Comments for t r u t h o u t | US Policies May Have Contributed to Iran Revolution, Study Says »
Posted By dissent 6 months ago in NewsA new report based on previously classified documents suggests that the Nixon and Ford administrations created conditions that helped destabilize Iran in the late 1970s and contributed to the country's Islamic Revolution.
A trove of transcripts, memos and other correspondence show sharp differences over rising oil prices developing between the Republican administrations and Mohammed Reza Shah Pahlavi in the mid-1970s, says a report to be published today in the fall issue of Middle East Journal, an academic journal published by the Washington-based Middle East Institute, a think tank.
The report, after two years of research by scholar Andrew Scott Cooper, zeros in on the role of White House policymakers -- including Donald H. Rumsfeld, then a top aide to President Ford -- hoping to roll back oil prices and curb the shah's ambitions, despite warnings by then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger that such a move might precipitate the rise of a "radical regime" in Iran.
"The shah is a tough, mean guy. But he is our real friend," Kissinger warned Ford, who was considering options to press the monarch into lowering oil prices, in an August 1974 conversation cited by the report. "We can't tackle him without breaking him."
Read Full Story at truthout.org »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 22
-
-
-
-
100%
hyperbola6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually, the modern version started about a century ago with the Brits. Between them and us, we imposed a government on Iran several times in the 20th century. The Shah's father was already an example of us imposing a monarch on Iran.
Reply -
hyperbolaComment removed: Spam
-
100%
hyperbola6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There is a really excellent recent movie about the history of Iran in the 20th century from French director Jean-Michel Vecchiet. I learned a lot about what came even before Mossadegh from it.
Reply
Here is the trailer in english.
IRAN, THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR - trailer
By going back in time over 100 years, “Iran, a Powerhouse unveiled” will explain the role and strategy of Iran in global politics as it is about to celebrate in January 2009 the 30th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution. A reference documentary on the past and present challenges of Iran to the Middle East and beyond.
This film is a narrative. With a plot. To tell the story of Iran, it focuses on the duel that, since 1908, has pitted Teheran against, first London, then Washington. This duel is more than just a ghost haunting the Iranian conscience. It summarizes the entire 20th century. It crops up in every major division of our era. It is at the heart of East/West, Occidental/Oriental and even Northern hemisphere/Southern hemisphere relations. In telling the tale of Iran, it tells the tale of the world, of our history....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DigrJOaQ0EI -
Neutral
hyperbola6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
With a quick look, I could only find the complete film in french.
Reply
Iran: une puissance dévoilée
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRGQFNM_FeE -
Neutral
hyperbola6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
and in spanish.
Reply
Irán, potencia de Oriente
“CIEN AÑOS DE UNA NACIÓN”
http://www.rtve.es/FRONT_PROGRAMAS?go=111b735a516a...
(click on the "videoteca" button at the left)
-
-
100%
tehranchik6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The major difference between then and now is that the Shah was our man. Kissinger was right with his warning. We got more than we bargained for with the Islamic revolution. We lost total control of Iran. Not quite what we planned. This regime is in no way a friend to the US and other western powers.
Reply
That's what is different about today.-
100%
dissent6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
like i said... we put 'em in, we take 'em out. we build 'em up, we tear 'em down. and then we spin it all away.
Reply
we may disagree, tc, as to the degree of our government's involvement in today's events but i'm sure we can agree that it would be unlikely that it is the non-active participant obama now totes it to be. especially in the light of having, over the last 2 years, invested substantial sums into this very purpose -- the destabilization of iran. -
100%
tehranchik6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I don't completely disagree with you at all. I'm very well aware of the wickedness of our government. AND I won't say that we haven't tried to upset the balance of power in Iran. I was there in '79. There was nothing but talk of the americans bringing down the shah. There is a difference this time. We don't have the insiders we once had. We simply haven't had the same advantage of '79.
Reply-
Neutral
dissent6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
the opportunities may not be the same but i don't think we can say they are not there. we have surrounded iran with wars on either side. do you think it's possible this kind of instability can create opportunity?
Reply
seymour hersh spoke last year before this election of the kind of infiltration we have made into iran these past few years
Clandestine operations against Iran are not new. United States Special Operations Forces have been conducting cross-border operations from southern Iraq, with Presidential authorization, since last year. These have included seizing members of Al Quds, the commando arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, and taking them to Iraq for interrogation, and the pursuit of “high-value targets” in the President’s war on terror, who may be captured or killed. But the scale and the scope of the operations in Iran, which involve the Central Intelligence Agency and the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), have now been significantly expanded, according to the current and former officials. Many of these activities are not specified in the new Finding, and some congressional leaders have had serious questions about their nature.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/07/0807...
-
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
tehranchik6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
dissent is correct. This has gone far beyond mousavi. This could be the first real step to change in Iran. With or without mousavi. With or without the US. Iran fought for the change they thought the Imam would bring 30 years ago. Right now to bring about that change it's mousavi.
Reply
If the clerics don't understand the change needed they will be out as well. This could have been a change within the system but it's moving towards changing the WHOLE system.
-
-
Neutral
dissent6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What does Kissinger have to do with what is happening right now?
Reply
this should be self-explanatory.
the article is about the iranian revolution which makes kissinger pertinent to this thread. the revolution is a historical event closely related, chronological and consequentially, to the events of today, ie. one thing leads to another. just as the events of 1953 led to the events of 1979. nothing ever happens in a vacuum. this is no different-
0%
Endoscopy6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What a bunch of nonsense. There is a difference between working to curb the Shah's ambitions and pulling the rug out from under him like Carter did. Carter bragged to foreign leaders that he was about to do that. Then it was accomplished. Liberals always thing they know best. Carter believed that the Ayatollah was a nice man that would work with him. He found out different. The Shah may have done some bad things in Iran but compared to the Ayatollah he was an angel. Many more died and were persecuted than any time before.
Reply -
-
100%
tehranchik6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Endo - saying "The Shah may have done some bad things in Iran" is nonsense. Shah killed thousands during his rule. Whisper his name the wrong way and you disappear into one of his torture chambers never again to see the light of day. Do a little reading on SAVAK. He was feared by one and all. It was nothing to knock off a member of his family if he thought they might cross him. There are stories of brake lines being cut and airplanes crashes because fuel had been siphoned off. Shah was NEVER an angel.
Reply -
-
-
-
100%
cleare6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
uh...duh.
Reply
of course our policies have had impact on the iranian revolution(s).
i understand that we need to protect our interests overseas, but we need to lead by example, not intervention.
time to get our own political house in order and stop mucking about the the political processes in other countries, however strategically important (or not.)
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.