[cryptome] Re: Fw: "The Battle for Iran," 1953: Re-Release of CIA Internal History Spotlights New Details about anti-Mosaddeq Coup

  • From: doug <douglasrankine2001@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2014 11:50:03 +0100

Hi Jeremy,
Tx for your contribution and background information..."every little helps" as they say at Tescos. (the slogan of a large supermarket chain here in the UK...henceforth renamed Tescoland, to the uninitiated). And you are right of course regarding the Iranians not trusting the British or the Americans. The problem with trust is who does one trust, or what does one trust. I don't even trust meself at times...And just think, if we lived in one of those worlds where everyone trusted one another...life would be boring and there would be nuffink for us to write about.

I used to feel the same way about communism...as some people felt about fascism or religious extremism...Can you imagine even a thousand year reich of Hitler salutes and goosestepping troops, or a millenium of sticking up the right fist, marching by the million past the Kremlin and hailing Uncle Jo Stalin...or bowing and scraping to some heirarchical religious organisation...far less an infinite one...perish the thocht...but some people believe in it...good luck to em. Someone once said to me that the only difference between conservatism and communism was the colour of the gold inlaid carpets which led up to their head office front door...an observation which has stuck with me ever since.
ATB,
Dougie.

On 28/06/14 04:46, Jeremy Compton wrote:
My understanding of this from reading the events of the time when it came to Shah of Iran II was that around this time with Mossadeq getting thrown out, the Shah had asked for help or advice from both the British and the Americans and they apparently said that they wanted the Shah to stay in power and so the Sevak were introduced to keep the Shah in power. As, the Shah became more and more insecure then he used the Sevak to crack down more and more.

One thing to note about the area of the world was that before Shah I Ahmad Shah Qajar <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_Shah_Qajar> (a young guy who had deposed his apparently deposed his father) was deposed by a British bloodless Coup. Previous to that the support was Russian support to the weak Iranian/Persian rule in the country. They asked from British empire support as it was the power of the day. Reza Shah was installed in 1925 and booted in 1941 and his son was installed in his place.

There was an interesting corrolation between the change of Turkey under Kamil Attaturk and that of the country we know of today as Iran under Shah I was they were both doing there own bit of modernising of the country, removing the religious system and the feudal land structure as well as tribal system and placing a more western style of government. This l believe as far as Iran was concerned was the background eventually that led to the down fall of Shah II. Also a factor was was the oil and gas redistribution to the lower levels of society who felt they were not getting their fair share. They also felt very disenfranchised with the redistribution of land and the rapid westernisation of their country.

When one considers these underlying issues is it hardly suprising why the Iranians dont trust either the British or the Americans?

Jeremy
At 06:18 PM 6/27/2014, you wrote:

Other related posts: