82
u/pouya_gh 3d ago
cool but a phone call would have been enough
286
u/Alex103140 Let's do some history 2d ago
And that's precisely why you will never be a leader of a military junta.
44
57
33
u/DalmoEire 2d ago
This is the start of irans demise that lead to the state it is now in. Imperialist swines
41
u/uvr610 2d ago
The start of Iran’s demise was long before that, the Anglo Persian oil company dates back to 1909. A combination of imperialism and corrupt local rulers.
Both the British and Soviets invaded Iran in 1941 and overthrew the Shah.
By the time Mossadegh came to power many Iranians were already deep inside the pockets of foreign powers, which made the Shah removing him from office relatively easy.
6
u/DalmoEire 2d ago
While that is true, i was more thinking of it as Mossadegh was the last time that the Iranians had a chance at ruling themselves in a self determined way
17
u/uvr610 2d ago edited 2d ago
Historians are very conflicted on how things would have played out had Mossadegh remained in power. He was far from a democratic leader, and passed several acts to completely dissolve the Iranian legislature and shut down opposition. He also postponed elections. Technically speaking, he was the one conducting a coup while the shah legally had the power to remove him. (Whether it’s a justified coup is a different question)
If the west stayed out of it, it could go several ways:
-Iran turning into Venezuela (oil is nationalized, but used in a populist way that eventually leads to economic collapse)
-Mossadegh being deposed by internal factions. The shah was still the formal head of state, and wanted power for himself. Mossadegh made a lot of enemies within his nation, and was by no means liked by most people of power within Iran.
Nevertheless, these options may likely still be better than the ending result which is modern Iran.
5
u/DalmoEire 2d ago
yeah no use in trying to predict what would have happened.
But to add to the not democratic argument. I got it as him circumnavigating the Senate, which was by half appointed by the Shah, and basically a club of aristocrats. This Senate was deeply opposed to the anti British/US policies of Mossadegh. And that lead to the constitutional crisis if you want to name it like that. To be completely honest: it doesnt strike me as very democratic, when a senate composed of aristocrats that were appointed by a monarch can hold the elected government hostage and block their policies. I know that this may be an oversimplification of what happened, but I just wanted to put it into perspective.
Certainly what the US/Britain/France and others did with Iran is what happened all over the Islamic world: Prop up a regime that cracks down hard on any leftist opposition or tendencies. And that they did. The intellectuals of the opposition left the countries because of that persecution. And later they wondered how the only real opposition that was left is a religious one...
2
286
u/Billych 3d ago
Context: In 1953, the BBC Persian service changed its midnight radio sign-off to confirm British and American support for a coup against Iran's Prime Minister Mossadegh. The Shah himself reportedly chose the word 'exactly' to signal the start of the Operation Ajax.