To learn more about the CIA overthrow of Mossadegh, and the man himself, I would suggest checking out these links below.
NY Times: Secrets of History
National Security Archive: The Secret CIA history of the Iran Coup
Wikipedia: Mossadegh Bio
Mossadegh Project: Official Site
For a posting comment, I would like you to answer any or all of these questions:
-Do you feel like you understand why Iran has acted the way it has in the last 28 years, specifically in relations to the U.S., by watching the video today?
-Do you think the U.S. was justified in taking Mossadegh out?
-Do you think Iranians share the blame for what happened to Mossadegh?
-Do you think the CIA should repeat what it did to Mossadegh to other countries, even Iran today?
You can post on any of the items we have posted so far, but make sure to do it by next Monday.
-Amir
NY Times: Secrets of History
National Security Archive: The Secret CIA history of the Iran Coup
Wikipedia: Mossadegh Bio
Mossadegh Project: Official Site
For a posting comment, I would like you to answer any or all of these questions:
-Do you feel like you understand why Iran has acted the way it has in the last 28 years, specifically in relations to the U.S., by watching the video today?
-Do you think the U.S. was justified in taking Mossadegh out?
-Do you think Iranians share the blame for what happened to Mossadegh?
-Do you think the CIA should repeat what it did to Mossadegh to other countries, even Iran today?
You can post on any of the items we have posted so far, but make sure to do it by next Monday.
-Amir
16 comments:
It is clear that the removal of Mossadegh signified a crucial change in the relationship between Iran and America. Prior to the event, the connection between the two States was generally positive, for the United States had not demonstrated -- at least overtly --a desire to engage in manipulative practices of Russia and England. However, subsequent to the coup betrayal, it was evident that new terms of their relationship were in place. Given the tyrannical nature of the Shah, the antipathy exhibited by Iranians within both the general population and the political/religious establishment is not surprising. The high level of damage and disgrace accompanying the reign of the Shah ensured that his ascension would not fade into the background of history. Thus, extending from the revolution to the present, Iran has been deeply suspicious of Western ambitions in the region. Any actions – real or potential – that have implications for their sovereignty or dignity will be treated in a hostile fashion. The Iranians wish to avert a reoccurrence of the historical injustices committed against their people.
The rule of Mossadegh should not have been subverted by the United States. He was popularly elected and conducted himself respectfully in both domestic and international affairs. The only legitimate basis for his removal would be in the event that he was engaging in mass atrocities or truly imperiling the welfare of other States. Neither inflated risks of a Communist takeover nor projected economic gains for Western countries serve as valid reasons for a coup. On the contrary, the employment of such reasoning represents a severe lack of judgment and even immorality on behalf of the United States and England. Only if Mossadegh were to have met his political demise at the hands of an un-manipulated popular demand would the process have been just.
That is not to say that all foreign intervention of this nature is categorically bad; it depends upon the circumstances. The primary considerations should be whether a leader in question is committing grave human rights offenses or imminently endangering non-hostile States. But there is absolutely no way to determine a priori when a coup is permissible. All one can do is lay down rational and strict criteria for when it is a valid option. According to my own standards, Iran today is not eligible for such foreign interventions.
In examining the United State's and Great Britain's reasons for removing Mossadegh, I came to the conclusion that the US and UK made a very bad mistake. While the justification that communism was encroaching, and Mossadegh was becoming friendly with the Russians, may be true, one could say that the British created this situation out of their own stupidity. In the first place, Iran was in an economically depressed state, and thus need money. Under normal circumstances, Iran might have sold its oil, but secondly, and most importantly, the British had an embargo on Iranian oil. So in a certain sense, Britain forced Iran towards the Russians, and communism, and thus Britain made their own mess, and had to clean it up. In retrospect, Britain should have negotiated with the Iranians on the share of the oil revenues, and not been so petty in wanting the oil revenue. And considering in the aftermath that the British lost the monopoly on oil in Iran, they should have negotiated with the Iranians in the first place. But then again, hindsight is 20/20.
I feel like many of the actions that Iran has taken in the past 28 years have been at least in part due to the unjustified and undemocratic removal of Prime Minister Mossadegh. The United States should not have removed a popular leader for its own benefits. America’s history as a country that claims it fights for freedom and democracy is constantly tarnished by actions that go against the founding principles of the nation. In the long run, America put itself in a much worse position by removing Mossadegh. Mossadegh’s removal was a large demonstration of how vulnerable Iran is to outside powers and seems to have condemned Iran to a defensive paranoia. In recent years it is clear that American forces occupying countries on both sides of Iran have intensified this paranoia. Given the history of foreign intervention in Iran, I have a clearer understanding of why they would be hostile to the U.S. and why they would seek to acquire nuclear armaments.
Do you feel like you understand why Iran has acted the way it has in the last 28 years, specifically in relations to the U.S., by watching the video today?
