Tragic End

Alireza Pahlavi's suicide


Tragic End
by Stephen Kinzer

The suicide of the shah’s son is the latest tragedy for a dynasty drenched in blood. Stephen Kinzer on the death of a prince. Plus, more on Prince Alireza Pahlavi's life.

Down the street from my apartment in Boston's South End, a single gunshot shattered the pre-dawn darkness Tuesday. Police arrived to find a suicide. This doesn't happen any more often in the South End than anywhere else, and passers-by like me were left to imagine what tragedy lay behind it. Then came news of the man's identity. He was Prince Alireza Pahlavi, son of the late shah of Iran.

This shocking act of self-slaughter was the latest violent tragedy in the long history of a family drenched in blood—first that of the Iranians it tortured and killed, then its own. It is a drama of Shakespearean dimensions. The shah once ruled Iran with an iron fist, but his family later paid dearly for his sins, echoing Hamlet's judgment that royal crime “cannot come to good.”

Prince Alireza's father died in humiliating exile barely a year after being chased from his homeland in one of the 20th century's most spectacular revolutions. His aunt, Princess Ashraf, the shah's twin sister, a once-sinister figure known as Iran's “black panther,” has suffered through depressions and addictions, three failed marriages, and the assassination of one of her sons. His sister, Leila, was found dead in a London hotel room in 2001 after taking an overdose of barbiturates.

“Like millions of young Iranians, he too was deeply disturbed by all the ills fallen upon his beloved homeland, as well as carrying the burden of losing a father and a sister in his young life,” the Pahlavi family said in a brief statement on Tuesday. “Although he struggled for years to overcome his sorrow, he finally succumbed.”

Iran has also succumbed over the course of a cruel century, in large part because of the depredations of the Pahlavi dynasty. Yet this was a dynasty that set out to modernize and strengthen a nation that was prostrate and on the brink of extinction when it seized power. Prince Alireza's tragedy mirrored that of his long-suffering land.

The founder of the dynasty, Reza Shah, Prince Alireza's grandfather, was a titanic figure, a brutal tyrant but also a visionary reformer. He was an illiterate soldier who came to power in a coup and made himself shah in 1926. The main reason he refused to lead his country toward democracy was that he wished his son to be shah after he was gone.

That came to pass with Mohammad Reza Shah's ascension in 1941, but the son turned out to be a cowardly wimp, completely unlike his commanding father. He hated the democracy that emerged in Iran after World War II—personified by its most formidable leader, Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh—but could do nothing to crush it. Then, like a gift from God, the CIA and British MI-6 arrived to overthrow Mossadegh in 1953, angered by his attempt to nationalize Iran's oil industry. That allowed Mohammad Reza Shah to take absolute power.

The Pahlavi dynasty was one of the few facts of 20th-century geopolitical life that nearly everyone considered permanent and unalterable. Its collapse in 1979 stunned the world no less than the collapse of the Soviet Union a decade later.

Prince Alireza spent his childhood in royal luxury. He was the second son of an absolute monarch who held the fate of 30 million people in his hands, became America's chief ally in the Middle East, and lost himself in such deep megalomania that he came to consider himself one of the greatest kings of all time, rightful successor to Persian titans like Cyrus, Darius and Xerxes.

First published in


Recently by Stephen KinzerCommentsDate
Reply to Kambiz Atabai
Feb 09, 2011
more from Stephen Kinzer

Mossadegh a PSEUDO-HERO, a true traitor/mercenery


Mossadegh has been proven to be a traitor and British mercenery for Iran.
Mossadeg was a Khajar Prince who routinely sent post through his Indian driver to the British embassy. Mr. Mossadegh was the product of a syphilitic father, which caused him to suffer from a nervous disorder. He did not write his own PhD dissertation, someone else wrote it for him. It was on Islamiic laws. Ayatollah Kashani's slogan at the time was: Whoever is the enemy of Mossadegh is the enemy of Islam. Reports from Mossadegh's inner group intercepted numerous telegraphs back and forth between Mossadegh and the British in which the British instructed Mossadegh to push/force nationalization of oil -- break the oil contract -because it was in the economic interests of Britain. This was Mossadeg's biggest treason to Iran. The previous two prime ministers, Mansour and Razmara were assassinated, Razmara while praying in the mosque by a radical muslim from lebanon -Navab Safavi...because Mansour and Razamara were in favor of allowing the oil contract to expire.

