2009 coup.

The democratic forces are determined to defeat the Ahmadinejad-Khameni coup of 2009. In 1953, we were defeated. Lets hope that in 2010, we have Victory over the forces of tyranny and dictatorship.  Ahmadinejad, Basij, and IRGC are today what Shaaban bi-mokh, Fadaian Islam, and military were in 1953. 

MK


RSaberi

Ardeshir is right

by RSaberi on

I agree with Ardeshir. The situation is like 1953 during Mossadegh, although Ahmadinejad is NOT Mossadegh. But mind you Mossdegh also was not Mossadegh at the time. It is hero now, because he was defeated. If he was successful like khomeini, again he was not admired so much. At the time they called him American agent, British agent, traitor, dictator and many other things. We have to be careful and alert and try to find who is going to benefit from this confusion. Obviously not Iranan people

 


Cost-of-Progress

Sargord, you know what?

by Cost-of-Progress on

You're like a $5 hooker who goes around and takes a "taste" of every site...

What you call independence is islamic fascism at its best.

You can take your independence and put it where the sun don't shine.  Also, keep telling yourself that this is only us "poor" exiles resisting murderers and opressors like you.

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________


FG

So Om would say 1979 revolution was foreign inspired

by FG on

As I read Ommani: If Iranians are restive and discontent with their government, that discontent can 't be indigenous.  It must be foreign-inspired.   No evidence needed.  Just make up a foreign conspiracy and challenge the ones you accuse to do the logically impossible--prove the negative.

Actually neither the current revolution or the one in 1979 shows any trace of being foreign inspired.  What happened in 1979 was that many groups revolted (not including the clerics) for much the same reason--to end a regime that was thieving, corrupt and brutal.

Alas, the Islamist clergy used their secular allies then took advantage of the American Embassy seizure to purge the latter and seize control of the revolution, much like the Bolshevics did in Russia.   In both cases, you got a coup within at coup and a regime more despotic than the one it displaced.  The mullahs would use it to turn themselves into multi-millionaires and in Khamenei's case, a multi-billionaire.   The biggest thief and murdererer in Iranian history can command only the loyalty of the well-bribed.   To everyonne else, he stinks up to the country and is totally despised.

Yes, the Iranians eliminated a thieving, corrupt and brutal regime with its own privileged class in 1979.  What they got was even even more thieving, even more brutal regime with its own privileged class--just a different class.

Basically Iranians and now seeking what they hoped to have in 1979 before greedy, sleazy and mendacious clerics stole the revolution.  They don't need foreigners to make them despise this regime and they are too nationalistic to serve any would-be foreign master.  they want to get rid of the regime so they can have a future instead of more of the same--rigged elections, rigged justice, death squads, extreme censorship, public beatings, illegal imprisonment, torture, forced confessions, outright murder on the streets and in the politicized courtrooms controlled by thieving mullahs.


Hovakhshatare

Well put AlexInFlorida. I could not stop laughing either for a

by Hovakhshatare on


while kinda like this (specially after minute 9 or so) 

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4Y4keqTV6w 

Even funnier is Goroohban Ghandali comment on seyyedol olagha: "This force has recently been augmented with heavy armor and air capability along with mass Basij mobilization". Bragging about IRR actually preparing mass weaponry to blow peaceful people to smitterins. And then further exposing what we knew all along about these thugs, "Unlike the shah’s 1979 military, the IRGC will not shy away from taking any decisive action if it feels the regime is in mortal danger". They know if Shah was 1% as shameless & subhuman as they are, he would have killed all these mercenaries. They also know this is their last appearance forever, so they'll kill as many as needed to stay. But go, they shall.


Sargord Pirouz

hass!

by Sargord Pirouz on

Great seeing you on iranian.com. Thanks for the URL.

You're right, they did call him a "diktator."

