Temetwir

18.4.06

THERE IS NO SPOON: Part B
The Shah and the US
Early 50s - mid 70s

From the previous part, we have established that the US (through the CIA's Operation Ajax) have overthrown a democratically elected PM in 1953 so that major oil companies of the West can divide the Iranian wealth.
Just to show what we mean by "democratically elected", the vote was 79-12. Yeah. Oil.

But even since 1941 (10 years prior to Mosadagh becoming PM), Mohammad Ritha Bahlawi has replaced his father's throne to become Shah of Iran (another long story which is irrelevant here because it concerns Britain and Russia).
Think of the Shah of Iran in terms of the United Kingdom: The parliamentary government would have the power to make the Shah submit to its opinion (vote).
But despite that, the Shah involved himself a lot in what concerns government, which really is not what he was supposed to do since he was only the constitutional monarch. Pun intended.

So now we arrive back to where we started, 1951, witnessing the election of PM who was overthrown in 1953. Because the Shah opposed the decision to nationalize the Iranian oil sector (under the fear of an economic embargo from the West), he came off as the 'right person' to install in Iran (or better yet, keep in charge), and it did not hurt that Iran was neighbouring the then-USSR Russia. Of course, most important thing was making sure the western oil companies divided Iranian oil.

The Shah afterwards expanded his constitutional powers, taking matters into his own hand and started 'westernizing' Iran. This is now 1954.
It wasn't really all bad if you look at it from a certain perspective. For example, in the early 1960s, he launched a program known as the White Revolution which did benefit Iranians. Somewhat.
Women had more rights, a lot of money was spent on education, and even land reform policies saw that a lot of farmers ended up owning land of their own.
Yet, despite all the 'socio-economic' measures, not much was done to push for democracy inside Iran. I wonder why?
This, as well as minimalising the role the shee3a scholars in matters of education for example, as well as the land owners losing some of their property to the farmers would get on the nerves of a lot of people inside Iran.

To make sure things were going the way he wanted them to, the Shah (for the time being, let's say) founded the SAVAK. House of Sand & Fog? Ben Kingsley's character? Yeah, nevermind.
Anyway, SAVAK was founded with the sole purpose of protecting the Shah against political opposition.
Although founded in 1957, the SAVAK became much more violent starting from 1965. And because they can justify any "type" of arrest to 'maintaining national security' (mn oma pun intended), the SAVAK were pretty much free to do what they wanted. It is estimated that anywhere between 13,000 to 20,000 people were killed (note: killed, not just tortured/arrested) by SAVAK.

And just to show how much of a nice man the Shah was, he ordered the assassination of one of the former directors of the SAVAK in 1970, as well as kept surveillance over the other directors. Who, by the way, were all friends of his (one of them dated back to school, I can check for the name if you want).

Audience: "Okay, wi7na shako? Bil 6agag ely ye6eg'hom, where does the US fit in all of this?"

It fits in all of the above, 'my dear Watson'.

SAVAK was founded with the help of the CIA (what? you thought Iranians were BORN into this?) as well as Mossad. If you don't know what Mossad is, then boy are you reading the wrong post.

"So what, now you're saying the US and the Israelis helped found SAVAK to arrest, torture, and murder the population in order to save the Shah?"

No, I'm reporting (not saying, not making up) that the US, in 1954, vowed to protect the Shah if he agreed to their terms. Terms being? Check the last post: dividing up the Iranian oil for 25 years among the west.

On the condition, if I might add, that Iran can not look over the actual accounts to make sure it was getting its share.

"Price of doing business?"
Fifty percent cut of profits. But with the condition of Iran not being able to look over the actual accounts, I'll leave the actual cut to your imagination.

So yes, I am saying that the US adminstrations overlooked mass murders and arrests, a corrupt system and an unstable political state of affairs in turn to make sure a 'certain industrial sector' was fucking Iran over for its money.

Human rights, democracy, and whatever fed BS these days just was not 'in' "back in the day" I guess. Or they were, bas 3ala naas o naas if you know what I mean.

Note: in 1973, because of the Arab-Israeli war and the consequent oil embargo, the Shah raised oil prices (obviously not joining the embargo) and .. what does he do with the money?

Spend it for 'defense purposes', of course.

Yeah, hmmmm I'm not sure where you can go buy "army stuff" when you have a shitload of cash?

La7tha let me think. "Oh holy-shizzle-in-da-nizzle, Batman. This has got to be the hardest question EVER."

Let me take one very very wild, uneducated guess. The US?