Before being appointed Prime Minister by our King, the late Shah, Mossadegh had been arrrested twice for treason by Reza Shah and each time, the elder Ayatollas intervened on his behalf. Mr. Mossadegh despised Iran and Iranians.
He was a British agent through and through and lived to be an old man. Whereas, our patriotic prime ministers and ministers were being assassinated by radical/communists. Finally, when Mr. Mossadegh was arrested for committing treason, our late King, intervened on his behalf to reduce his sentence to three years.   So, please refrain from mentioning this tainted figure as a great leader of Iran. Mossadegh is a pseudohero propped up for us by the British.

Mr. Mossadegh was and is a disgrace to Iranians and Iran.


Long Live Pahlavi Kings - TRUE PATRIOTS.


No Fear

by norooz on

Funny that you say, we should not accept a politician blindly.  Not even one time you disagree with what Ahmadinejad did or said.  How could that be?  I gave you plenty of reasons that are in our flawed constitution and common sense. I am sensing you are related to Ahmadinejad. I am going to find out sooner or later, just as DK being gay and Farah Rousta being Farah Pahlavi.

Sincerely, Dariush

No Fear


by No Fear on

Just wanted to sum up a few things;

Firstly, Ahmadinejad as the president of Iran has absolutely NO right interfering with our country constitution. If he wants a new law , he must introduce it as a bill to the parliament , then the bill is at the mercy of the MPs to pass as a law or not. A president must not interfere with the functions of our parliament.

Mossadeq changed laws to give him power over parliament and Judiciary. Which he eventually succeeded in gaining those powers. It is more suitable to ask Mossadeq ( who had so much power ) if he did change the constitution with its flaws as you suggested. Ahmadinejad in comparison, does not have a fraction of the powers that Mossadeq enjoyed before, as prime minister.

I am going to leave this debate and hope we refuse to become blind devotees of any politician in our history.

Mossadeq did one great thing for Iran ,but he was not a democrate as many wishful thinkers would like to believe. Lets not elevate him to the level of a saint. He was a non compromised politician who used everything in his power ( including breaking the law ) to push his agendas forwards. The nationalization of our oil industry was his biggest accomplishment , but he made many mistakes that many of us tend to ignore or try to sugar coat it because as Iranians, we fall in love with " personalities" and to us Mossadeq is a saint who should not be questioned.

I trust your better judgement to prevail. sincerely.



No Fear

by norooz on

If you read all of the constitution, you will see more proofs supporting Mosaddegh. 

As MP he didn't have the right to select members, but apparently according to constitution as replacement for Shah he could appoint or dismiss officials.  In a normal situation, you might be right, but the timing was critical. In fact, it was too late. Had he known there were so many traitors, he probably would have hold referendum when he took office and it wouldn't come to that or as some say, if he had arrested and imprisoned his oppositions, the coup would have failed, But to know exactly why he did what he did, one must have been involved with his government.  

The 1906 constitution had some flaws. One was that women weren't allowed to vote. Just like IRI constitution that has some flaws and the good in the constitution hasn't been practiced/enforced.  so saying Ahmadinejad hasn't violated flawed constitution is not a credit to him.  People would rather see him correct it and if he cannot, at least enforce the good parts that protect and benefit people.  Has he done that as a president?  That is violating the constitution law.


The rights of the people:  //

ART.19   ART.20   ART. 23   ART. 24   ART. 27

ART. 38 and 39  are very interesting

Even though this constitution has also some flaws like the Monarchy constitution, the question is, is this constitution being practiced and what is president's responsibilities with respect to constitution and people, country and etc?

The presidency: 

Here are some of Ahmadinejad's responsibilities with respect to people's rights :  //

ART. 113

ART. 121  Support of truth and justice is one of his duties and he says, he has nothing to do with justice system.

