Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Iran Marks Oil Nationalization Day


Iran has marked the 62nd anniversary of the nationalization of oil industry by Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq.  Mossadeq, one of the most popular premiers in Iranian history, was selected as Time’s Man of the Year for his leadership to end the decades-old ownership of Iranian oil industry by Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (later BP) in 1951. Iran’s state-run Press TV called the nationalization movement “a momentous breakthrough in the nation’s movement for independence.”

Mossadeq was overthrown as premier in a British-American coup, known as Operation Ajax, in August 1953, bringing the Shah back to power. The overthrow of a popular and politically moderate premier and the installment of a dictatorship helped pave the way for the rise of leftist radicalism and Islamic fundamentalism in the country which eventually led to a regime change and coming to power of Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979. 

File photo: The late Mohammad Mossadeq, Prime Minister of Iran, 1951-1953.

22 comments:

Yossarian said...

This man was an enemy of the Shah and the West...Therefore, and enemy of me.

Nader Uskowi said...

Shah certainly acted as an enemy of a popular and democratically elected premier, and you must have a lot of enemies, my friend!

allochtonie said...

Mossadegh, the greatest Iranian in modern times.

Anonymous said...

Come on Mr Uskowi lets not kid ourselves. Mossadeq was one of the ministers of parliament chosen by the Shah himself and then ratified by parliament.There was no democratic elections as we know it in the West.Unfortunately for Mossadeq he went against the written constitution by demanding the closure of parliament and asking to be commander in chief of armed forces.
This act concerned a number of Iranians who decided to remove the prime minister and put him under house arrest.As we know the West likes to take credit for what the Iranian armed forces and the traditional pro monarchist or traditionalists amongst the population done.
It's very sad to read among the writers who claim that Mossadeq was elected by popular vote of the masses,which wasn't the case.The Shah became Shah because Reza Shah was forcefully made to abdicate in 1941.Because Mossadeq went against the constitution he basically was responsible for ending the constitutional monarchy that existed before 1953.
It's like prime minister of Britain decides to go against the monarchy by demanding the closer of parliament and wanting to be the symbolic head of the armed forces,same thing.

Nader Uskowi said...

Even the United States government has apologized for the 1953 coup. Are you saying this coup was originated by pro-Shah elements without any Western support? Interesting read (or misread) of history!

The period after the abduction of Reza Shah and the 1953 coup is one of the most democratic periods in Iranian history. Reza Shah had left the country, a young and inexperienced Shah was sworn in, and the resulting power vacuum had resulted in the rise of political parties, chief among them the pro-Soviet Tudeh Party (then the largest political party ever assembled in The Middle East, nationalist parties which later formed the National Front under Mossadeq, and rightist, pro-fascist groups.

The two Majlis elections in the period were arguably the freest elections in Iran (due the sudden departure of a dictator and the pursuing power vacuum). Mossadeq’s supporters won the parliament under these circumstances, he was named premier by the young shah and he won vote of confidence from Majlis, like in any parliamentary system. And as such he was a democratically elected and popular premier.

The coup orchestrated by the British with the active support of the Americans overthrew Mossadegh’s government and reinstated the shah (who had fled the country and was in Italy at the time) and a dark period of dictatorship followed. A development that eventually led to a regime change and coming to power of Khoemeini.

Anonymous said...

No,I'm saying the pro Shah and conservative elements of the country were concerned about Mossadeq and his parlaying with the Tudeh elements of the country.You got to realize the so called coup wouldn't have worked if it wasn't for the public relief that was shown towards it.
Also the dictator as you claimed was the person that single handed saved the country from the cesspit of Qajar dynasty which would have lead to the breakup of Iran and become Iranistan.
Lets face it,Reza Shah saved Iran and put the mullah in its place.Only regret I have is that he didn't finish the job off and do what Stalin did and finish them off for good.So I say Reza Shah was a democrat and humanist and not a real dictator like Hitler or Stalin.
We all know that Mossadeq was,a closet Qajari and had nothing but disdain towards the Pahlavi Dynasty. And by his action in parliament when he became prime minister he contributed towards Iran becoming a paternalistic state.
And if Mossadeq would have kept the Shah away in 1953 Iran still wouldn't have become democratic because the damn mullahs would have made sure of that.Basically 1953 delayed the advent of the TAZI spring by 25 years.That means Mossadeq would have let the mullahs introduce their hate towards the Jews and Bahai as well as reintroduction of Sharia law in 1953,just like the good old Qajar days.
Please also remember that the British despised the Pahlavis and wanted to reintroduce the hated Qajar dynasty back in 1941.
I personally don't think the period between 1953 to 1979 was a dark period of dictatorship in Iran.Look at Turkey,South Korea,these countries at the time were far worse than Iran was both politically and economically.
In the late 1970s Iran was on its way up despite nagging problems no different than any other developing country.
Now look at Turkey and South Korea today and look at the economic, social political state of Iran and compare.Which country you rather live in?
What I'm saying is that Iran at the time could have been reformed like those countries mentioned.The Shah was willing to reform when he knew that forces were against him.But elements went under charlatan Khomeini's Aba and betrayed Bahktiar the last prime minister of the Shah.
But to say that Iran can be reformed today under the Sharia run mullahcracy is an impossibility.You might as well say you can rewrite the Koran.
Our war is with the mullahs.A war that has been going on far beyond the 34 years.They won the battle in 1979 but not the ongoing war.
Please note;I'm not against communist or Tudeh,Jepeh Melli or Iranian NAZI party.I'm against the damn traitors that sold and are still selling Iran to the damn TAZI party that is leading to Iran's destruction.

