Sarzamine Man

The Fall of the Shah - Fereydoun Hoveyda

Hoveyda Fereydoun, 1979. The Fall of The Shah, Wyndham Books, NY

Amazon Reviewer:

"The author of this angry little book worked as a diplomat for the Shah of Iran for almost 30 years. His older brother served as the Shah's Prime Minister for 13 years. And yet the book is a vitriolic attack against the Shah. The reason? In the last months of his reign the Shah decided to imprison the author's brother, Amir-Abbas Hoveyda,in a forlorn bid to silence the regime's violent critics. Amir Abbas Hoveyda was made a scapegoat. When the Shah left Iran with his wife and family he abandoned Amir-Abbas to the bloodthirsty mullahs who soon seized power. That was a cowardly act on the part of the Shah. The mulahs murdered Amir-Abbas Hoveyda along with tens of thousands of other Iranians who fell into their hands. Fereydoun Hoveyda cannot forget, or forgive, the betrayal of his borther. And that is understandable.

The problem is that Fereydoun Hoveyda's emotions prevented him from writing a balanced book. His vilification of the Shah can only absolve, albeit only partly, the mullahs who actually murdered Amir-Abbas. Had the title of the book been " Settling Scores with the Shah", I would have had no obejction. The Shah was certainly no angel. But nor was he the demon that Fereydoun Hoveyda pretends.

For a more balanced biography of the Shah, and a less emotional account of Amir-Abbas Hoveyda's tragic fate, you could read William Shawcross's " The Shah's Last Ride" which remains a good example of the Western art of biography.

For a more initimate, and Iranian, view you could read Amir Taheri's " The Unknown Life of the Shah". Taheri knew the Shah well and was also regarded as a personal friend of Amir-Abbas Hoveyda.He has thus been able to remain fair to both men, although his bias, not to say hatred, of the Islamists colours his broader political judgment. A READER IN RICHMOND, SURREY, UK"

I've recently finished reading this book published by the brother of Iran's late Prime Minister Amir-Abbas Hoveyda - namely Fereydoun Hoveyda. Fereydoun Hoveyda was an Iranian diplomat who served as Ambassador to the United Nations (1971-1979) and also served as Deputy Foreign Minister during the Pahlavi Era.

This book was written within months of the takeover of government institutions by anti-Iranian islamic militants, establishment of an Islamic state, and execution of his brother at the hands of the revolutionary islamist terrorists. Although he states in the prolouge of the book that he intends to stay objective in his analysis this is not always the case as any reader comes to realize - understandable to some extent.

Many accusations in the book are subjective in nature (and this is expected after the author clearly states he hates the late Shah and lays the blame for what happened to his brother on him) rather than facts that can be verifiably established - despite this going against his expressed intent of staying objective. Most reviews of this book seem to come to this same conclusion. This leads me to believe that many of the attacks are vindictive in nature rather than grounded in facts. Would it be right of us, the readers, to accept all these subjective assesments as truths? I definately do not think so, and believe that the closest we can come in establishing something in this regard is to take into consideration a multitude of different sources upon which we can draw a fairer conclusion upon.

Having said that though there certainly are valid criticisms in the book of the late Shah, dealing with neglecting political liberties, not being hard enough on corruption, and issues pertaining to economic mismangement (most of them attributed towards the end of the Shah's reign), which can definately be taken into account when trying to come to a fair assessment on the late Shah of Iran. On top of objective criticism there are also positive objective passages regarding the advances achieved under the Pahlavi Era. A bit of further examination should be sufficient in most cases to establish which statements would fall under which category (vindictive/subjective, or objective in nature).

Fereydoun Hoveyda argues that "by 1970-72 the improvement in material conditions was requiring a parallel move toward democratization. Here the sovereign committed a serious error of judgement and let slip a number of opportunities. Yet as early as 1971 the apperance of guerilla activity, even on a small scale, ought to have alerted him."

But then he seems to contradict his first statement (society being ready for democratization) when he states later on (highlighted part being directly relevant with the rest of the passage included as a matter of interest):

"From what source did the inarticulate and often illiterate masses derive their inexorable strength? Was it simply from the fervor inspired by their deep faith? But Shi'ism had been their driving force ever since the sixteenth century. Was it from the fiery speeches of Khomeini? But the Ayatollah had been calling on them to rise up in rebellion long years since?