ART.122    President is responsible to the people.





by statira on

No one can deny he was behind the nationlizing of oil, but that  just doesnt make him perfect as a great leader. Abdolkarim Qasem, a brutal military dictator in Iraq, at the same time nationalized Iraq oil. Did that make him a good leader? No,he overtrown the king,showed his dead body all over the capital. later him and other military leaders were fighting over power and Iraqis witnessed some of the bloodiest days of their history. Who knows, it was very likely that Mosadegh's victory would bring one of the most bloody days of our history.He was a Qajari prince and not very fond of Pahlavi, he befriended the two most dangerous groups, Islamic fundamentalists and the Tudeh Party. It was very likely that the power struggle would have begun right after deposing the shah.




Qajar condemnation and Mosaddeq

by siavash1000 on

"You cannot blame every family member for mistakes of the past, it's like blaming Reza Pahlavi II for the mistakes of his father and so on.."  hirre

There is NO single trace of document in our modern history to show that Mosaddeq even for once did condemmed his Mongolian daynasty. Mosaddeq was 19 when his opium addict uncle known as Mosafaredin shah signed the oil concession with Brits. Mosaddeq  chosed to be silent for 50 years.



by Simorgh5555 on

Talking crap as usual. A brutal propagandist with a Left wing agenda. On the one hand, the Shah is a brutal dictator and on the other hand he is a 'cowardly wimp'. You can't have it both ways. If he tried to crush sedition and rebellion he was a dictator. When he sent the stupid Tudeh and far Left into prison for short spell of time only to come out more Bolshy than they were before, he was called a 'wimp'. I swear, the Shah would have got more respect if he did what Khomeini did and systematically purge all the prisons of socialists and communists and thrown their corpses into a mass grave. Kinzer's skewed historical analysis is demonstrated by the fact that he does not see the excesses of the mullah in order to rationalise the policies of the Shah's government. 

No Fear


by No Fear on

This article of the constitution makes a strong case against Mossadeq. ( From the link provided by you ).

ART. 10. Complaints in connection with the elections shall not interfere with the carrying out of the elections; that is to say, the Councils mentioned above in Art. 9 shall investigate such complaints without suspending the elections.

Below is a part of the oath members ( including Mossadeq took as a member of the Parliament );

ART. 12. No one, on any pretext or excuse, shall have any right, without the knowledge and approval of the National Consultative Assembly, to molest its Members. Even in case of the Members committing some crime or misdemeanor, and being arrested flagrante delicto, any punishment inflicted upon him must be with the cognizance of the Assembly.

The above two articles makes a strong case against mossadeq illegal actions against the assembly ( parliament ). I can not approve any method ( even if it was well intented ) if it goes against the constitution.

Article 25 which you posted is in regards to ministers of the government and not members of the parliament who enjoyed partial political immunity as long as they were a member. Below is the entire article for you to read carefully.

ART. 25. No special authorization is required to proceed against government officials in respect of shortcomings connected with the discharge of their public functions, save in the case of Ministers, in whose case the special laws on this subject must be observed.


I did not read the entire constitution, but i have spoke with few lawyers and they argued Mossadeq had to break some laws in order to nationalize our oil industry.

Keep in mind , after Mossadeq had installed his MPs ( 30 were from the national front ) in to the paliament and made Kashani the speaker, he asked them to give him additional power in the Judiciary and the ministry of war. This is exactly the kind of power that Khamenie enjoys today, if not more. Mossadeq chose the parliament speaker, prevented an election and  by using  a makeshift parliament, gave himself control over the Judiciary on top of the administrative power of running the government. You can't sugar coat this.... this has all the signs of a dictatorial personality.

This is what i am having huge problem with. We can't say if Mossadeq is doing it, its good but if Khamenie does it, its bad.

I hope you understand that i am against Mossadeq's methods and not against his accomplishment.

In comparison, Ahmadinejad has not been found violating any constitutional laws.


No Fear

by norooz on

I am sure Dr. Mosaddegh with a PHD in international law in those days with an impeccable public service record and fight against foreign hegemony of our resources knew what he was doing.  

As we can read in the link below, constitutional Monarchy and parliament in Iran was created during Mozaffareddin Shah and in 1925 Reza Shah changed that again to a Monarchy.  I read the original constitutional Monarchy and these are what I found and could possibly answer some of your questions.       


Go to the bottom of the page and click on A version to 1906-1955 without later revisions.

Then Go to: 4. The Supplementary Fundamental Laws of Oct 7, 1907

Then to:     Rights of Persian Nation. ART. 25

This article states:  No special authorization is required to proceed against government officials in respect of shortcomings connected with the discharge of their public functions.

