Monday, August 19, 2013

CIA Admits Role in Saving Iran from Soviet Domination


MOSCOW LEANING PM: Mohammad Mossadeq. 

The CIA has finally admitted its role in the 1953 coup in Iran that removed a populist, Soviet-leaning prime minister, Mohammed Mossadeq.

The strikingly successful CIA operation strengthened the Shah, who subsequently ruled Iran for 26 years as a modernizing and staunchly pro-Western monarch.

Read more.

Not for nothing did the Kremlin try to assassinate the Shah. High-ranking KGB and satellite spy service defectors claimed the Shah was the target of various assassination attempts by Soviet agents.



Khomeini precursor Kashani and Mossadeq.
The CIA-supported coup saved Iran from coming under Soviet mastery and also saved it, arguably, from being taken over by backward Shiite clerics led by a politically ambitious, viciously anti-American and anti-Israel Khomeini precursor, the Ayatollah Abol-Ghasem Kashani. Mossadeq and Kashani were allies, initially. But they became bitter rivals after the secular politician resisted Kashani's demands for a shariah state; and Kashani, who briefly served as chairman of Iran's parliament, ultimately joined the Shiite clerical establishment in supporting the Shah over Mossadeq. The Shah, who transformed Iran into a powerful, oil-producing nation, fell out of favor with the clerics because of his pro-Western political orientation, literacy and educational programs for peasants, emancipation of women, and tolerance and protection of religious minorities.



At the end of the day, Iran's king, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, underestimated the power and ruthlessness of the mullahs; and his failure to crush the clerical fascist menace when this was still possible led to his ouster and exile, and to the revolution that has made his country's name synonymous with barbarism, terrorism, and war … and a mad march toward atomic armageddon.


Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Shah of Iran.
ENDNOTE: The Shah's strategic alliance with and importance to the United States and friendly relations with Israel made him a target of Soviet-sympathizing media outlets. Had he developed into a Stalinist dictator instead of an authoritarian monarch, he probably would have died in power. As an anti-American, anti-Isrel, leftwing despot, he would have enjoyed the support of liberal elites, eager for engagement--in those days, dialogue was the magical word--and signs of "moderation." Had the Shah traded his stylish European attire for Mao suits or jungle fatigues and recast himself as a Kim Il Sung, say, or a Fidel Castro, his every meaningless gesture--an ambiguous phrase or sentence uttered in an interview, for example, or a passing reference to Israel instead of to "the Zionist entity," etc.--would have been dutifully observed and analyzed in the most favorable of lights. But none of that happened. The Shah stuck with his pro-Western stance and modernizing programs to the end, and, in so doing, ironically, earned the enmity of the West's perception-shaping elites.
-Andr√© Pachter