Sure! However, facts can be misrepresented or spun as it is called in the media depending on who is trying gain legitimacy. Anytime I see any kind of "facts" I cannot help but be skeptical. I tend to ask the question, "Who is benefited?"
-Do you think the U.S. was justified in taking Mossadegh out?
This is an ethical question. Regardless of who is the aggressor, I find it wrong to take out anyone that the majority people want in power. On the other hand I wonder if this is just a business deal of elitists (like Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi). Can the U.S., Britain take all the blame or are there people within Iran that could care less and want to capitalize even though Iranian people are suffering?
-Do you think Iranians share the blame for what happened to Mossadegh?
I am not sure if you are meaning all Iranians or a certain class of Iranians. Many people have no Idea what kinds of business deals are happening and who is suffering because of these deals. How many people in the U.S. today know that we are one of the top exporters of weapons in the world? The better question is how many people care as long as they have steak to eat?
-Do you think the CIA should repeat what it did to Mossadegh to other countries, even Iran today?
To be honest this is an unfair question. I say this because it makes people pick a side. The CIA has been doing horrible things and awesome things. It is all in what side of the fence you live. If the people in the US are benefiting, I am fairly confident they are not going to disapprove or even ask what this organization is doing. For instance, people know that cars pollute and may contribute significantly to global warming but does this stop them from buying the biggest environment polluting SUVs on the market? Most of the clothing that is in US retail stores are made by slave labor but does this detour people from buying them?
The ethical answer to your question is no because life cannot be compared to the monopoly of resources. But, I wonder if Iran and the US swapped positions, would Iran do the same thing as the US. What I am getting at is, “is this an Iran vs US thing or a social economic class vs class thing?”
The United State's role in Mossadegh’s removal from power was unjustified and has caused the nation to face many more issues as a result of its involvement. It is understandable that the people of Iran would be suspicious of any US activity in the region after being subjected to an imperialistic-like ousting of their popular leader. Mossadegh was a popularly elected leader whose actions within Iran were legal and justified. His policies—being beneficial to Iran in the long run but harmful to Western interests—were implemented through legislation and backed by popular support. It is understandable that a generation of Iranians that had their voices stripped from them by foreign governments would be distrustful of any foreign intervention.
I have wondered for a long time, "why is it that they hate us so much?" It just didn't make sense to me that so many people would be so angry with the United States. I wondered if it was just a backlash against a powerhouse, stickin' it to the man... Now, after watching the film on Mossadegh and the CIA, I am able to put this lack of trust into context. I can now completely follow a move to Islamic extremism. If I were in power in Iran, I would want to secure my power, too. I wouldn't want the CIA to sneak inside and knock me off my own feet. I can now see why every little comment or move by the US is treated with hostility. Really, the removal of Mossadegh seems completely embarrassing to me (like many of the US' moves during the Cold War). Were they protecting Americans? Protecting Iranians from Communism? Or protecting their oil?! It is about as qualified as the move into the current war.
I suppose, the next step, then, is to figure out how to gain some trust back. Where can we find the respect that our country needs? Perhaps the US won't earn that respect for years to come. It is hard to forgive for something as horrible as taking a popular leader out of power for your own selfish reasons. We have to remember that countries react very similar to people; they are made out of them! Can a fresh set of leaders pull the US into a new relationship with the rest of the world? Hillary '08!!!
The US had no right in removing Mossadegh from power. It was in my understanding a brainless idea to do so because; it was during the Mossadegh government that the US had good diplomatic relationships with Iran. After the coup they would be close allies of the Shah, but this would also lead to the political and social hatred against America. Mossadegh was a democratically elected president, whose government had great control but in a straight peaceful manner. Without any doubt, the US involvement in the coup against Mossadegh was driven by personal interests’ and bad intelligence. The idea of Iran turning communist was nothing more, than a great media story in order put the foundations for the coup against popular President Mossadegh. The US involvement in Iran crisis was nothing but a response towards a changing world, where the main power of the world was wishing to control not only the oil of the region, but the politics as well.
I find it ironic how the American government conspired to overthrow the elected leader of Iran at the time, Mossadegh. It also astonishes me that the CIA contrived this action developed around baseless fear and suspicion. You would think that an organization as powerful as the CIA woud have more research done on a situation, before it plans to overthrow a government. It is, after all, the Central Intelligence Agency. The extraction of Iran's leader did create a huge rift in the American-Iranian relationship. Since he was elected in a democratic way, no matter if he was feared for being communist, he should not have been conspired against. I feel like no matter who rules over Iran, America will have a problem with them.