Now, you add bribery, plotting and coup to those officials records. Then you get dissolve for reelection at a minimum or imprisonment and execution at maximum.  They were lucky Dr, Mosadegh was ruling the government. Otherwise , they wouldn't have lived to tell their stories.

Also:     Rights of The  Persian Throne

ART.35    The power has been trusted by people to the king.

ART.38    In case of decease of the king, he will be replaced by his son or heirs.

when Shah ran from the country, his absence must have constituted decease and the parliament should have elected a replacement for the Shah and they did, Dr. Mossadegh..  ART. 41

So now Mosadegh was not the king, but he had to carry the king's responsibilities, if any, In addition to his own as prime minister.

ART. 45  The affairs of the state should be carried out by ministers.  So Dr. Mosaddegh had to carry out his duties as prime minister and king's as the result of king's absence.

ART. 46-50 has given the rights to king (his successor) to appoint and dismiss government ministers, grant military ranks, the supreme command of all forces, declaration of war and conclusion of peace. 

So these gave him the legal rights to appoint and dismiss officials until a  new king was elected.

You asked, why he postpone the referendum? 

Due to unrest and chaos and then came the coup and he was arrested and imprisoned.

You asked, Did he have any proof who was pro Shah or British?  He was a man of law , got  99.9%  of the votes, many in his government were offered bribes, he was well informed about what was going on.

You wrote, Ahmadinejad hasn't dissolve the parliament. 

I think that would be a good thing and he should. A parliament that doesn't uphold the constitution is best to be dissolved and be put to re-election and be replaced with one that does and a constitution that doesn't protect commonwealth should be reformed.

You want to separate Ahmadinejad from IRI, but he is second in command and this is his government.  

You want to compare Ahmadinejad to Dr. Mosaddegh? You must be kidding. 










No Fear


by No Fear on

Can you provide me with the constitutional law which Mossadeq dissolved the parliament? Was it legal? ( I do not know the answer ). Was it also legal to hand pick members of the parliament by stopping the election after his National front members were elected?

How was it possible for Mossadeq to appoint the parliament speaker? Was that allowed by our constitution?

Did he facilitate a referendum after dissolving the parliament? Didn't he postpone re election indefinitely?

Did he have proof of who was pro shah or british? Was there an investigation or was it just his words?  Even if he had proof, does that give him a legal reason to shut down the entire parliamentary elections instead of going after the corrupt MPs?

The way Mossadeq conducted himself in regards to the internal rivals, is very revealing about his political personality.

Look ... All i'm trying to say is to criticise Mossadeq methods. And i understand that you are justifying it based on the circumstances. But if we are going to idolize Mossadeq, we have to find legal justifications for his actions. The end does not justifies the means when you are defending an idol.

Please refrain from using the general term of IR ( as of the regime ) to paint a black and white picture of what is right or wrong. You compared what Mossadeq did with IR. We are discussing personalities of different leaders here. We are not comparing systems. You have to compare Mossadeq with other leaders such as Ahmadinejad ( which i support ).

When Ahmadinejad complains about the insults which he is receiving, it is not a personal matter. It is in our constitution that insults or unfounded acusations against our president is illegal. Ahmadinejad must uphold the law which he swore to protect.

If you want to see examples of Ahmadinejad's tolerance against opposing views, please refer to the 400+ press publications inside Iran who are relentlessly criticising his policies. Everyone should work within the frame of our constitutional law. Whether its the press or the president.

Mossadeq later asked his handpicked MPs , and Ayat. Kashani which he appointed as the speaker, to grant him special administrative powers to run the ministry of war and other organs. And he got those additional powers too! This was a political coup. There are no ifs or buts about it.



Let this "tragic End" for Pahlavis be a lesson.....

by Roozbeh_Gilani on

To Khamenei, Ahmadinezhad and the entire leadership of the Islamist regime. Let these islamist criminals see what the certain fate of torterures and murderures of the Iranian people will be.

Long Live Iran. Long live Democracy and Secularism

Down with the Islamist regime. 

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."


No Fear

by norooz on

You keep referring to Dr. Mosaddegh dissolving the parliament. 

First of all, the parliament was the same parliament that was under Shah and many of the deputies were pro Shah and British.

