The Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh Of Iran Essay

In January 1979, Iranians opposed to the Shah’s rule invaded the American embassy in Tehran and held a group of 52 American diplomats and other hostages for 444 days. The Shah left Iran and the victorious Ayatollah Khomeini returned that February. Of the approximately 90 people inside the embassy, 52 remained in captivity until the end of the crisis. The reputation of the Ayatollah Khomeini and the hostage taking was further enhanced with the failure of a hostage rescue attempt that cost lives. The Ayatollah Khomeini set forth several demands to be met prior to the release of the hostages. The US had options of their own; however, the risk to the hostages required the utmost consideration. In order to secure their freedom, outgoing

Saudi Arabia and Iran are two countries that sit on opposite sides of the Sunni/Shiite divide, which can be argued as being the most prominent issue the Middle East faces today. Saudi Arabia is predominantly known to be a Sunni state, while Iran is largely inhabited by Shia Muslims. Both countries aspire to be the hegemonic powers of the region. Ethnically, Iran is known to be a Persian land, unlike Saudi Arabia that is known to be in the heart of the Arab world. These two countries are separated by the Arabian Gulf and throughout the twentieth century and up until today, the relationship between the two countries has been notoriously contentious. Within the past few years especially relationships between the two states have been very fragile with Saudi Arabia ending diplomatic ties early in 2016. The two states are strained over many issues of which are, interpretations of Islam, oil export policy and hegemonic regional leadership.

All the Shah’s Men by Stephen Kinzer details the 1953 American-orchestrated coup in Iran. Iran was under British economic control, but as it modernized, Iranians began fighting for their own control. Their fledgling democracy was working to modernize, until the UK and the US decided to interfere to protect Britain’s colonial holdings from Soviet influence. Because the US was not interested in protecting a British business, British politicians emphasized the threat the USSR held to Iran, leading to Americans inserting themselves into a nation’s politics in which they had no place. They successfully orchestrated a coup, however, the negative, long-term, anti-Western results overwhelm any positive effect. All the Shah’s Men by Stephen Kinzer paints a picture of the results of action without adequate attention to future results.

Various factors influenced the 1979 Iranian revolution, but at the core of this significant event was Islamic fundamentalism. The Iranian religious leader, Ayatollah Khomeini, led this movement to end the thirty-seven-year reign of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, also known as the Shah of Iran (Diller 1991, p.152). The revolution was a combination of mounting social, economic, political and religious strains. The nation of Iran was never colonized, unlike some of its bordering countries, making its people intolerant of external influences. The Shah had gradually westernized and secularized his country, creating a strong American presence that was being felt

Leading up to, and throughout the first World War is when the tension started to build in Iran. The overthrow of Qajar regime, which was replaced by Reza Shah, lead to what is known as modern Iran. Iran was divided up by many powers. They were controlled by the imperial nations of Britain, Russia, Ottoman, and Germany. Because of a lack of government, it allowed nationalist groups to move in and develop in Iran. When World War 1 broke out, it increased foreign pressure in Iran, causing the flows of their government widen. “Following the approval of the Iranian Constitutional Code by the Qajar king in 1906, Anglo-Russian

The complexity of America’s relationship with Iran increased steadily beginning in 1908, when Iran struck oil. The Shah, the king or emperor of Iran, after taking the place of his young predecessor Reza Shah Pahlavi with the help of the CIA, led Iran into a period of extreme wealth and prosperity, the likes of which the Iranian people had never experienced. However, with the growth of wealth in Iran came the growth of Iranian resentment towards the West, specifically the United States. The Iranian’s resented the uneven distribution of wealth that they felt existed and the United State’s influence in “westernizing” their society. In 1963, this growing hatred led to a conflict with the Islamic clergy. The conflict was quickly settled by the Shah, but he was unaware that this dispute was the beginning

Many descendants of Muzzaffar continued to rule after him, and although the Iranian people eventually were able to nationalize some industries, the oil belonged to the British. This is really where all of the conflict begins concerning the oil, and the hatred that Iranians have for foreign

Iranian hostility of United States can be traced back to the 1950s. The United States supported any regime that was not communist, even though they would be considered very unpopular with the people of their country. Because of this, Iran became an anti-communist country and the Shah became an ally of the United States. In 1950 the Shah left Iran when Mohammed Mossadegh was elected Prime Minister. After Mossadegh election, he used his authority and nationalized the oil industry in the country. This incident generated fear in the United States. The state department felt that communists could abuse this anarchy and Iran could turn against the United States. The Shah, who had been removed from power, contacted the United States and the Central