In removing Mossadegh from power, the US triggered a long lasting resentment from the Iranian people that eventually lead to a revolution against the Shah’s government, which had come to be so closely allied with US interests. Mossadegh was chosen democratically and was backed by the general populace and various parties. The Shah’s friendly relationship with the US was enough to turn away any support from the Iranians at a point when he needed it most in order to maintain power. It was an example of where the Shah's interest lied regarding Iran's involvement with the US, and his own role as the head on a puppet government. With feelings of betrayal and animosity from the Iranian people towards the US, it's not shocking that an explosive revolution against the Shah's regime who was so entangled in US interest and so deaf to the needs of its people was bound to occur, apart from the religious motivations which helped unite the factions. The removal of Mossadegh disintegrated any trust Iran had towards the US, and that sense of suspicion has become a core reason and the rally cry of the present religious government in Iran, making advancement of US interest in the Middle East rather difficult.
I do feel like i am more able to understand the current relationship between iran and america by examining the past. i don't feel like either side is justified in their actions, though.
this goes back to the US taking Mossadegh out. I think that Iran was moving towards a very promising place and it seems very unfair and short sighted of American to have pulled Mossadegh out of Iran, especially since the US didn't even seem care much to begin with. I think that some foreign intervention can be very positive, but it requires a great deal of research and thought, and ideally it would be beneficial to both the nation where the change would be taking place, and the foreign nation facilitating the intervention.
I don't think that anyone can really blame Iranians for what happened to Mossadegh. Ultimately, it seems that Iranians come from a long history of weak leadership and inappropriate priorities. Mossadegh was making the effort to change that and bring strength to Iran's people, who had long been neglected. I don't think that they can be blamed for the leaders of their past, or for what western nations did to stop their progress. I can, on the other hand, see how anti-American sentiments can brew there after these events.
In terms of the CIA staging interventions in other nations, I think that it is a case by case situation. In an ideal situation, the CIA's interventions would be very helpful, but unfortunately a great deal of harm can come from these interventions. It may actually take more insight than any one group can have to intervene, as it clearly caused some issues when Mossadegh was removed, and the aftermath of removing Saddam from Iraq has not exactly been ideal. That said, I would generally disagree with CIA interventions but I still have some optimism that it can be done well. I certainly don't think that the CIA has the strength or ability to remove Ahmadinejad from Iran today, and even if they were able to, the results would not be favorable to the US.
From the United States point of view it was definitely justified to take Mossadegh out, since they were competing with the Soviet Union, and they could not afford to loose Iran to the Soviets. From Iranian's point of view, United States was not justified to take out Mossadegh, since by doing so United States was interfering in Iran's domestic affairs. Iranian's had a chance overthrow the Shah without any bloodshed and have a democratic country, but the United States shattered their hopes.
After reading about the operation in our reader, i don't feel that the United States was justified for the 1953 coup to overthrow Muhammad Mossadegh. A couple reasons come to mind. I don't think that the United States would have helped Britain regain its control over the AIOC if it did not feel that it would make an economic earning from the support. Any type of American intervention in iran without any form of compensation would not be worth the resentment that Mossadegh's followers would have towards the US after the coup. This resentment is important to control because iran is politically and strategically important to the US, so it would be unwise for them to anger the iranian population. Overall, it sounds like the US is running a muck trying to sustain democracy in the US as well as promoting it in the middle east, as they are doing now.
The coup against Iranian Premier Mohammad Mossadegh is yet another example of the failures of American foreign policy. I do not think that the US was justified in taking Mossadegh out of position in Iran because as an American I think it is none of our business. It really is that simple. Our foreign policy is and always has been so extreme that at this rate we really ought not to have one whatsoever. At the time, there was no such proof that Mossadegh was of any threat towards neighboring nations let alone the US, which is on the other side of the world.
The fact that the coup actually took place and that the Shah was installed, is proof alone that the CIA cannot be trusted. If, for example, this was one of the few times in US history that the CIA, under the guide of the US administration, had interrupted in another country's foreign affairs, then I would expect the Islamic nation of Iran to be forgiving towards the US and to then establish a future relationship. But because the US appears to be sticking their head into most world affairs that they are in disagreement with, then it is clear that they cannot be trusted whatsoever. But mind you, I am speaking of the US administration and not the people of the US, who usually according to polls and daily massive protests show an overwhelming stance against their administration. Take even, for example, the occupation occurring today in Afghanistan and Iraq, to name only two examples. The US administration has waged a war on two nations at the expense of killing innocent civilians on the basis of finding weapons of mass destruction that do not exist for Iraq and in search of Osama Bin Laden who cannot be found for Afghanistan. I think the dubious actions of the US's with regard to the overthrow of Mossadegh ought to be made very clear when the countries are discussed in our public discourse, and perhaps even do something we are not used to: take stock of what we do abroad. It is none of our business to be meddling in other countries affairs especially when our own country can use improvement. I think it is better that we work on making the US a better place as opposed to getting further entrenched in the Neo Imperialist adventures abroad.
Post a Comment