Secondly, Dr Mosadddegh dissolved the parliament by putting it for referendum, so that the deputies can be elected by people. 

Thirdly, He did that after he learned about the plots by some members of the parliament and west against him and he was right. As it came out later, members of the government were being bribed and recruited by US and British through Rashidian brothers and Zahedi.  

You wrote, Ahmadinejad hasn't done that.  

He has no reason to do that.  Domestically, he doesn't have the powerballs and popularity as Mosadegh to do it. 

When Shah left Iran and Mosadegh took power. He didn't dissolve the parliament, but when Shah left and IRI took power, they not only dissolved the parliament, they executed and imprisoned some of the members.  Mosaddegh didn't even imprisoned those suspected of plotting to coup against him.  When Mosaddegh was advised to order to shutdown a newspaper publishing company because they were propagating against him and drawing his cartoons, he refused. as i recall just a few weeks ago Ahmadinejad was complaining that those who disrespect the officials should be punished.  Of course, legally no one should be immune from criticism, that is the legal part, but morally there should be some truth and justice backing the criticism.  Statira made a few remarks and gave her opinion, i disagreed and gave mine. I never said she shouldn't criticise Mosaddegh as you implying.

Just as now Iran has been negotiating over the nuclear energy for years, back then Mosadegh tried to negotiate with British. Iran was willing to go 50/50 , with AIOC,  just as ARMCO was paying Saudi Arabia, but AICO refused.  So saying that Mosaddegh didn't want to negotiate is not true.  He wanted a reasonable deal so that Iranians too can benefit and improve their lives.

If i support Ahmadinejad over Israel and west, is not just because he is pretty, it is because he is defending Iran's rights and what he says about them is true.


Don't judge so quickly

by hirre on

You can not blame the Tudeh for everything. People were not satisfied with the situation... Since there were no democratic alternatives, you basically had 3 political choices: supporter for the current regime, communist or fundamentalist...  There were no "Democratic Party of Iran" or similar parties... After the revolution everything changed, almost all who were leftists activists dropped and became secular democrats...

As far as Mossadeq, it sounds very conspiracy-thinking that he wanted some kind of revenge because he was Qajar and the Pahlavis brought their dynasty down (maybe this was the case)... The Qajar rulers collaborated with England and Russia and didn't nationalize anything, this is a contradiction to Mossadeqs policy (which the shah later adapted)!

You cannot blame every family member for mistakes of the past, it's like blaming Reza Pahlavi II for the mistakes of his father and so on... The Qajar familiy is a really old well established family with many many children and grandchildren and so on (//, I myself have roots going back to being Khan and related to Qajar decendents, so are thousands of other Iranians, that doesn't make us responsible of mistakes from the past... Each person have different agendas...

Look at "Notable Members of Qajar Family":


Interesting is that Prince Soleyman Mirza Eskandari, founder of the Socialist Party of Persia is also one of the founding members of the Tudeh Party together with Prince Iradj Eskandari...Also interesting that Soleyman indrectly supported Reza Khan during the revolt! Soleyman ultimately wanted a republic after seing how badly the country was runned by the previous kings...

At the same time we have Gholam-Hossein Banan, famous Iranian musician and singer, great grandchild of Mohammad Shah Qajar, first performer of the song "Ey Iran"... 

So basically there are a lot of people with different agendas...The Qajar history goes back a lot in time, it tells how Iran was ruled during the latest centuries, even Ali Khamenie spends time reading about Qajar kings, knowing that they had a lot to say about Iran during these periods...

G. Rahmanian

Ms. Hojjati:

by G. Rahmanian on

This was in response to a very insulting poem which I saw at two different threads by a Tudeh activist. One of them has already been removed. Another one is still available in the news section. Please go and check for yourself!

Anahid Hojjati

Yarab, what the hell you mean Mr. Ramanian?

by Anahid Hojjati on

To G. Rahmanian, this comment of yours, what does it mean? Apparently
you felt so strong about your comment that you spammed it into several
blogs just like those guys who spam their ads about boot and whatever. I
see that you spammed your comment into some blogs related to Alireza' s
suicide so what do you mean or you are just trying to provoke?