How easily some Iranians would throw away their hard earned independence- again. Thankfully, the majority of these types are exiles. 


hass

They called Mossadegh a Dictator too

by hass on

//tinyurl.com/yjxesg3


Sargord Pirouz

Interesting viewpoint.

by Sargord Pirouz on

Interesting viewpoint. Thanks for posting it, Mr. Ommani.
I would just add to this author's perspective by providing further insights on Iran's security forces, contributed by another commenter:

"In objectively assessing the political-military situation in Iran today, the Islamic Republic simply does not face a 1979 type coalition of the mosque, bazaaris, intellectuals, leftists (MKO, Fedayeen, Tudeh etc), urban middle-classes and the conservative rural masses (sucessfully co-opted by the Khomeni’s Islamists). The shah’s only pillar was the 550,000 US trained (300,000 conscripts) Iranian army led by inept and isolated elitist generals with very limited intelligence or grasp of the Iranian street thinking. Today, the situation is totally different."

"The Islamic Republic enjoys very loyal and effective over-lapping intelligence services and widespread system of quasi-military organizations like the veterans Bonyads (foundations) that provide services to a wide segment of Iranian lower social classes. These are also the bedrock of the regime’s support base."

"The Sepah (IRGC) has its elite Seyed-ol-Shohada Corps strategically perched on the northern gateway of Tehran, and it can move swiftly into the metropolis and occupy all important institutions and buildings, and cut off the Iranian capital from the outside world, all within hours. This force has recently been augmented with heavy armor and air capability along with mass Basij mobilization."

"Unlike the shah’s 1979 military, the IRGC will not shy away from taking any decisive action if it feels the regime is in mortal danger. Any successful “regime change” is impossible without effective control over Tehran, and possiblly two other major urban centres like Isfahan or Shiraz. The prospect of such an upheavel are too far fethched indeed. The force structure of the regime is designed to swiftly move into the Tehran metropolis and occupy all important institutions, communication links and key buildings, and cut off the Iranian capital from the outside world, all within hours. The IRGC already controls the internet and cellular communications networks."

"The level of dissent in Iran is not as widespread as sometimes reported by the foreign based vested interests. The regime still has widespread grass-roots support in both the rural areas as well as most urban centers. Most Iranians will not support an Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan style chaos or US orchestrated 'regime change."


AlexInFlorida

Iranians are so twisted

by AlexInFlorida on

Iranians, including the author of this article are so twisted and anti-analytical to the point where I pray to God no people ever has to depend on Iranians to be honest.

Actually, if I told you how strongly this article forces me to change my views you would not believe me either.

Mr Ommani unintentionally is making me realize that maybe monarchy is essential for Iran. This is a big change for me because I believed that our people could do better than the shah if left to on own.  But as this article shows even if every groups agenda leaves us alone we still have ourselves to overcome. And it seems to me that we are our own biggest obstacle.

I now have to consider the Shahs results in terms of evolution and development... with a people similar to this author.  Try tell me that there is a better form of government for Iranians than absolute Monarchy.  The end result of democracy in Iran?  Iran will become like India or worse, which is unacceptable for a people that saw what the shah accomplished from the ashes of ww2 with an illiterate people.


Darius Kadivar

FYI/Ardeshir T. Ommani interview 09-14-06 (video)

by Darius Kadivar on

Just so you can see for yourselves who this confused fellow is ...

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYoXlLXEfiQ

Background: Ardeshir T. Ommani, Political Economist, has been an activist in the anti-war and anti-imperialist struggle for over 40 years, including the Vietnam War. Ardeshir is co-founder of the American-Iranian Friendship Committee (AIFC), and Chairman of the StopWarOnIran Campaign. He has written a number of articles documenting the U.S. foreign policy towards Iran. He has translated many articles into Farsi, which have been published inside Iran in the progressive press. In the 1960's, he was a co-founder of the Iranian Students Association (ISA), training many students in political theory and activism which contributed to the struggle against the Shah of Iran, a U.S. puppet. Mr. Ommani returned to Iran in 1979, at the dawn of the revolution and participated in the revolutionary surge of that period. Since returning to the U.S. in 1980, he has been very active in the anti-war movement and in the struggle against the U.S. war and occupation of Iraq