Yangi

AQSh va Buyuk Britaniyaning 1953 yildagi davlat to'ntarishida ishtiroki qanchalik sir edi?

AQSh va Buyuk Britaniyaning 1953 yildagi davlat to'ntarishida ishtiroki qanchalik sir edi?

Bir professor menga Eronda (va umuman Yaqin Sharqda) fitna nazariyalarining mashhur bo'lishining sabablaridan biri G'arb davlatlari musulmon mamlakatlariga qarshi haqiqiy fitnalar sodir bo'lganligini aytdi. Masalan, 1953 yildagi Eron davlat to'ntarishi Eronning saylangan Mosaddeg hukumatini ag'darib, qamoqqa tashladi. Bu Eronda demokratiyani amalda tugatdi va uning o'rnini Muhammad Rizo Pahlaviyning kuchli monarxiya boshqaruvi bilan almashtirdi.

U Buyuk Britaniya va AQSh tomonidan uyushtirilgan va rejalashtirilgan. Vikipediyaga ko'ra, shundan keyingina bu mamlakatlarning razvedka xizmatlari o'z rollarini rasman tan olishgan.

2013 yil avgust oyida, 60 yil o'tib, Amerika Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi (CIA) to'ntarishni rejalashtirishda ham, ijro etishda ham ishtirok etganini tan oldi, shu jumladan eronlik siyosatchilar, xavfsizlik va armiya yuqori martabali amaldorlariga, shuningdek to'ntarishni qo'llab-quvvatlash. Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi, davlat to'ntarishi "Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi ko'rsatmasi ostida" va "AQSh tashqi siyosati akti sifatida, hukumatning yuqori darajalarida ishlab chiqilgan va ma'qullanganini" tan oldi.

va

Tasniflangan hujjatlar shuni ko'rsatadiki, Britaniya razvedka xizmatlari to'ntarishni boshlash va rejalashtirishda muhim rol o'ynagan ...

Mening savolim shu edi, bu mamlakatlarning bu rolga jalb etilishi qanchalik yashirin yoki ma'lum bo'lgan? Bu haqda keng jamoatchilik (Eron va G'arbda) bilganmi? Yoki faqat "fitna nazariyotchilari" AQSh va Buyuk Britaniya dastlab shunday qilganiga ishonishganmi?


Bizga joriy manba emas, balki eski manba kerak bo'lgani uchun, men iqtibos keltiraman Etti opa -singillar (1975) Entoni Sampson, bu ish bo'yicha butun bobni o'z ichiga oladi.

Doktor Mossadekga kelsak, uning tarixdagi roli haligacha bahsli. Qadimgi eronliklar orasida, u hozir ham o'z mamlakatini bankrot qilgan va dunyoga ahmoqona ko'rinadigan uyatli hodisa; va u tufayli mamlakatni tark etishga majbur bo'lgan Shoh "o'sha odam" ning ismini eshitmaslikni afzal ko'radi. Ammo yosh eronliklarning ko'pchiligi uchun u Eron milliy qahramonidir, chunki u kompaniyalar va inglizlarga qarshi Eron millatchiligini ilgari surgan. - p. 163

Bu, 70 -yillar davomida Eronda to'ntarish haqida katta xabardorlik bor edi, degan da'voni qo'llab -quvvatlaydi va Mossadiqning qulashi neft uchun G'arb bilan kurashga bog'liq.

Kitobda G'arbning bir nechta harakatlantiruvchi kuchlari ko'rsatilgan:

Sahna ortida Eronda o'z vaqtini kutayotgan sirli kuchlar ishlagan. Inqiroz boshlanganda, Britaniya maxfiy agentlari Londonga Eronda Musodiqqa qarshi ko'plab unsurlar borligi haqida xabar berishdi, ular Mossadiqni yiqitishga yordam beradigan Buyuk Britaniyadan pul, shu jumladan. Tashqi ishlar vaziri Entoni Eden davlat to'ntarishiga ruxsat bermadi va loyiha Vashingtondagi Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasiga topshirildi, ular o'z navbatida Britaniyaning yordamisiz harakat qilishdan tortinishdi. Oxir -oqibat, reja Eden tomonidan emas, balki 1953 yil aprelda Eden kasalligi paytida Tashqi ishlar vazirligida vaqtincha qo'mondonlik qilgan Cherchill tomonidan tasdiqlandi. Fitnachilarga Kermit Ruzvelt tomonidan to'g'ri yordam berildi va tez orada ularning imkoniyati keldi. - p. 151