G. Rahmanian

Tudeh Traitors!

by G. Rahmanian on

یا رب سبب خیانت توده زچیست؟•این خا‌ئن بی وطن چرا، بهر چه زیست؟•چون می شود او از این غم ما خوشحال،•در شادیمان برای او جایی نیست!•


Distortion of Iran history

by siavash1000 on

Steven Kinzer made his million on misery of Iranian people. He was warmly welcomed by stinky mullahs in Tehran and stayed in Hotel Laleh where he developed his 9/11 theory. In that, he distorted Iran history by saying 9/11 wouldn't take place if U.S wouldn't financed operaion Ajax, The idea had been reinfornced by left wing media such as N.P.R. He denied  the will of our great nation in wanting shah back on crown in 1953 Instead, he gave all credit to a bunch of lampoons who were paid to chant in favor of shah. His book "All shah's men"  was quickly translated into Farsi. The only part was censored related to Ayatollah Kashani role in returning shah back to power in 1953 because Ayatollah Kashani's  grand son is working with Ahmadinegad these days. In his 256 pages book nothing had been said about  the rapid influence of Soviet Union in Iran through Tudeh party in those days. He describes the trees on Dr. Fatimi Blvd in Tehran but he forgot to say anything about Soviet threat and the most stongest communist party in middle east meansTudeh with 20000 members. Nothing had been said that all tudeh members who were either executed or ran to communists countries. Nothing had been said about life sentnce prison or execution of those military branch officers of  Tudeh party. He also gave wrong information about Dr. Mosaddeq character in his book. He introduced Dr. Mosaddeq as a Ghandi of Iran.

Unlike what we read mainly in western media and also from traitors and decadent communists Tudeh, Rajavi's thugs, Yazdi's murderers, Islamists and....Dr. Mosaddeq or rahter Dr. Epileptic was not elected by popular vote of people of Iran. He is from Qajar dynasty which treated Iran as a country of enemy for almost 140 years was chosen as a deal among factions of member of Iranian parliament that include Tudeh communists, Islamist, traditionalists and.... to nationalise Iranian oil from BP. Dr. Mossadeq prefered to drop his family name of Ashtiani but instead he chosen the title of Mosaddeq al saltaneh which was given to him by his paedophile king of Qajari known as Nasar al-din Shah for his surname. Today the most dreadful people in our modern history such as Yazdi, Rajavi, Communists group Tudeh, fanatics Islamists which harmed Iran beyand believe are follower of this epilieptic Qajari. For their betrayal, destruction, humiliation and barbaric crime commited through out 140 years of their disgraceful rule in Iran.There is NO single trace of document in our modern history to show that this man even for once did condemmed his Mongolian daynasty. Mosadegh was born in 1882 in one of the Qajar palaces in Tehran as Mohammad Ashtiani. In 1927 Iranian were obliged to obtaine birth certificate for a fistr time in our history. Iran was constitutional monarchy and Dr. Mosaddeg was planning to oust the Shahanshah of Iran and to end Monarchy in Iran simply by settling his old scorn and took his revenge from Pahlavi dynasty. Mosadegh was deserved to be naminated for Nobel prize for his unshakable loyalty toward his Mongolian Qajari dynasty. As matter of fact the Iranian oil concession was signed with British in 1901 by his savage Mogolian Qajar dynasty in 1901. In fact the members of Iranian parliament proposed Mosaddeq to H I M court and subsequently was appointed later as a prime minister by H I M Shahanshah. In 1953 Mosaddeg disolved parliament uncostitutionally and undemocratically which in fact it was the same parliament elected him democratically two years earlier.


No Fear


by No Fear on

All i'm saying is to not follow any politician blindly. I initially said that no politician should be immune from criticism, even Mossadeq.

Ahmadinejad has never forced the closure of our parliament and has not taken a huge gamble in regards to our national integrity. Ahmadinejad has shown that he is open to criticism and he has shown a lot of flexibilities in regards to our parliament. Mossadeq did not do that. He acted like a complete dictator. Although he was democratically elected, he acted in a complete different manner.

Look ... there are different ways to be effective as a leader. Ghandi was non violent and non confrontational. He got rid of the british empire in his homeland in a different manner. Other leaders around the world choose different methods but mostly in line with the diplomatic norm around the world, but Mossadeq chose to be confrontational both with his internal rivals and his external foes (british ). Unfortunately, this has had a long lasting effect on our politicians since everyone thinks you have to use you teeth and claws to get what is yours. This is the lesson Mossadeq has taught us.

