World History
hello guys
i am always post new article
The Shah of Iran never knew until the very end of his rule that he was going to be cast aside. President Carter and the Shah of Iran. 1978
History can be viewed through the prism of three distinct perspectives. Imagined history is written by the victors in conflict, this history most certainly is skewed and though containing elements of truth it is not entirely to be believed without understanding the perceptive of the defeated. The History of the defeated often exaggerates the brutality those who defeated them, but they can generally be relied upon for the actual situation on the ground as they were in control of their respective domain. Outsiders provide a more neutral perspective but they often lack the knowledge of the deeper culture present often their role can become extremely important as they can spur events to unlikely endpoints. The reality of what occurred in Iran during the 1970s is not a simple narration of a revolutionary Ayatollah Khomeini risking his life to combat an oppressive regime in Tehran which was a puppet of the U.S. as what is commonly believed. The facts more align themselves on the basis of the Shah of Iran having been a puppet of the U.S. during the first decade of his rule, but by the 1960s having gained the confidence to show his underlying nationalism for an Iranian state which could be made self-sufficient in everyway possible.
The Shah of Iran hands ownership titles to women, after the 1963 White Revolution.
It began with his 1963 White Revolution. He then nationalized the Iranian Oil Industry in 1971, providing a path to fund the modernization of Iran. For much of the 1970s, Iran would see economic growth rates which rivaled Taiwan and Japan. The Shah of Iran would buy controlling interests in Mercedes-Benz and Krupp, only to be forced by West Germany to sell the shares as they claimed this was an issue of national security. The West did not look at the Shah of Iran’s ambitions favorably. In fact, the more he tried to make Iran a modern and secular state, the more the West called him a human rights abuser. Incredibly, none of the accusations were present in the 1950s when a young Shah Mohmmad Reza Pahlavi was placed back on the throne by a jointly sponsored Anglo-American convert operation called “Operation Ajax.” In 1953, the Shah of Iran was simply viewed as young man the West could control and he would have no choice but to reinstate Anglo-American dominance over the Persian Oil Fields as a key element of his own survival.
The Shah of Iran with President Kennedy, 1961.
For many in the West the Shah of Iran was no longer a leader they wanted support by the mid 1970s. Britain more than even the U.S. stood to loose its largest economic stimulus as the Shah of Iran proclaimed that he would end their involvement in the Iranian Oil Sector completely after 1980. The accusations of human rights abuses became a frequent story in the Western Media. Ayatollah Khomeini who had been exiled from Iran on November 4, 1964, had shown complete resistance to the White Revolution the Shah of Iran launched in 1963. The six point program had stood for, the enfranchisement of women, the allowing of Non-Muslims to hold government positions, land reform in favor of landless peasants, sale of state owned industries, profit sharing in the oil sector, and a national campaign for literacy across all socio-economic levels. Ayatollah Khomeini claimed that these programs went against the traditional life of people in Iran. In reality the program was weakening theologists in the country both in terms of their landholdings but also on their potential grip over future generations of Iranians. The West looked at the program as being the start of an Iran which would climb out of the balance of power equation they held for the region.
June 27, 1974, the Shah of Iran reaffirms he nationalization of Iranian Oil Interests.
The Iranian people were largely traditional and believers in the Shia faith during the 1970s. For many who came to Tehran from the provinces, the shock of the lifestyle that they encountered made them angry. They saw alcohol being served in the open, women were attending universities. At first The Shah of Iran encouraged, both men and women to wear western dress, and later it has been claimed that this dress code was forced more and more. The Shah of Iran spoke openly of the Iran before the Islamic Invasion, and of the age of Cyrus the Great, when Iran was a Zoroastrian dominated nation. Many of the religious clerics in Iran viewed this as a threat on their own power, for the Shah of Iran was attempting to undo their interpretation of history. The Shah of Iran placed emphasis on the Indo-Iranian roots of Iran, and in time this would have led to a complete reintegration of what Iran was, as his leanings clearly went far past just historical awareness. The Shah of Iran, was pushing Iran to have its own Atomic Reactors at a time when its proven energy reserves were at their highest levels. His ambition was to see Iran as a modern state which could rival any other by the late 1980s. The Shah of Iran, instituted programs by which Iranian students could be sent abroad to study, and then return to Iran with high paying jobs and careers.
The communication between Washington and Ayatollah Khomeini was not a fact many people were aware of in 1979.
The West was well aware of what the Shah of Iran was doing and aspiring to create. Having an Iran which was largely industrialized, not import dependent and a regional power was not in the interest of the Western Powers. Instead the model of Saudi Arabia was desired. Here was a Kingdom which made no effort to modernize other than optic extravagance, no effort to become secular as the state depended on its links to Wahhabism to maintain it legitimacy and had little to no true military power which was not dependent on the West. Saudi Arabia would through out the 1970s fund Anglo-American policy interests in Pakistan to fund radicals to destabilize the civilian secular government in Afghanistan. The Shah of Iran would during the 1970s end support for the Kurdish rebels in Iraq, the response from Washington was very negative and the Shah was faulted for both settling the issue of maritime rights with Iraq and ending a long standing border dispute. The Shah of Iran could never have been counted on in supporting U.S. interests in Pakistan and Afghanistan as by the mid 1970s he was already seeing the beginnings of an India which would become an economic power. He saw the role of an Iran which had its own foreign policy apart from being told by Washington of what it should do.
Ayatollah Kohemeni had realized presenting an image as a cleric not interested in flows of Iranian Oil was preferable than to announce his complete agenda. Ayatollah Kohemenni indicated he had no desire to grow close to the U.S.S.R. as it was godless communist power. For Washington, Ayatollah Khomeini seemed to be a potential leader who would open Iran’s oil sector once more.