Sampson davom etadi:

Bu maxfiy operatsiyasiz Musadiq qachon va qachon yiqilganini aniqlash qiyin, lekin shubhasiz G'arb davlatlari aralashib, uning ishini tezlashtirgan. Bu yaxshi uyushtirilgan to'ntarish edi va Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasini, ayniqsa, Gvatemaladagi boshqa sarguzashtlarga undadi; lekin G'arb oxir -oqibat buning uchun og'ir narx to'ladi. Chunki shoh keyinchalik o'z mustaqilligini ko'rsatishga qaror qildi va endi G'arbning piyoni sifatida ko'rishga jur'at eta olmadi. -151-2-betlar.

Shunday qilib, 1979 yilda Shoh taxtdan ag'darilishidan oldin ham, katta rasmni bilish mumkin edi. Biroq, o'sha paytda AQShda bu hikoyaga qiziqish cheklangan edi. Ko'pchilikning e'tiborini Sovuq urushga qaratdi va AQShda odamlar AQSh siyosatiga qarshilik ko'rsatishni Sovet Ittifoqining ishonchli vakillarining harakati deb bilishga moyil edi.


Qirolning g'azabi: AQSh rasmiylari to'ntarishni qo'zg'atish uchun qirolichaning ismini qanday ishlatgan

Havola nusxa ko'chirildi

Shahzoda Filipp qirolichaning tug'ilgan kuniga bormasligi mumkin, deydi ekspert

Siz obuna bo'lganingizda, biz sizga ushbu axborot byulletenlarini yuborish uchun taqdim etgan ma'lumotlardan foydalanamiz. Ba'zan ular biz taklif qilayotgan boshqa axborot byulletenlari yoki xizmatlari uchun tavsiyalarni o'z ichiga oladi. Maxfiylik xabarnomasi sizning ma'lumotlaringizdan qanday foydalanishimiz va sizning huquqlaringiz haqida ko'proq ma'lumot beradi. Istalgan vaqtda obunani bekor qilishingiz mumkin.

Qirolicha 1953 yilda taxtga endigina kelgan edi, uning ismi 1953 yildagi Eron to'ntarishiga aralashganidan buyon Buyuk Britaniya Eron bilan munosabatlarini yomonlashtirdi. Garchi janobi oliylari bu hodisaga shaxsan aralashmagan bo'lsa-da, uning ismi AQSh diplomatik kuchlari tomonidan Eron shohini mamlakatda qolishga ko'ndirish uchun ishlatilgan va bu o'sha yili AQSh va Buyuk Britaniya qo'llab-quvvatlagan Eron to'ntarishining kalitidir. Buyuk Britaniya ham, AQSh ham Shohni saylangan Bosh vazir Muhammad Mossadiq o'rniga o'rnatishni xohlashdi va telekanalda & ldquoQueen Elizabeth va rdquo havolasi Shoh va Nashni mamlakatda qolishga ko'ndirishda muhim rol o'ynadi.

Ommabop

Biroq, amerikaliklar nazarda tutgan & ldquoQueen Elizabeth & rdquo - bu o'sha paytda bosh vazir o'rinbosari Entoni Eden bo'lgan Britaniya kemasi edi.

Hozirgacha sir saqlanayotgan favqulodda hujjatlar, shu jumladan telegrammalarni o'zidayoq, voqea qanday rivojlanganini ochib berdi.

Hujjatlar Yakshanba kuni efirga uzatiladigan "Kanal 4" va "Qirolicha va to'ntarish" rdquo hujjatli filmining bir qismidir.