A political scientists can immediately point to Mossadeq flaws in diplomacy, but i guess it will fell on death ears of the nationalists.





by AryamehrNYC on

This pseudo-journalist NYT D-list reporter is symbolic of the types back in the 1970's who wrote steroid infused articles on the supposed and over exaggerated short comings of the Monarchy.  These types helped create and nurture a maniacal cleric named Ruhollah under the guise of James E. Carter, the poster boy for a jackass, in the hope of curtailing communism. Their Viagra-induced hard on for the House of Pahlavi prevents them from comprehending the mere fact that their actions created the Islamic Republic, and as a result the problems the US and the rest of the world is dealing with today: Islamic Fundamentalism. Now they have to deal with the monster they have created.

The world has not been the same since MRP went into exile.   


No Fear

by norooz on

So in your opinion, if British had attacked and divided Iran, Dr Mosaddegh would have been guilty, but since it didn't happen and he succeeded, now we should find him guilty based on our imagination?  How could have oil been nationalized without the risk of sanctions and war with England? 

We are in the same situation now if noy worse Then was British, now is US. Why this doesn't make your stomach uneasy and you support Ahmadijad?  I tell you why, Just because there is a risk of losing a fight we shouldn't  lay down and die.  This was true then and it is true now. 





Re AliReza pahlavi

by delavar on

Being a socialist/true Liberal/Leftist and despite my difference of opinion with Reza Pahlavi and despite not being a supprter of Monarchy in Iran, I still believe that Pahlavi Family both Reza Shah and Shah did their best for Iran considering the time and the date they ruled. Infact Iran was considered the only democracy in that region considering middle east standards for democracy. Reza Pahlavi is a fine man not after becoming a King and I do believe that he should have a place in a future democratic Iran such as becoming a senator or Member of parliament or what have you if people would vote for him or be allowed to live in his motherland freely as an Iranian citizen once Iran is liberated from  terrorist occupation of Iran by the Republic of Islam and Hezbollah

 My condolensces to the Pahlavi family for the passing away of AliReza Pahlavi. It is hard to imagine how much pain this family has to endure esp. Shahbanoo Farah pahlavi. I had tears in my eyes when I heard the bad news.

No Fear


by No Fear on

your arguements in favour of Mossadeq is circumstantial.

Mossadeq gambled many things and he won. If the outcome of his policies were an imposed war by the US and the british which was very likely and could have caused the breaking up of our country, then he would have been regarded as the biggest asshole in our history.

Imagine that.... a prime minister who ignored the parliament, his own advisors, the international community and led Iran to a war which eventually led to the break up of our country.

This scenario was very real at that time. The british military was all around us and the US military was looking for new bases in the region.

But since his gamble paid off, he is regarded a hero today and everyone who opposed him ( or his methods ) is branded a traitor.

I love what mossadeq accomplished for Iran. But i can not ignore the tremendous risk that was involved in his gamble. It makes my stomach uneasy to even think about what could have gone wrong.