Ayatollah Khomeini lived a life in exile for nearly 15 years by the time his chance came to return to Iran on February 1, 1979. Incredibly he did not return to Iran on his own, but instead on an orchestrated Air France flight which arrived two weeks after the Shah of Iran voluntarily left Iran. In the months before the complete collapse of the Shah of Iran’s government, the Iranian Military had been ordered to stand down largely by U.S. interference. More and more over the past two years, revolutionaries had been released from custody. No government in the world would do this, as the situation was becoming worse. On September 8, 1978, the Shah’s Government opened fire on protestors, and at least 88 Iranians lost their lives. The miscalculated effort to take back control of the nation would only fuel greater condemnation from Western Media at the time. Iranian accounts from the time differ. U.S. General Huyser came to Tehran, in January 1979, his meetings took place with Iran’s top military officials but incredibly he had less than 5 minutes of time to talk to the Shah of Iran. The only discussion with the Shah was one about when he was planning on leaving to ensure Prime Minister Bakhtiar had a chance to stay in power. Iranian military officials at the time remarked they were told to stand down by the U.S. and not to fight the chaos outside.
The Tudeh Party was Iran’s socialist leaning opposition. Washington did not want any path of power open for them, as they would lean towards the Soviet Union. Ayatollah Khomeini was again seen as more favorable.
Perhaps nothing would offer a better perspective on this then the words of both the Shah of Iran and those of Ayatollah Khomeini, they both narrate what is quite clearly the U.S. role in bringing the Shah of Iran to accept a voluntary departure from Iran, and no struggle to stay in power. Just hours after the Shah of Iran departed, Ayatollah Khomeini stated this in a direct communication to Washington, "You will see we are not in any particular animosity with the Americans," stated Khomeini, he referred to his cause of action as “a humanitarian one, which will benefit the cause of peace and tranquility for all mankind". It was not the first time Ayatollah Khomeini had reached out directly to the U.S. he had a history of doing so, and the U.S. a history of responding and creating plausible deniability. The U.S. responded by ensuring the constitution of Iran could be changed and the Monarchy abolished. At the same time it is possible that Washington believed that U.S. and British Oil Interests could be restored to 1971 levels. Ayatollah Khomeini's statements were declassified decades after the Shah was removed from power. Though the Shah of Iran spoke openly about the U.S. role in his exile to Now Magazine later in 1979. On December 8, 1979, the New York Times had an article which quoted Now Magazine and added in the complete believability of this situation.
President Carter and Secretary of State, Cyrus Vance
If it were even possible for the U.S. role to be any worse in this situation the Carter administration would ensure this, on January 11, 1979 a White House Situation Room meeting would leave President Carter with the belief that Ayatollah Khomeini would allow Western educated officials to run the Iranian economy while devoting himself to Social Justice creating a Shia version of Saudi Arabia. Phillip Stoddard, the head of the State Intelligence Bureau would state, "We would do a disservice to Khomeini to consider him simply as a symbol of segregated education and an opponent to women's rights.” The idea that an Iran oblivious once more to its economic and foreign interests could be created again trumped all concerns for the Iranian people. On January 14, 1979, US Secretary of State Cyrus Vance would send a telegram to US embassies in Paris and Tehran, "We have decided that it is desirable to establish a direct American channel to Khomeini's entourage.” As if this is not enough, on January 15, 1979, Warren Zimmermann a staff member of the US embassy in France arrived at a small inn located in the village of Neauphle-le-Château, outside Paris, where Khomeini lived. Zimmermann used a Peugeot, which did not have diplomatic plates, to not draw attention to the fact that the U.S. had in fact betrayed the Shah of Iran. Zimmerman was meeting with Iranian-American, Dr. Yazdi who was to be a liaison between Ayatollah Khomeini and the U.S. Yazdi was linked to a former CIA operative by the name of Richard Cottam. The later had become a staunch Anti-Shah scholar. It would not be last meeting, as Washington directed Zimmerman to meet another two to three times. In each meeting, Washington attempted to delay Khomeini by holding the compliance of the Iranian Military as a carrot. Khomeini was never detailed about his economic plan, and Washington simply interpreted this as coming from a man who really was not concerned with economics or state craft.
Just one year after Ayatollah Khomeini arrived at Mehrabad International Airport outside of Tehran, the stage was set for the beginning of the Iran-Iraq War.
The meetings would lead Ayatollah Khomeini to ask for the Iranian military to stand down and not support Prime Minister Bakhtiar, and for arrangements for his return to Iran. The U.S. agreed to these terms based on the written statements Ayatollah Khomeini made which were "We will sell our oil to whoever purchases it at a just price," he went on to state "The oil flow will continue after the establishment of the Islamic Republic, except for two countries: South Africa and Israel," he also declared a need for the assistance of other nations, "in particular the Americans.” It was clear the U.S. had hardly been able to judge Ayatollah Khomeini anymore than understanding a self-sufficient even if less profitable relationship with the Shah of Iran had in the long term had been better for humanity. Of course, assigning even the notion of humanity to U.S. foreign policy outside of Western Europe is a discussion in itself. What history would bare witness to in the year which followed was violence mass executions and the start of the Iran-Iraq War. Ultimately, secularism, modernity and the near developed status of both Iran and Iraq would be lost, for the millions who died their names would be lost in history, as the U.S. ultimately would arm Iraq and sell weapons to Iran during the Iran-Iraq War.
Comments
Post a Comment