"The Times" gazetasiga bugun yozgan Valentin Lou quyidagicha tushuntiradi: & ldquo Uning ismi amerikaliklar qirolicha Yelizaveta, taxtda atigi bir yil bo'lgan 26 yoshli monarx va RMS o'rtasidagi farqni bilmagani uchun ishlatilgan. Qirolicha Yelizaveta, Cunard Line tomonidan boshqariladigan okean layneri, tashqi ishlar vaziri Entoni Eden o'sha paytda sayohat qilgan. & rdquo

Qirolicha Yelizaveta II 1953 yilgi to'ntarish paytida tasvirlangan Shoh (Tasvir: Getty)

Qirolicha 1955 va 1959 yillarda Shoh bilan suratga tushgan, ular 1948 yildagi to'ntarishdan oldin uchrashishgan (Tasvir: Getty)

Uorvik universiteti professori Richard Aldrich hujjatli filmga o'zi va boshqa tadqiqotchi Vashingtondagi telegrammani qanday topgani haqida ma'lumot berdi.

Ularning kashfiyoti shuni anglatadiki, hukumat va Bukingem saroyi birinchi marta malika va rsquos ismining suiiste'mol qilinishi haqida bilishgan.

Professor shunday dedi: & ldquoTarixchi sifatida 40 yil ichida bu men ko'rgan eng hayratlanarli hujjatlar to'plami. & Rdquo

Hujjatlar AQShning Tehrondagi elchixonasiga yuborilgan telegrammani o'z ichiga olgan edi: & ldquoXorijiy idorasi bugun tushdan keyin qirolicha Yelizavetadan Eden yuborilgan xabarni, Shohning so'nggi voqealaridan xavotir bildirgani va uni mamlakatni tark etishdan qaytarish yo'llarini topishga umid qilamiz. & rdquo

Tegishli maqolalar

Keyin AQSh elchisi Loy Xenderson Shohga xabarni etkazdi va keyin dedi: & Ldquo, shuningdek, men Shohga aytdimki, men hozirgina Shoh eng do'stona his -tuyg'ularga ega bo'lgan juda muhim shaxs samimiy umid bildirganini bildirgan xabarni oldim. Shohni mamlakatni tark etish fikridan qaytarish mumkin edi. & Rdquo

Professor Aldrix quyidagicha izoh berdi: & ldquoBu juda muhim, chunki agar siz shoh yuguruvchi qilgan bo'lsa, Shohni hokimiyatga keltirish uchun siz to'ntarishingiz mumkin.

Bizning fikrimizcha, agar Shoh yuguruvchi qilganida, bu to'ntarish bo'lmasdi. & rdquo

Shuningdek, materialda amerikalik diplomatlar bungleni inglizlardan saqlamoqchi bo'lganliklari ko'rsatilgan.


"Klassik reja"

Shoh Muhammad Rizo Pahlaviy 1951 yilda Eron parlamenti qo'llab -quvvatlagandan so'ng, Mossadegni bosh vazir etib tayinlagan.

MI6 va AQSh Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi shohni 1953 yilda Musadiga qarshi to'ntarishni qo'llab -quvvatlashga ishontirishdi.

"Rejaga ko'ra, shahardagi muhim nuqtalarni shohga sodiq bo'linmalar qo'lga kiritishi mumkin edi ... radiostansiyani tortib olish va hokazo ... Klassik reja", - dedi Darbishir.

Mossadeg Angliya-Eron neft kompaniyasini milliylashtirdi va MI6 oxir-oqibat Sovet tomonidan qo'llab-quvvatlanadigan kommunistlar hukumatni egallashiga ishonishdi, deydi Darbyshir.

"Men bunga ishonaman, chunki Mossadeg juda zaif xarakterga ega edi", dedi josus. "Agar siz kommunistik partiyaning yuqori malakali a'zolarini qabul qilsangiz, ko'p vaqt talab qilinmaydi. Biz Amerikaning kommunizmga qarshi tayanch vazifasini o'tayotgani haqidagi fikriga qo'shilmadik ... Biz uni kelajakda kommunistlar itarib yuboradi deb o'ylagandik, - dedi Darbishir.


1953 yil 19 -avgust: AQSh va Buyuk Britaniya Eronning demokratik tarzda saylangan hukumatini yig'di

1953 yil 19 -avgustda Britaniya va AQSh hukumatlari tomonidan uyushtirilgan va moliyalashtirilgan davlat to'ntarishi natijasida Eron Bosh vaziri Muhammad Musodiq hokimiyatdan chetlatildi. Shoh tezda hokimiyatga qaytdi va Eron neft konlarining qirq foizidan ko'prog'ini AQSh kompaniyalariga imzoladi.