-

With that, we have overseen the:
a) coup d'etat (changing the political system of a country through violent or non-violent means) against a democratically elected prime minister
b) the splitting of Iranian wealth among the western companies
c) under the US promise to protect the Shah as long as he keeps doing that.. through
d) the founding of SAVAK with the directions of your friends over at the American and Israeli "intelligence agencies".
e) who would go on and arrest, torture, and kill people as they wished to secure the 'protection of the Shah'

"Did Iran benefit from all that?"

Sure it did, "little Johnny".

If you call fucking your people over and turning your country into a military and economic base in the Middle East so you can keep the western companies in business. Oh, and just in case you foresaw that in like 30 years later you will have someone who has no idea about history or historical politics to say "Iran was better off with the Shah" .. then yes, "little Johnny", Iran did benefit. *Pat on the head*

Conspiracy theory? No sir, no ma'am. Plain history. Documented and sourced.


8 Comments:

  • Shaklik weddik t'36s ta7at...

    Look here
    You may also want to Googlize "Declassified" documents of the FBI, CIA, NSA, PANTAGON, ...etc.

    Have fun.

    By Blogger MBH, at 18.4.06  

  • im not digging deep, not at all

    tara hal kalam hatha mo ana ily i made it up or "rabba6t" eb kaify between diff events.. abad
    that would be making up a conspiracy theory, while this is just historical facts

    so to whoever is not convinced for whatever reason, let me know and we'll deal with it from there

    mbh: thank u for the link ill take a look later see wasup

    By Blogger Temetwir, at 18.4.06  

  • I've read this and I had to read the previous one again and then read this one again, too..

    It guess I have nothing to say except to thank you. I've always heard about the US having puppies around the world, knew that Pahlavi was one of them but I didn't know much about the story.

    Good luck with your assignments, and waiting for more of your usual 'contreversial' posts

    By Blogger ScarlO, at 18.4.06  

  • ive read both posts i like ur comments sarcastic and funny but point is made clear..... ive read ur reply if ur interested in studying politics in London SOAS School of Oriental and African Studies - University of London is highly advisable they have good courses on Middle East politics..... and thanks for the link :)

    By Blogger متفرغ, at 19.4.06  

  • scarlo
    yeah sorry abt that, i thought going in perfect chronology would be "boring" and just like expanding on a timeline .. so the back n forth thing is just how i thought would be more appealing

    and btw, the Shah, as well as being a puppet for the oil trade, was also made into a military force (strongest in the ME at the time) and neighbouring the USSR .. which was very important for the cold war

    i studied the cold war in school, and iran's name popped up a few times .. but thats irrelevant to the purpose of the 'series' .. so yeah, "puppets" are all over the place installed by the US (of course, with the promise of military defense .. hint hint .. think of it in terms of "itefageyat el 7imaya" between the brits and kuwait 1899)

    also think of it as the US-strategy in copying the British-Empire's colonies in the 19th century and pre-WW2 :)

    metfarigh
    im glad the point is being conveyed .. thanks for the advice ill look into that school

    but thing is (this is gonna bore u), im already employed at kuwait univ but not with the political science department (of the 3ilm ijtema3 faculty) .. BUT im gonna ask to work there (teach english) so im 'in the right place' and ill see how it goes from there (if im serious abt the whole studying thing)

    i really dont think postgrad degrees require a BA in the exact same field as much as it has to do with interest and "potential" (whatever that means) .. but if i HAVE to do a PhD after being done with the MA .. i know for a fact that it can NOT be in linguistics heheh

    but anyway, with the "new" integrated phd programs, i think foundation courses + independent research time will put me on par with the big boys of politics a.k.a metfarigh :p

    By Blogger Temetwir, at 19.4.06  

  • It wasn't really that confusing.

    You did a nice thing, putting the links for those on the right side up there on your page.

    Your comments make the post more lively, btw, which is sort of why I kept reading. Usually history bores me out of my skin. So yeah a 'history lesson' every once in a while would be great :-D

    Question you might hate me for asking: didn't the US try to do anything to stop the revoloution? I mean, pahlavi was their puppet, they should look after him, shouldn't they?

    By Blogger ScarlO, at 19.4.06  

  • scarlo
    the SAVAK was founded for that specific purpose .. making sure the Shah was in power no matter what happens

    ironically, the 25 year 'agreement' with the western oil companies would have ended in 1979 (year of the revolution) but it ended in 1973 due to the arab oil embargo on the west (for the october war)

    so yes, they WERE looking out for him and still .. the revolution was succesfull

    the 70s - 80s should be in the next part whenever i get the time to write up on it

    By Blogger Temetwir, at 19.4.06  

  • Will be waiting for the next post - whenever you write it.

    By Blogger ScarlO, at 19.4.06  

Post a Comment

<< Home