Who helped them to rebel? Mossadeq's National Front? The intellectuals of the right and the left? But these represented only a very small minority. Or was it the oil companies, unhappy with the Shah's policies? But their powers were limited, and after all they were still getting their oil.

There has been some talk of foreign influences. The Shah held all-day consultations with the Americans and British ambassadors. The Palestinians trained guerilla groups. Radio Peyke Iran had been criticizing the Shah from an East European country. Nixon and Kissinger had encouraged the Shah to squander the country's wealth on sophisticated armaments.

Other observers go further still. Thus, Robert Dreyfuss and his colleagues on the Executive Intelligence Review see the Iranian revolution as stage one in a grand "conspiracy" engineered in certain British and Western intelligence circles and designed to destabilize the region and dismember its component countries, so as to reconstitute them inside new frontiers. According to them, the Iranian executants of this secret plan were [Ebrahim] Yazdi, Ghotzadeh, Bani-Sadr, and Amir-Entezam. Again according to them, Yazdi, an American citizen, was recruited by Richard Cottam, professor of political science at Pittsburgh University, with reputed CIA connections. So it is not Western governments who are behind the alleged consipiracy, but a secret "brotherhood" whose purpose is to prevent the industrialization of the Third World and to keep it in a permanent state of underdevelopment. Islamic fundamentalism is supposed to have provided the plotters with a powerful weapon for inducing such a backward step. Iran was chosen first because conditions were favorable there...These views have found a certain amount of confirmation inside Iran itself. For instance, when the Ayatollah Taleghani, the religious leader of Tehran, disappeared on May 17, 1979, after the arrest of his children by the Komiteh, some fantastic rumors broke out in the capital. When the Palestinians occupied the offices of the Israeli representatives in Iran, according to rumor they found documents which established the existence of contacts between Yazdi, Ghotzadeh, and other associates of Khomeini and foreign intelligence services. They at once called Taleghani's son and handed the papers over to him. The Komiteh, which was tapping the line, picked up Taleghani Junior as he left the building and took away the compromising documents.

These are just rumors, of course, but certain world happenings do give grounds for reflection. For example there is the sudden switch by Western economists, who are now talking about the bankruptcy of their previously held theories of development. All at once they are urging the Third World to confine itself to a predominantly agricultural economy, in order to increase food production and use more of the work force. And this comes at the very moment when the experts are maintaining that at the present rate of population growth the poor countries will never be able to supply their own needs. The famous "green revolution", launched amid such a fanfare of publicity, has been unable to solve the problems of the developing regions. As for Iran, with its lack of arable land and water it cannot hope to become agriculturally self-sufficient. Although the Shah may have made a lot of mistakes. the fact remains that his broad idea of industrialization was essentially correct. For how are sixty million Iranians to be fed and clothed as they enter the third millenium, once the oil deposits are used up, except by means of an export-oriented industrial sector?"

So based on these two statements - how can an "inarticulate and often illiterate mass" be ready for democratization? Should this mass or society not be given enough time to reach a fair level of being literate/informed/educated mass before they are given FULL rights to determine the future direction of the country? If an inarticulate, superstitious and illiterate mass are given FULL rights to determine their future, is not anarchy the only realistic result of such a ludicrous move? Iranian society had come a long way at the turn of the previous century however there was still some way to go before such noble aspirations could materialize - there is nothing wrong about Fereydoun Hoveyda's aspirations as I believe any patriotic Iranian would share them, however his timing in demanding them in this regard was not correct. Also on the issue of misappropriating funds into the country's defense capabilities I have to disagree with Fereydoun Hoveyda as where would our country be today if it wasn't thanks to what remained of our military and defense capabilities at the time of the Iraqi invasion!? Although the command structure was in tatters thanks to purges by the Islamists we were still able to keep the Arab invaders at bay. Given that this book was written before the Iraqi invasion I don't believe the late Ambassador was aware of how crucial those defense capabilities would mean for our country to maintain its territorial integrity in the volatile region it finds herself in.