1953 yilda Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi va Britaniya razvedkasi Eron demokratik yo'l bilan saylangan hukumatini ag'darib tashlagan davlat to'ntarishini uyushtirdi. Muhammad Mossadeg hukumati. Davlat to'ntarishining zarbalari hali ham sezilmoqda.

1951 yilda Bosh vazir Mossadeg neft sanoatini milliylashtirgandan so'ng Britaniyaning g'azabini qo'zg'atdi. Musadadning ta'kidlashicha, Eron Angliya-Eron neft kompaniyasi tomonidan nazorat qilinadigan ulkan neft zaxiralaridan foyda ko'rishni boshlashi kerak. Keyinchalik kompaniya British Petroleum (BP) nomi bilan mashhur bo'ldi.

Harbiy harakatlar haqida o'ylab, Britaniya davlat to'ntarishini tanladi. Prezident Garri Truman bu fikrni rad etdi, lekin Duayt Eyzenxauer Oq uyni egallaganida, u Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasiga xorijiy hukumatga qarshi birinchi maxfiy operatsiyalaridan birini boshlashni buyurdi.

Milliy xavfsizlik kengashiga Eron bo'yicha hisobot. Manba: Milliy xavfsizlik arxivi.

Davlat to'ntarishiga prezident Teodor Ruzveltning nabirasi Kermit Ruzvelt ismli agent boshchilik qildi. Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi Mossadigni bosh vazir lavozimidan ozod qilish to'g'risida qaror chiqarishga ishonchsiz yosh Shohga suyandi. Kermit Ruzvelt Norman Shvartskopfning otasi Norman Shvartskopdan yordam olgan.

Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi va inglizlar poraxo'rlik, tuhmat va uyushgan tartibsizliklar orqali Mossadeg hukumatiga putur etkazishga yordam berishdi. O'zini kommunist sifatida ko'rsatgan agentlar diniy etakchilarga tahdid qilishgan, AQSh elchisi esa Amerika fuqarolariga qilingan hujumlar haqida bosh vazirga yolg'on gapirishgan.

Tehron ko'chalarida yuz bergan otishmada 300 ga yaqin odam halok bo'ldi.

Musadeg taxtdan ag'darildi, uch yil qamoq jazosiga hukm qilindi, keyin esa umrbod uy qamog'iga hukm qilindi.

Eronning birinchi demokratik hukumatining qulashi, AQSh yordami va qurol -aslahasiga tayangan Shoh davrida yigirma yildan ortiq diktatura o'rnatdi. 1979 yilda Shohni ag'darib yuborgan Amerikaga qarshi hujum butun mintaqani larzaga keltirdi va islomiy jangarilikning tarqalishiga yordam berdi.

Muallif Stiven Kinzer bilan intervyuni o'z ichiga olgan to'liq translyatsiyani (quyida) tinglang Shohning barcha odamlari: Amerika to'ntarishi va Yaqin Sharq terrorining ildizlari, va Baruch kolleji professori Ervand Ibrohimyan.

Amerika sayohati Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi Eronda sodir bo'lgan to'ntarishni "qo'llab -quvvatladi", haqiqatan ham "qo'llab -quvvatlash" da Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi agenti va Teodorning nabirasi Kermit Ruzvelt ishtirok etdi, Tehronga muxolifat harakatini ishlab chiqarish uchun chamadonlar bilan naqd pul to'la keldi, odamlarni norozilik namoyishlariga jalb qilish va gazeta muharrirlariga pora berish. noto'g'ri ma'lumot chop etish (haqiqiy soxta yangiliklar), va somon odami sifatida harakat qilish uchun soxta kommunistik partiya tuzish. Amerika sayohati Shohning aytishicha, AQSh bilan "hamkorlik qilgan", bunday "hamkorlik" Eronning AQShdan milliardlab dollarlik qurol -yarog 'sotib olishi va Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasining Shohning maxfiy politsiya kuchlari Savakni o'qitishi bilan aniqlangan. inson huquqlarining buzilishi. O'qishni davom ettiring.