On Kinzer and his article

by Feria on

 It is comments like the ones in this article (Tragic End, 06 Jan 2011) about the history of Iran that have caused added pain and depression to the young royals and millions of other Iranians who’ve been driven out of their beloved homeland.  Stephen Kinzer has clearly demonstrated partiality in this article as with some of his other articles.  His biased viewpoint about the history of Iran has affected his judgement and political analysis, disregarding the Cold War during Mohammad Mosaddegh’s premiership and its effect on the politics of Iran as one of the most important countries in the conflict between the West and the Soviet Union.     Mumbling about more than 80 yeas of the Iranian history in just a few lines and in scattered comments here and there does not do justice to Iran and its people. He seems to be somehow confused by his own analysis of Reza Shah and Mohammad Reza shah, while calling Reza Shah a very brutal ruler, he then criticises the young Mohammad Reza Shah for being cowardly wimp unlike his commanding father. This contradiction has also been demonstrated many times by those who branded Mohammad Reza brutal but after revolution called him a coward because he did not stand strongly against the demonstrators although it was suggested to him several times by his commanders. The obvious fact of the effect of the Cold War after the Second World War during Mosaddegh’s government and the extreme influence of the Tudeh Party, which its seeds were sewed by the Soviet Union, has also been ignored in this article. A one time that many Iranians did not mind the interference of the CIA in the affairs of their country was the 1953 coup for what it is widely believed to be saving Iran from falling into the hands of the Soviet Union. Mossadegh, however with good intensions, was too naive and ambitious in believing there was any chance of real democracy considering the strong influence of the Soviet Union through her Iranian agents who toyed with Mossadegh and used him to achieve their sinister aims.  Stephen kinzer also largely blames “the depredation of Pahlavi Dynasty” for the cruelty Iran has succumbed failing to recognise 31 years of political, economic, and social and every other adversity in any sense that a nation can experience.  He branded the Shah as a megalomaniac, a term that was first adopted by the West describing the Shah, I would say Mohammad Reza Shah was the symbol of stability and peace in the region for more than thirty years, something that none of the world’s superpowers have been able to manage ever since his departure 31 years ago. There are no perfect leaders and the judgement on them should be based on the geopolitics of their time and relative to their contemporaries.  The Writer is also blind and oblivious to the level of development and economic growth and brilliant global diplomacy during 37 years of Mohammad Reza Shah’s leadership compared to the level of political asphyxia and international isolation in the last 31 years of hell imposed on the Iranian nation. He states that young royals “are paying for the sins of their father”.  Of course mistakes were made but his sins were no greater than many other world leaders before and after him, especially in developing countries.  The “iron fist” ruler as described by the writer would not accept apology and forgive a man who plotted to kill him, a sin that would be severely punished in today’s Western and most civilised countries.  

Stephen kinzer’s comments just few days after the death of prince Alireza Pahlavi is adding insult to injury for many Iranians who consider his death very close to home and another reminder of their own sorrow.


No Fear

by norooz on

Mosaddegh dismissed the parliament? A parliament that wants to betray Iranians interest should have been dismissed.  That was his judgment call and based on his services, honest and non violent approach to his oppositions, i trust his judgment. Would you have preferred him not to dismiss the parliament and just execute the members and oppositions as shah and IRI have done?  

Anywhere else would have been a crime?  US shut down the government during Clinton administration. Hell, Shah and many others have been supported to coup, betrayed their country and serve foreign interests. Dismissing parliament loaded with traitors is nothing in comparison.  We saw what that parliament did after all. So he was right about that.  Yes, he didn't listen to some advices and did to some others.  He was advised to crackdown his oppositions and he didn't.  He was advised to make deals and give up his fight and accept British offers and he didn't.  You seem to take nationalizing the oil lightly. That was far more important than our nuclear issue today.  Both in terms of revenue and the difficulty to fight the British.  Nationalizing the oil was one of many of his positive aspects and services that I mentioned before.   

That is a shame. We cannot even tell the difference between good, bad and worse and we ask why?



Thank God...

by Parham on

... people like Dr. X and norooz still exist! One can lose hope in all Iranians reading the pages of



by fussygorilla on

Absolutely unbelieveable that there are people around who still think what you state about the deposed shah.  Shocking, schoking delusional.


Safa "dude"!

by fussygorilla on

Just read your own comment and see how an illiterate person writes. What happened to getting an education while in U.S.?



by fussygorilla on

Comment on and challenge the content of what kinzer wrote, if you can. Since you cannot, you make personal insult which is the sign of your inability to do so.  

No Fear

On Mossadeq,

by No Fear on

No one should be immune from criticism, even Mossadeq.

Today we view Mossadeq and judge him based on his accomplishment for nationalizing our oil industry.

But if you study the manner and methods of how he dealth with the internal political rivals, you be surprised to findout he was no saint. He made questionable alliances which he later back stabbed them, he refused to listen to his own peers and advisors from the Nationalist front group and he even forced the closure of the house of people , the parliament! If any politician in todays politic does such a thing, you people will be calling it bloody murder, but it seems Mossadeq gets a free pass on these issues.

As i said, we are happy since he was instrumental in nationalizing the oil industry. But he could not be a good role model for our future generations. 





by hirre on

Let us not forget that when the shah grew older and more wise, he started to think of Iran's oil in the same way Mossadeq did, namely, that it is an important resource for the iranian people and should not be sold cheap (70's oil crises)...