B.M.A said...

NO ! He has a special place in IRANIAN history!.but KHOMEINI is greater for HE led the revolution of a century!!.

Anonymous said...

So in other words you`ll support any dictatorship as long as its pro western!?

Anonymous said...

B.M.A,you know nothing about Iran. So be silent.

Anonymous said...

So what are you trying to say,that I should support the dirty Tazi colonialist mullahs that is occupying Iran?
And besides what is wrong with being "pro western" if it means economic and social prosperity? Your comment is total nonsense and wrongly assumes that "pro western" means dictatorship.Yet Iran today is cooperating with China,North Korea and Russia,countries that are dictatorships.
Since you are so against "pro western" I wonder which country you reside in?
Let me take a wild guess. You don't live in any of the countries above for sure except for Europe or America.

Anonymous said...

Anon 9:48AM, you mad bro? Ha ha.

Anonymous said...

KHOMEINI WAS THE CHARLATAN OF THE CENTURY !

Anonymous said...

Sadly when it comes to the history of the middle east the wests actions are damning,they have consistently supported dictatorship after dictatorship and despot after despot,they have continually denied the people of the region the same things they take as their most basic rights,the history of the west in the middle east is one act of bloodthirsty hypocrisy after another,if you support the west and its goals in the middle east then you support this its really that simple

Anonymous said...

@Anon 4:49...I'm against the Islamic regime.You have a problem with that? Otherwise Stupid comment.

Anonymous said...

Anon 6:09 - You have the right to be malcontent and you are entitled to your own personal sentiments and dissaffection. However, Anon 4:49 hit the nail on the head and it is infact your negative reaction to his statement that is seen as "stupid" in light of what he posted.

Anonymous said...

There are malcontents like Anon 6:09 in every society,he does not like the current islamic government but if you asked him what it should be replaced with he wouldn`t be able to give you a coherent answer,the best thing to do is to ignore malcontents like him unless of course they are dangerous madmen like anders brevik or timothy mcvay or form terrorist groups with others of their ilk like the mek or al qaida that threaten society as a whole

Anonymous said...

You call that regime of turds a "government"?
And stop pretending you have other Anons supporting your silly comments.
All the Timothy Mcvays,Anders Breviks types are presently the one that are in charge of occupied Iran.
You seem like a fanboy of the mass murdering,bloodthirsty,anti Iranian theocratic turd rate regime.
You are a shameless hussy.

Anonymous said...

They are the elected government with a reasonable degree of popular support,I know you cannot stand this reality but nonetheless it is a fact,calling me names does not change the truth in what I wrote it only diminishes your credibility in this forum by showing that you have no effective rebuttal to my previous posts.So tell me what would you replace the current government with?,would you bring back the shah and turn iran back into an "arab style" dictatorship like saudi arabia with its corrupt royal family or perhaps you would prefer a corrupt military strongman dictatorship like mubaraks egypt or saddams iraq or would you prefer the 2 party us system with the illusion of choice but little of the substance.Irans political system is far from perfect but by the standards of the middle east its light years ahead of all the others in the region but that doesn`t mean that theres no room for improvement

Anonymous said...

Since when does Saudi Arabia have a royal family? They are Sheiks not your typical royal family.Shows how literate you are when you compare the institution of royalty with thousands of years of history in Iran to a Sheikdom of Saudi Arabia.And then you have the nerve to compare the government of the secular Monarchy of Iran to a Sharia ridden Sheikdom and call it "Arab style".
Even a comedian couldn't write a funnier script like what you have written.If you want to compare a regime which worships all things "Arab style" then compare the Islamic regime in Iran.It's a regime that apes to Arabian sensibilities and worships the sand they walk on.The aping Arabian regime in occupied Iran is the most savage and backward in Iran's history.They lie,steal,imprison,rape,torture and kill in the name of Allah. The only thing that can improve the festering camel turd regime in Iran is to flush it down the toilet where it belongs.And after that a Melli government suitable to Iranian sensibilities should be established.
It wont make a damn difference if you agree or likely disagree because that will happen.Never the less,I can't stop you from your self inflicted illusions in thinking you can "reform" or "improve" the barbarous theocracy.It's like trying to rewrite or "improve" the Koran and that as we know is not possible.

Anonymous said...

It seems all you can do is call people nasty names,you have not presented one argued rebuttal to any of the points I`ve raised you just spout a visceral stream of hatred,so I ask you again What would you replace the current government of iran with?,it seems to me you do not have an answer,like many malcontents they know what they hate but they cannot seem to come up with something they like,I have no doubt that had you lived in the days of the shah you would have hated him as vehemently as you do the current islamic government

Anonymous said...

Are you illiterate or what? Read my last post again and see what I said as regards replacement of current "government".
Your "doubts" are doubtful.

Anonymous said...

And what exactly is a melli government suitable to "iranian sensibilities",just what are these sensibilities,who decides what is sensible or not,it seems to me that the current government encompasses iranian sensibilities pretty well,at least a majority of iranians seem to think so.I`m sorry my friend but you`re going to have to do better than some vague statement about a government with iranian sensibilities,would it be democratic?,would it have political parties if so how many? two like in the us or a multi-party system as in parts of europe or would you be happy with a secular dictatorship like the shas.It seems to me that you`d happily settle for anything so long as it wasn`t the current system