Kinzer's "Tragic End"

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

Feria
by Feria
08-Jan-2011
 

It is comments like the ones in this article (Tragic End, 06 Jan 2011) about the history of Iran that have caused added pain and depression to the young royals and millions of other Iranians who’ve been driven out of their beloved homeland.

Stephen Kinzer has clearly demonstrated partiality in this article as with some of his other articles. His biased viewpoint about the history of Iran has affected his judgment and political analysis, disregarding the Cold War during Mohammad Mosaddegh’s premiership and its effect on the politics of Iran as one of the most important countries in the conflict between the West and the Soviet Union.

Mumbling about more than 80 yeas of the Iranian history in just a few lines and in scattered comments here and there does not do justice to Iran and its people.

He seems to be somehow confused by his own analysis of Reza Shah and Mohammad Reza shah, while calling Reza Shah a very brutal ruler, he then criticises the young Mohammad Reza Shah for being cowardly wimp unlike his commanding father. This contradiction has also been demonstrated many times by those who branded Mohammad Reza brutal but after revolution called him a coward because he did not stand strongly against the demonstrators although it was suggested to him several times by his commanders.

The obvious fact of the effect of the Cold War after the Second World War during Mosaddegh’s government and the extreme influence of the Tudeh Party, which its seeds were sewed by the Soviet Union, has also been ignored in this article. A one time that many Iranians did not mind the interference of the CIA in the affairs of their country was the 1953 coup for what it is widely believed to be saving Iran from falling into the hands of the Soviet Union. Mossadegh, however with good intentions, was too naive and ambitious in believing there was any chance of real democracy considering the strong influence of the Soviet Union through her Iranian agents who toyed with Mossadegh and used him to achieve their sinister aims.

Stephen Kinzer also largely blames “the depredation of Pahlavi Dynasty” for the cruelty Iran has succumbed failing to recognise 31 years of political, economic, and social and every other adversity in any sense that a nation can experience.

He branded the Shah as a megalomaniac, a term that was first adopted by the West describing the Shah, I would say Mohammad Reza Shah was the symbol of stability and peace in the region for more than thirty years, something that none of the world’s superpowers have been able to manage ever since his departure 31 years ago. There are no perfect leaders and the judgment on them should be based on the geopolitics of their time and relative to their contemporaries.

The Writer is also blind and oblivious to the level of development and economic growth and brilliant global diplomacy during 37 years of Mohammad Reza Shah’s leadership compared to the level of political asphyxia and international isolation in the last 31 years of hell imposed on the Iranian nation. He states that young royals “are paying for the sins of their father”. Of course mistakes were made but his sins were no greater than many other world leaders before and after him, especially in developing countries. The “iron fist” ruler as described by the writer would not accept apology and forgive a man who plotted to kill him, a sin that would be severely punished in today’s Western and most civilised countries.

Stephen Kinzer’s article just few days after the death of prince Alireza Pahlavi is adding insult to injury for many Iranians who consider his death very close to home and another reminder of their own sorrow.

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

 
statira

Excellent article

by statira on Mon Jan 10, 2011 07:19 PM PST

Kinzer still regurgitating the same stuff that narrow-minded people used to say 32 yrs ago.


  •  
siavash1000

Kinzer is talking out of mullah's mouth

by siavash1000 on Mon Jan 10, 2011 09:55 AM PST

Kinzer was welcomed by Islamic criminal gangs who occupied Iran for last 31 years. He was accomodated in Laleh hotel where he wrote his book "all shah's men". The book was quickly translated to Farsi. Some part that belong to Ayatollah Kashani in support of Shah has been censored in Farsi translation because the grand son of Ayatollah Kashani is currently working with Ahmadinegad. This bastard made millions on the misery of Iranian people by publishing a book that aimed to distortion of Iran history. His article is adding to the pain of our nation for loss of our beloved prince Alireza Pahlavi. Most likely he received big bonus for writing that article.   