According to Mark C. Carnes and John A. Garraty’s “The American Nation: A History of the United States”, “During World War II, Great Britain, the Soviet Union, and later the United States occupied Iran and forced its pro-German shah into exile, replacing him with his twenty-two year old son, Muhammad Reza Pahlavi” (Carnes and Garraty). In the early 1950’s, executive power was relocated to the leftist Prime Minister Muhammad Mossadegh.

The American government is known to promote democratic values throughout the world. Though the ideals America was fighting for during the Cold War, the government still managed to participate in the overthrow of democratically elected Prime Minister, Mohammed Mossadegh. Mossadegh threatened to nationalize Iran’s oil in 1951 and later gained the support of the Iranian government. The British companies had many investments in Iranian oil. It is with the approval of nationalization that the economies of both British and Iran were ultimately harmed. The British government requested the help of the US so that they could perform a coup to overthrow Mossadegh. With suspicions of Mossadegh supporting communism, and being supported by the Tudeh Party, the United States government was willing to sacrifice their democratic ideologies and credibility in the region for the insurance of an anti-communist leader. This would prove to cause problems that still resonate in today’s political and military negotiations in this region.

In response, the rest of the world started a boycott of Iranian oil, and the British began planning a military operation to wrest control from Mossadegh. They worked with President Dwight Eisenhower and the American CIA to organize a coup of sorts, by funding and inciting pro-shah supporters to take to the streets and demand the removal of Mossadegh, who was an erratic and unpredictable ruler. The operation was successful and threw Mossadegh out of power, but not without many unintended consequences (Farber, 56). Within Iran, Islamic fundamentalists following Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini were greatly angered by the American influence and disruption, and the seeds of revolution were planted.

Iran has always, it seems, been the breeding ground for some kind of political upheaval or another. In recent times, back in 1979, there was a major revolution which was, in some ways, similar to the revolution we are seeing today. The people were angry and they were tired of being controlled by the government that was in power. They had concrete ideals and were incredibly passionate about their revolution. The revolution Iran is experiencing today does not appear to be quite as passionate and does not appear to maintain a belief in any real solid political system. They just know they want something different. In the following paper we present an illustration of the current revolution that is taking

The emergence of the Islamic Republic in late 1970’s Iran demonstrates how middle class Iranian people purged themselves of the Pahlavi Dynasty in an effort to continue down a more righteous and egalitarian path. As a result, the country underwent a complete social upheaval and in its place grew an overtly oppressive regime based in theoretical omnipotence. In response to this regime, the very structure of political and social life was shaken and fundamentally transformed as religion and politics became inexorable. As a result, gender roles and the battle between public and private life were redrawn. Using various primary and secondary sources I will show how the Revolution shaped secular middle class Iranians. Further, I will show how the

Before the revolution, Shah Reza Pahlavi was the ruler of Iran. Under his leadership power was clustered and concentrated among his close allies and networks of friends and others with whom he had close relations. By 1970s, the gap between the poor and the rich was widening and huge distrust about his economic policies grew. Resentment towards his autocratic leadership grew fuelling people to dissent his regime further. Shah now was considered an authoritarian who took full control of the Iran government preventing the Iranians from expressing their opinion. The government has transformed from the traditional monarchial form of government to authoritarian with absolute authority replacing individual freedom of the Iranians. This transformation to Iranian was unacceptable because they needed to control their own affairs. They wanted self-government where they could take control as opposed to what Shah was doing. Shah was seen as a western puppet for embracing authoritarian form of government (Axworthy, 2016).

While the Iran-Iraq War during the 1980's may have permanently altered the course of progress in Iran and Iraq, the war also altered the resulting permanent involvement of the rest of the world in the middle-east. The rich and complicated history in Iraq has established numerous cultural and ethnic traditions that all play a part in where the country is today. The Iran-Iraq War brought into focus some of those traditions and how they conflicted, while also bringing Iraq and its economic situation into the spotlight. Being on top of some of the most mineral rich soil in the world makes Iraq a major contributor to the world's economy through petroleum and crude oil exports. This, among other reasons, ties nations