Some of the positive aspects that are attributed to the Pahlavi Era in the book are described in the following passage:

"[In 1977] more than 65% of the population owned the houses they lived in (and the percentage was even higher in the capital). Per-capita income stood at $2,200 ($300 in 1965). Primary school attendance was over 10 million (270,000 in 1960). Illiteracy had fallen from 85% to 55%. Whereas oil revenues had accounted for 90% of the gross national product in the 1950's, in 1977 they came to no more than 35% (for a total of $70 billion). The present critics of the regime claim that industry was confined to assembly. They forget that in the car industry, for example, in 1977 more than 65% of components were manufactured in Iran. Agriculture, although it left a lot to be desired, was showing real and appreciable progress, as the events of 1978-79 have proved. (In fact, although almost all Iran's foodstuff imports were paralyzed, there was never any shortage of food supplies either in Tehran or in any of the other towns. And it is worth mentioning that from 1972 to 1977 domestic consumption had quadrupled.) In the fields of communications, social welfare, health, education, etc., the picture was equally impressive. If inflation, which had remained reasonable until 1975, began galloping in 1977, it is generally agreed that this was the outcome of the sudden injection of Iran's increased revenues from oil."

Fereydoun Hoveyda passed away in Virginia (USA) in 2006.

Patriotic Poem- Vatan (Mihan)

A patriotic poem, dedicated to the motherland, sung by an Iranian lady (video is embedded in the following page):

http://www.farhangsara.com/

31 March 2010...

Potkin has a powerful clip showing the strengthening societal consciousness within islamist-occupied Iran (two girls are attacked by one of the regime's islamist guards and tens of bystanders intervene and chase the regime thug away). The regime's stronghold on society through fear and repression is slowly crumbling through the show of force and courage of ordinary people.

Also a "pic of the day" (NYPD officers holds the Iranian flag during the annual New York Persian Parade):

Na mollah! Na allah! Marg bar Hezbollah!

I just came across this new protest chant against the anti-Iranian Islamic Republic:

Na mollah! Na allah! Marg bar Hezbollah!
(no mullah's, no allah, death to hezbollah)

A few nice clips I wanted to share with my blog readers:

In defence of Caspian Makan

by Observing_Iran
24-Mar-2010


The Jerusalem Post has reported that Caspian Makan, the fiance of Neda Agha Soltan has been to Israel and has spoken with the Israeli President, Shimon Peres. Since then there's been a lot of complaints, anger and outright disgust at Mr Makan's actions, sadly most of it from the so-called "reformist" Green Movement.

Mr Makan, having been tortured in Iran after the murder of his fiance, fled and went to Canada. Since then he has done a lot of good work in trying to keep the focus on the situation in Iran and the what's been going on since June 2009. He arrived in Israel last week and was quoted as saying "I come to Israel as an ambassador of the Iranian people, a messenger from the camp of peace" and "I have no doubt that Neda's spirit and soul feels the sensitivity and warmth I received in this meeting". President Peres in turn replied by saying “you can murder a person, but not a spirit. One candle can scatter a lot of darkness. And this candle will not be extinguished. In this struggle, I am sure that the progressive and moral Iran will emerge victorious.”

Every Islamic Republic passport bears the statement, "the bearer of this passport is forbidden from traveling to occupied Palestine" i.e. Israel. By visiting Israel Makan has essentially given two fingers to the regime. But what's happened since the meeting has been very telling and of great interest to me:

• One "reformist" website has declared that Makan was never even Neda's fiance
• A group of "Greens" have set up a Facebook group declaring that Makan is not aligned to them
• Neda's mother has declared that Makan does not represent them
• Makan has been accused of hurting the opposition movement, as visiting Israel could be construed as seeking support from foreign powers for regime change and unrest.
• By far and away however, the award for best toeing the Islamic Republic line comes from the Mullah's mouthpiece, PressTV, which has reiterated its firm belief that Makan is none other than a suspect in Neda's murder, visiting his Israeli accomplices.

Now, here's what I think:

The charge that Makan was not Neda's fiance is patent nonsense, and Neda's mother herself has confirmed that they were in a relationship and planning to get married. Then again, it doesn't surprise me that a website aligned to Mir Hossein Mousavi and his "Green Movement" would be hostile to anyone who has the temerity to visit the Israel, let us not forget that Mousavi himself was Prime Minister of Iran whilst the IRGC was actively helping the Hezbollah Islamic Fundamentalists in their war against Israel and was involved in the bombing of the US Embassy in Lebanon. If that isn't enough proof for you, there's also the fact that he called Israel a cancerous tumour, whilst in office. It therefore doesn't come as much of a surprise that Islamic Republic "reformists", still loyal to the theocratic system, would attack Makan.