  •  
Ameri

it is sadder that...

by Ameri on Sun Jan 09, 2011 03:30 AM PST

Feria has made some valid points. I think it is sadder that some people still try to cover up subversions, rewrite and even impose their own flawed ideology on history by making untruth statements such as the ones made by "abnabot".   No one and no one can deny the influence of the Soviet agents in Iran and on Mosaddegh. This is widely documented even by some of the Mosaddegh supporters who wrote about him.  These kinds of comments mostly stem from those who have been politically desperate and who by blaming the Shah for everything, try to hide their own mistakes in believing in and, in some cases, paving the way for the emergence of the current system in Iran.  Anyone supporting Kinzer, who has made his fortune out of the suffering of the Iranian people and who has been greatly respected and entertained by the Rulers of Iran, and believing in his articles such as the one about Prince Alireza Pahlavi, is either in the state of self-delusion and ignorance or has no qualms about the pain the current regime has inflicted on the Iranian people.   It is ironic that neither ‘Abnabot’ nor Kinzer made any comments about the current brutal regime in Iran when talking about dictatorship. Oh dear will they be offending the Rulers of the Islamic Republic?


  •  
Abnabot

It is sad that in spite of

by Abnabot on Sat Jan 08, 2011 05:31 PM PST

It is sad that in spite of all the documents and disclosures coming out of the Western governments’ archives, the old "Tudeh party and the cold war" excuse is repeated in this article. This is another attempt  to (once again) call Mossadegh "naive and ambitious" and tarnish such a great person's name. By the way, one can be a wimp and a dictator at the same time. We are unfortunate to have Pahlavi's kings sandwiched between two fanatically religious and backward regimes, to avail ourselves of ignoring the history and to conclude that Pahlavi was "symbol of stability and peace"! Are those "many Iranians who did not mind the interference of CIA" the same people who amassed the streets and toppled the government in 1978? Kinzer has other writings on the subject, such as "Overthrow" that describes CIA's hand in toppling democratically elected governments of many countries, and replacing them with dictators and puppets, such as the Shah. The Islamic government is the direct result of the Pahlavi regime. If the Shah allowed the least and limited political dialogue in Iran, we would not have to be ruled by characters such as Khomeini or Rafsanjani or Ahmadi Nejad. Of course, everyone (including Kinzer, as he mentioned) is sad in losing such a young person in prime of his life, so tragically. I think the one who is naive is Faria, the author of this article, who should study history of Shah's rein, US policies towards Middle East, and 1953 qoup. Kinzer's articles and writings about Pahlavi dynasty has always been fair and balanced.


  •  
azadi2001

Responding to Kinzer's Comments in the Guardian (UK)

by azadi2001 on Sat Jan 08, 2011 02:53 PM PST


The general coverage given by the media to the tragic news concerning the untimely death of Prince Ali Reza Pahlavi has been more of a ‘knee-jerk’ reaction to the event than anything else. In the absence of enough relevant facts concerning circumstances leading to the young Prince’s death, reliance has had to be made on a plethora of speculation by uninformed people with no objective other than promoting their own agendas.

 

While Ian Black’s coverage of this story has tried to provide a balanced picture, I find his inclusion of comments by Stephen Kinzer, one of America’s many ‘instant experts’ on Iran to have been both obnoxious and incorrect. Whatever one’s view of the previous regime in Iran, no informed Iranian – irrespective of any ideology he or she might profess – would  validate Kinzer’s suggestion concerning a correlation between the death of Prince Ali Reza and the “history of a family drenched in blood”. 

 

It is an insult to any reader’s intelligence to suggest that Kinzer’s biased comments have any bearing whatsoever on the realities pertaining to Ali Reza’s suicide. They are however perceived to be both distasteful and insensitive not just to Pahlavi sympathizers but to many others who unlike Kinzer are much better informed of the true realities in Iran.

 


  •  
vildemose

Excellent write up on

by vildemose on Sat Jan 08, 2011 09:10 AM PST

Excellent write up on Kinser's insidious agenda to keep distracting Iranians and the world's public opinion from recognizing  Iran's true enemies  to  serve his paymasters: the military industrial complex.


  •  
Darius Kadivar

Excellent Observation Feria Jaan

by Darius Kadivar on Sat Jan 08, 2011 09:10 AM PST

Good points !


  •