Nika’s Reviews > All the Shah's Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror > Status Update
Nika
is on page 109 of 272
Instead of negotiating seriously, they [the British] issued only “rash statements” and “impulsive expressions of resentment” about what they considered the theft of their property in Iran. “I frankly feel that if the British government does not cooperate,” he concluded, “it will make the success of my mission extremely doubtful if not impossible.”
— Nov 01, 2022 11:39AM
13 likes · Like flag
Nika’s Previous Updates
Nika
is on page 207 of 272
At several points he [Mossadegh] might have declared victory and made a deal. In the summer of 1952, for example, he was an unassailable national hero. He had been returned to power by a spontaneous mass uprising and had won a great victory over the British at the World Court. President Truman was on his side. A more pragmatic leader might have seized on this moment, but Mossadegh was not a pragmatist.
— Nov 11, 2022 12:50PM
Nika
is on page 164 of 272
With this unanimous vote, the United States gave its final goahead for Operation Ajax, or Operation Boot, as the British continued to call it. The governments in London and Washington [the Eisenhower administration] were finally united in their enthusiasm. One looked forward to recovering its oil concession. The other saw a chance to deliver a devastating blow against communism.
— Nov 03, 2022 08:58AM
Nika
is on page 164 of 272
With this unanimous vote, the United States gave its final goahead for Operation Ajax, or Operation Boot, as the British continued to call it. The governments in London and Washington [the Eisenhower administration] were finally united in their enthusiasm. One looked forward to recovering its oil concession. The other saw a chance to deliver a devastating blow against communism.
— Nov 03, 2022 08:58AM
Comments Showing 1-6 of 6 (6 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Daniel
(new)
-
added it
Nov 01, 2022 12:23PM
Part of me almost admires the gall it must take to admonish a country after exploiting and taking their primary natural resource unabated for decades.
reply
|
flag
Yes, the gall and confidence that they were in the right while doing so are astounding. This book explores how the intransigence of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company became one of the key factors leading to the political crisis in Iran in the early 1950s.
How is this so far? I read a Kinzer book, "Overthrow...." which had a section on this event and enjoyed it. As an American, I cannot dunk on the British for any foreign engagement issues. Even in this circumstance, Americans are far more detrimental than the British.
Daniel wrote: "How is this so far? I read a Kinzer book, "Overthrow...." which had a section on this event and enjoyed it. As an American, I cannot dunk on the British for any foreign engagement issues. Even in t..."This is my first Kinzer. I'm enjoying it so far. I've already learned quite a lot from it.
The author delves into the details of a coup organized by the CIA to overthrow Mossadegh, the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran.
Mossadegh nationalized the oil company and was unwilling to compromise. As the author pointed out, "a more pragmatic leader might have seized on this moment, but Mossadegh was not a pragmatist. He was a visionary, a utopian, a millenarian."
The coup succeeded in August 1953. Mossadegh was deposed, the Shah reinstalled in Tehran and the hopes for democracy in Iran shattered.
Kinzer points to a series of rather unintended consequences of the 1953 coup. Some of the short-term and long-term effects are the oppressive rule of the Shah, the Islamic Revolution, the rise of radicalism, and terror attacks across the world.
Can't wait to read your views on such an interesting topic. Read the blurb, it is not an easy read. Kudos, Nika! <3
Thank you for your succinct synopsis, Nika. It feels like this book could have a nice size addendum on for the long-term effects fairly soon but that has probably been said for the last 40 years.