Birinchi nashrning 8 -bobida bu tarixni darsliklar bilan qamrab olish bo'yicha ajoyib tanqid mavjud Yolg'on gapirdi ustozim menga Jeyms W. Loewen tomonidan.

Tegishli manbalar

Imperializmni yashirish: darsliklar qanday qilib sovuq urushni noto'g'ri va talabalarni aldashga olib keladi

Maqola. Muallif: Ursula Vulfe-Rokka. Agar biz tariximizni bilsak seriyasi.
Ko'pincha, AQShning Sovuq Urushga aralashuvi haqida gap ketganda, rasmiy o'quv dasturi tozalanadi va taqsimlanadi, bu esa o'quvchilarni o'z mamlakatlarining global zo'ravonliklarini tushunishga yordam bermaydi.

Grenada: ‘A Sevimli kichik urush ’

Maqola. Bill Bigelow tomonidan. Agar biz o'z tariximizni bilsak.
Darsliklarda AQShning Grenadaga bostirib kirishi ahamiyatsiz yoki noto'g'ri ko'rsatiladi. Grenada "yaxshi namuna tahdidi" edi.

Tarix darslari: Dunyo bo'ylab darsliklar AQSh tarixini qanday aks ettiradi

Kitob – Badiiy adabiyot. Dana Lindaman va Kayl Uord tomonidan. 2004. 404 bet.
Dunyo bo'ylab darsliklarda AQSh tarixi qanday tasvirlangan.

Yolg'on o'qituvchim menga aytdi: Amerika tarixi darsligingizdagi hamma narsa noto'g'ri

Kitob – Badiiy adabiyot. Muallif: James W. Loewen. 2018. 480 pp.
12 ta etakchi o'rta maktab tarixi bo'yicha darsliklarni batafsil tanqid qiladi.


Oshkor qilingan hujjatlar 1953 yilda Eron to'ntarishida Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi rolini ochib berdi

Eronning sobiq bosh vaziri Muhammad Mossadeg 1951 yil oktyabr oyida paydo bo'ladi. Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi Mossadegni ag'darib tashlagani agentlikning yashirin operatsiyalari uchun shablon edi.

Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi 1953 yilda Eron bosh vaziri Muhammad Mossadegning ag'darilishi ortida edi. Bu o'nlab yillar davomida ochiq sir edi, lekin o'tgan hafta Jorj Vashington universiteti Milliy xavfsizlik arxivi buni tasdiqlovchi yangi maxfiy hujjatlarni e'lon qildi.

Eron davlat to'ntarishini uyushtirish Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi uchun birinchi bo'ldi va bo'lajak Sovuq urush maxfiy operatsiyalari uchun shablon bo'lib xizmat qiladi.

Musadeg "o'sha paytdagi Eronning asosiy muammosi bu asosan xorijiy imperiyalar boshqaradigan mamlakat ekanligiga ishongan", - deydi eronlik kinorejissyor Moziyar Bahari "Dam olish kunlari mezbon hisoblangan hamma narsada". Shunday qilib, bir haftadan kam muddat ishlaganidan so'ng, 1951 yil 1-mayda Mossadeg Angliya-Eron neft kompaniyasini milliylashtirishga qaror qildi.

"Inglizlar uchun, chunki ular neftni kashf etdilar va Eron neft sanoatini noldan yaratdilar, chunki ular neftdan tushgan daromadni Eron hukumati bilan bo'lishdi", deydi Bahoriy. "Ammo ko'plab eronliklar uchun, ayniqsa inglizlar kelishidan oldin Eronda neft yo'qligini eslamaganlar uchun, Britaniya kompaniyasining Eron neftiga monopoliyaga ega bo'lishi adolatsizlik edi".

Biroq, inglizlar tinchgina ketishmasdi. Bahariyning so'zlariga ko'ra, "inglizlar o'z monopoliyasini saqlab qolishi uchun Mossadeg ketishi kerak edi" va ular Eron bosh vazirini ag'darish choralarini ko'rishni boshladilar. Ularning rejasi amalga oshdi, lekin faqat ikki yillik josuslik mahorati, buzg'unchilik va Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi yordamidan so'ng.