The other charge is that by visiting Israel, Makan is harming the "opposition" movement, and giving ammunition to those that claim that Iran's protesters are all Americanised lackeys. Given that for quite some time Iranians have been shouting, "Not for Palestine, not for Lebanon, only for Iran do I give my life", we can see that a lot of Iranians are not the raving anti-Zionists that Ahmadinejad would have you believe. Iranians have a lot of problems to deal with in Iran, hating on Israel is really quite low down on the list of priorities at the moment. In addition, the Islamic Republic already blames the current unrest on foreign powers, so whether or not Makan makes a visit to Israel, the Iranian opposition will still be accused of being foreign stooges. It's an entirely illogical point for the Green movement's media to make.

Anyway, if the Iranian opposition movement is so weak and Ahmadinejad-esque that it feels "harmed" by someone going on a goodwill visit to the Middle East's only democracy, then it's a rotten, bigoted opposition movement anyway and not one I have any interest in supporting as it's on the same level as Ahmadinejad and his vile rhetoric. Where is Rahe Sabz's outrage at the Turkish Prime Minister's recent visit to Iran, after he denied the Armenian genocide? Rahe Sabz don't give a fig about the Palestinian people's rights, they're just toeing the Islamic Republic's anti-Semitic line.

At least PressTV maintain a consistent line, they've always been thuggish anti-Semites, however when the self proclaimed free thinkers of the Green movement round on a man and assasinate his character simply for going against what the Islamic Republic's fanatical supporters believe in, I believe that is wrong and just the sort of hypocrisy which makes me view the Green Movement's leaders and media with distaste.

I myself have no problem with Makan visiting Israel, any message of peace and goodwill is long overdue in my opinion. The Islamic Republic for thirty years has engaged in terrorism and hatred, and much worse has declared that it has done so in the name of Iran's people, who by and large are not the intolerant fanatics that the regime paints them out to be. Caspian Makan is simply shouting "this is not in my name". I for one support him.

1389 - Taazi Year - Norooz

What do those Iranians who use the Taazi (Arabo-Muslim) year of 1389 indirectly promote? That they are proud of:

1389 years of being slaves to a backward, savage, anti-Iranian ideology imposed by the swords of savage Arab invaders

1389 years of being raped by Arabo-Muslims

1389 years in which our children have been sold as sex-slaves to Arabo-Muslims

1389 years since our freedom fighting national heroes, in their last defence for their motherland, where slain and beheaded by the savage Arabo-Muslim hordes

1389 years since the Arabo-Muslim hordes burned, pillaged, and raped our nation

1389 years of a pedophile, thief, rapist, murderer being idolized as a prophet sent by God!

Shame on those who regurgitate this shameful Islamic year instead of using proper Iranian reference points for their cultural new year! Iranian history goes back thousands of years, yet some Iranians shamelessly adopt this shameful Islamic year as their "new year" reference! It cannot get more illogical, sick and twisted than this - it's as if on the same day your father is murdered, mother is raped, siblings sold as sex-slaves, and your house pillaged and burned to the ground by savages and you decide to commemorate and celebrate that date as the reference point for your cultural new year!!! This is how deep Islamic brainwashing is ingrained in the psyche of some Iranians - even the "secular/modern/westernized" ones living in progressive western countries who can freely educate themselves regarding these issues!

Three suggested Iranian years that should be promoted and used are: 7032 (Mitrai Aryan year); 3748 (Zoroastrian year); 2569 (Shahanshahi year). Personally I prefer to use the Shahanshahi year - 2569 - as this the reference point for the formation of the Persian Empire (Iran) as a unified state with defined borders by Cyrus the Great.

Chaharshanbe-soori - London - 2010/2569

Chaharshanbe-soori celebration in London:

Reza Shah II - Shahbanou - Norooz 2569

Faraa'residane khojasteh norooz'e jamshidi'ra beh hameh mihanparastane Irani shaad'bash migooyam.

Norooz 2569 Khojasteh va Pirooz Baad!

Happy Iranian New Year 2569


HIM Reza Shah II celebrating ancient Iranian fire festival ("chaharshanbe soori") with His family:



HIM Reza Shah II Norooz address (2569/2010):



HIM Empress Farah Pahlavi Norooz address (2569/2010):

AUDIO - CLICK HERE

Arash @ DeviantArt

Separate Religion and Politics by ~arasch on deviantART (picture depicts a person disposing of the Islamic Republic's emblem in a trash can)

A compatriot called Arash sent me an email asking to publish his works on the blog, please pay a visit and review his political artwork:

http://arasch.deviantart.com/gallery/