Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Galraedia

(5,023 posts)
Sun Aug 19, 2012, 11:46 PM Aug 2012

Aug. 19, 1953: When the Eisenhower Administration destroyed Iran's secular democracy

It is impossible to understand modern American history, modern American foreign policy, anti-American anger throughout the Middle East and the developing nations, and the roots of anti-American terrorism, without understanding what happened on this date in 1953. Any understanding of modern Iran has to begin with an understanding of what happened on this date. For on August 19, 1953, the little known and not even six-year-old Central Intelligence Agency overthrew the democratically elected prime minister of Iran, installed a new prime minister of its own choosing, and restored to the throne a recently self-exiled Shah. It wouldn't be long before the Shah seized total local control of his government and established the brutal SAVAK, which over the next decades tortured and killed thousands, to crush all opposition.

Mohammed Mossadegh is not widely remembered in this country, but he was Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 1951. The first Iranian to receive an advanced education from a European university, and a man widely renowned for his blunt honesty and impeccable integrity, Mossadegh was brilliant and disturbingly passionate, capable of verbally eviscerating opponents in political or juridical debates, and just as easily capable of breaking down crying while giving a speech, or even passing out while in the middle of tense negotiations. His understanding of national and international law became legendary. He often conducted official business while lying in bed.

Iran's monarchy had had a long, turbulent history, with the corrupt and incompetent Qajar regime being forced to democratize by the 1906-1911 Constitutional Revolution, but that effectively came to an end when the Qajars were toppled in the early 1920s by a British-backed military officer named Reza Khan. In 1925, Reza Khan became Reza Shah Pahlavi, and soon turned the Iranian parliament, or Majlis, into a rubberstamp. Most people don't understand this, but the final Shah of Iran was not part of an ancient royal family, rather he was heir to a dynasty that had lasted exactly two generations, himself included.

Reza Khan's rule was secular but brutal, and he often clashed with the clergy and just as often eliminated his chief political rivals. But Iran's monarchy had long been but a compliant puppet of the British, who had controlled much of the Middle East, which had not yet become important because of oil. To that era's economic, political, and military powers, Iran's primary importance was as gateway to India, the British Empire's Crown Jewel, which the Russian Empire long had coveted. But in the early 20th century, oil had become important, and the British-owned Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC) controlled Iran's oil production, creating a sprawling and horrifying slum to house the Iranian workers, with a parallel, segregated country club community for the British executives and managers. Iran was so taken for granted, and the British oil company's profits were so staggering that AIOC actually paid more to the British government in taxes than to Iran for the right to steal its oil. During World War II, Reza Shah wanted to remain neutral, so the old rivals Britain and Russia, now allied against Germany, invaded and occupied Iran. In 1941, the Shah was forced to abdicate, and was replaced by his young son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

Read more: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/08/19/1121087/-Aug-19-1953-When-the-Eisenhower-Administration-destroyed-Iran-s-secular-democracy

13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Aug. 19, 1953: When the Eisenhower Administration destroyed Iran's secular democracy (Original Post) Galraedia Aug 2012 OP
k and r niyad Aug 2012 #1
Most people in this country are completely ignorant of the history of Iran. It was this that still_one Aug 2012 #2
The day I was born roody Aug 2012 #3
Very odd coincidence, roody. Wow. n/t Judi Lynn Aug 2012 #6
uninteded consequences. england has them too. pansypoo53219 Aug 2012 #4
I'm surprised that's in the 1892 ed. -- it was during WWI that ... eppur_se_muova Aug 2012 #12
K&R thank you for posting this article. Everyone should read this. idwiyo Aug 2012 #5
An excellent diary on Daily Kos. Uncle Joe Aug 2012 #7
Excellent article tjwmason Aug 2012 #8
Wow! nt cbrer Aug 2012 #9
Kick. Too important to let it sink idwiyo Aug 2012 #10
You reap what you sow dipsydoodle Aug 2012 #11
The current Iranian Parliament is their third attempt at democratic representation ... eppur_se_muova Aug 2012 #13

still_one

(92,187 posts)
2. Most people in this country are completely ignorant of the history of Iran. It was this that
Sun Aug 19, 2012, 11:57 PM
Aug 2012

Eventually allowed the fundamentalist to take over Iran. It was our overthrow of Saddam in Iraq that led to situation we have in Iran today.

Maybe be should stop listening to these think tankers running our foreign policy

pansypoo53219

(20,974 posts)
4. uninteded consequences. england has them too.
Mon Aug 20, 2012, 03:38 AM
Aug 2012

while reading about something related in my 1892 encyclopedia britannica. they supported the whabbibis cause they were against the ottomans.

eppur_se_muova

(36,261 posts)
12. I'm surprised that's in the 1892 ed. -- it was during WWI that ...
Thu Aug 23, 2012, 07:59 PM
Aug 2012

the Brits supported the Arab revolt against the Ottomans, allies of Germany, in exchange for promised Arab independence. Of course, they reneged on the deal, which muddies the concept of 'unintended' consequences.

tjwmason

(14,819 posts)
8. Excellent article
Mon Aug 20, 2012, 02:20 PM
Aug 2012

The only thing I would change about it would be a stronger eliding of Britain and the U.S. in Iranian minds. From our point-of-view we're different countries, but for Iranians we're essentially part of the same thing which has been interfering...installing the Pahlavis is seen as part of the same process as kicking out Mossadegh.

eppur_se_muova

(36,261 posts)
13. The current Iranian Parliament is their third attempt at democratic representation ...
Thu Aug 23, 2012, 08:02 PM
Aug 2012

Russia and Great Britain sabotaged their first effort.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Aug. 19, 1953: When the E...