"Menimcha, pastroq odam bir hafta ichida tushib ketadi. Musadeg juda kuchli siyosatchi va juda kuchli odam edi", - deydi Bahoriy.

Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasining yosh agentlari rejimni beqarorlashtirish uchun naqd pulga to'la chamadonlardan foydalanishgan. "Ular gazeta muharrirlarini sotib olishdi, hoodlum sotib olishdi, turli shaharlarda mitinglar uyushtirishdi, muammo tug'dirish uchun soxta kommunistik partiya tuzishdi", - deydi Bahari. Shunga qaramay, ular deyarli muvaffaqiyatsizlikka uchradi.

Bahariyning so'zlariga ko'ra, Mossadeg va uning ittifoqchilari 1953 yil 15 avgustda birinchi davlat to'ntarish tashabbusini barbod qilganidan so'ng, Vashington rasmiylari josuslik operatsiyasining vilkasini tortmoqchi bo'lishgan. Ular Teodor Ruzveltni ag'darish va nabirasini boshqargan Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi xodimi Kermit Ruzvelt Juniorga telegramma yuborib, uni to'xtatishni va to'xtashni buyurdilar. "Ammo Kermit Ruzvelt shunchaki" men hech qachon eshitmaganman "deydi va u operatsiyani davom ettirmoqda va u muvaffaqiyat qozondi", - deydi Bahari.

To'rt kundan keyin ikkinchi to'ntarish urinishi muvaffaqiyatli bo'ldi.

"Bu eronliklarning og'zida achchiq ta'm qoldirgan", deydi Bahoriy. "Bu Eron hukumatining Eron xalqining haqiqiy shikoyatlaridan foydalanishi uchun juda yaxshi bahona yaratdi."


Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi 1953 yildagi Eron to'ntarishida o'z rolini tan oldi

AQSh Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasining dushanba kuni e'lon qilingan hujjati 1953 yilda Eron millatchi bosh vaziri Muhammad Mosaddeq ag'darilgan to'ntarish Vashington tomonidan uyushtirilganini va AQSh razvedka agentligi tomonidan amalga oshirilganini tasdiqlaydi.

1953 yilda demokratik yo'l bilan saylangan Eron rahbari Muhammad Mosaddeq ag'darilgan harbiy to'ntarish AQSh hukumati tomonidan uyushtirilgan va uning razvedka agentligi tomonidan amalga oshirilgan.

Birinchi marta Milliy Xavfsizlik Arxivi veb-saytida-Jorj Vashington Universitetida joylashgan tadqiqot markazida-maxfiy hujjat AQShning oldingi xabarlar va esdaliklar oshkor qilganini tasdiqlaydi, lekin bu hech qachon Amerika josuslik agentligi tomonidan to'liq tan olinmagan. .

"Mosadek va uning Milliy front kabinetini ag'dargan harbiy to'ntarish Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi rahbarligi ostida AQSh tashqi siyosati akti sifatida amalga oshirildi, hukumatning yuqori darajalarida ishlab chiqilgan va tasdiqlangan", deyiladi hujjatda (o'ngdagi rasmga qarang). .

Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi tarixida yozilgan "Eron uchun jang" 1970-yillarning o'rtalarida yozilgan va 1981 yilda qisman oshkor qilingan, ammo Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasining rolini tasdiqlovchi bo'lim olib tashlangan.

Yangi nashr etilgan hujjat 2011 yilda Milliy xavfsizlik arxivi tadqiqot direktori Malkolm Birn tomonidan yuborilgan Axborot erkinligi to'g'risidagi qonun (FOIA) so'roviga javoban maxfiylikdan chiqarildi. Biroq, Bern hujjatni ommaga oshkor qilish uchun shu haftagacha kutdi.

"Men to'liq tasvirni olishga umid qilgandim, chunki hali ko'p narsa saqlanib qolmoqda, lekin bu ishlar ba'zan juda uzoq davom etadi", - dedi Birn dushanba kuni elektron pochta orqali FRANCE 24 ga. "Mening asl [FOIA] so'rovim 2000 yilga to'g'ri kelgan, shuning uchun 11 yil davom etdi. Men boshqa kutmaslikka qaror qildim. "

Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi, Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasining Mosaddeqni ag'darib tashlagan va Eronning surgun qilingan Shohini o'rnatgan kod nomi TPAJAX ekanligini tasdiqladi. Hujjat Milliy xavfsizlik arxivi tomonidan ag'darilganining 60 yilligiga bag'ishlangan.

Shuningdek, matn o'sha paytdagi AQSh rahbarlarining tafakkurini, Britaniya va Rossiya kuchlari o'rtasida yuzaga kelishi mumkin bo'lgan qarama -qarshilikdan xavotirlarini va Eron neftiga kirishni davom ettirishga bo'lgan qiziqishini yoritadi.

"AQSh yordami bilan davlat to'ntarishini amalga oshirish, oldindan aytib bo'lmaydigan ishlarga yo'l qo'yishdan ko'ra, xavfliroq tuyuldi", deyiladi hujjatda.

Britaniya aralashadimi?

Biroq, hujjatning Shohning rejasi, ijrosi va rolini batafsil bayon qilgan qismi asosan Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi tomonidan olib tashlangan. Birn AQSh va davlat to'ntarishi haqidagi hujjatni va boshqa hisoblarni to'liq ochib berishni talab qildi.

"Men Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasidan qo'shimcha tekshiruvlar, shu jumladan" Zendebad, Shoh! " Hujjat, lekin hozircha men boshqa javob olmadim ", - dedi Birn FRANS 24 telekanaliga.

Tadqiqotchining aytishicha, bu hujjat muhim, chunki to'ntarish haqidagi ko'plab tafsilotlar, masalan, fitna uyushtiruvchilar va jinoyatchilar, ilmiy va siyosiy munozaralar mavzusi bo'lib qolmoqda.

"Eron hukumati davlat to'ntarishini muntazam ravishda Eron yoki xorijiy kuchlar mamlakatning tarixiy traektoriyasiga javobgarmi yoki yo'qmi, deb bahslashish uchun chaqiradi ... munosabatlar yaxshilanishi uchun Vashington avvaldan aralashgani uchun kechirim so'rashi kerakmi", - deydi Byorn.

Ma'lumotlar ko'payib borayotgan bo'lsa -da, to'liq hikoyani yopib qo'ymaslik uchun bosim mavjud.

Dushanba kuni Milliy xavfsizlik arxivi, shuningdek, 1978 yilda Amerikaning Eronga aralashuvini oshkor qilishiga Britaniyaning to'sqinlik qilgani haqidagi hujjatlarni e'lon qildi.

O'shanda Britaniya Tashqi ishlar vazirligi Davlat departamentining rejalashtirilgan nashri Buyuk Britaniyaning Erondagi obro'siga putur etkazishidan qo'rqardi.

Ammo Milliy xavfsizlik arxivi dushanba kuni so'radi, agar Britaniyaning hozirgi aralashuvi, ehtimol, boshqa muhim hujjatlar oshkor qilinmagan.

Kundalik axborot byulleteniHar kuni ertalab muhim xalqaro yangiliklarni oling


"53 -to'ntarish" 1953 yilgi Eron to'ntarishi ortida turgan AQSh va Buyuk Britaniya kuchlarini ochib beradi

Tarix uzoq vaqtdan beri AQSh Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasining yashirin rolini 1953 yil 19 avgustda Eron davlat to'ntarishida, demokratik tarzda saylangan Bosh vazir Muhammad Mosaddeg'ni Shoh Muhammad Rizo Pahlaviy bilan almashtirganini tan oldi. Biroq, yovuz hiyla -nayranglar tafsilotlari ilgari Buyuk Britaniyaning ishtirokini to'liq tan olmagan, shu jumladan MI6 yetakchisi Norman Derbishirning roli.

Darhaqiqat, Derbyshirning 1953 yildagi to'ntarish haqidagi hisoboti hozirgi kungacha Britaniyaning rasmiy sirlari to'g'risidagi qonunga muvofiq tasniflangan. Faqat yozuvchi/rejissyor Tagi Amiranining "53-to'ntarish" hujjatli filmi uchun o'n yillik tergov mehnati tufayli 1985 yilda Britaniyaning o'n to'rt qismli "Imperiya oxiri" seriali uchun Derbisir transkripti paydo bo'ldi. Derbishir serialdan butunlay chiqarib tashlandi, ammo Derbishirni (hozir vafot etgan) hayotga qaytargan Ralf Fayns, to'ntarishni boshqarishda aybdor ekanini tan olib, oshkor qilingan transkriptdan o'z izohlarini beradi. Bu loyihaga to'rt yil bag'ishlagan ishtirokchi va ajoyib muharrir Uolter Merchdan iqtibos keltirsak, "bu manzara bo'ylab, albatta, nima bo'layotganini aniq ko'rsatadigan chaqmoq chaqadi". Va aql bovar qilmaydigan burilishlar, Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi va MI6 manevrlari, muvaffaqiyatsiz urinishlar va xiyonatlar, zo'ravon noroziliklar va suiqasdlar orqali, ikki soatlik "To'ntarish 53" Mosaddeg Angliyani milliylashtirish uchun ko'chib kelganida nima bo'lganini aniq tushuntirib beradi. Eron neft kompaniyasi.

Siyosiy va demokratiya uchun dahshatli tarixiy rekord Amiranining haqiqatni izlashi natijasida paydo bo'ladi, u filmni to'liq tadqiqotlar olib borganidan keyin izlaydi. Eng yaxshi detektiv janrli filmlarda bo'lgani kabi, u juda murakkab jumboqni birin -ketin tafsilotlarini birlashtiradi va nihoyat hayratlanarli rasmga keladi. Bu ishda u quyidagilarning barchasidan foydalanadi: "Imperiya oxiri" turkumidagi intervyulardan olingan arxiv lavhalari, birinchi navbatda 1953 yilgi to'qnashuvlar va qotilliklarning hozirgi intervyularini, bosh vazir Cherchillning ishtirokini muhokama qilish , Prezidentlar Truman va Eyzenxauer, shuningdek elchilar, Tashqi ishlar vazirligi xodimlari va ekspert mualliflar kim.

Ushbu ta'sirli hujjatli filmda O'rta Sharqdagi qiyin vaziyat haqida juda ko'p narsalarni tushuntiradigan hayajonli vahiylarni umumlashtirishning iloji yo'q. Agar kerak bo'lsa, ba'zi inglizcha subtitrlar bilan "Coup 53" butun mamlakat bo'ylab virtual kinoteatrlarda mavjud bo'lib, siz film veb -saytidan batafsil ma'lumot olishingiz mumkin.


1953 yildagi Eron to'ntarishi uchun Vashingtonni ayblamang

Ularning 30 oktyabr maqolasida Tashqi siyosat, Roham Alvandi va Mark J. Gasiorowski mening 2010 yilgi kitobimni chiqardi Eron va Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi: Mosaddeqning qulashi, buni Eron va AQSh o'rtasidagi hozirgi dushmanlik bilan bog'lamoqchi. Ularning asosiy maqsadi - 2017 yilda Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasining maxfiy fayllari chiqarilishi halokatli zarba bergan obro'siz hikoyani qayta tiklash. Quyida keltirilgan arxiv dalillari o'quvchilarga 1953 yil avgustda Eron bosh vaziri Muhammad Mosaddeq hukumati taqdirini ag'darish holatlari to'g'risida mustaqil hukm chiqarishga imkon berishi kerak.

1989 yilda "AQShning tashqi aloqalari" turkumida qisman Mosaddekga qarshi ingliz-amerikalik to'ntarish rejasi bilan bog'liq bo'lgan Davlat departamenti maxfiy hujjatlarining birinchi partiyasi chiqarildi. Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi fayllari va fitnaga to'g'ridan-to'g'ri havolalar kiritilmagan. kod nomi TPAJAX, o'zgartirildi. Shunday bo'lsa -da, nashr etilgan materialda Eyzenxauer ma'muriyati va AQSh siyosatining tadbir oldidan ham, undan keyin ham tafakkuri haqida qimmatli ma'lumotlar bor edi.

Ularning 30 oktyabr maqolasida Tashqi siyosat, Roham Alvandi va Mark J. Gasiorowski mening 2010 yilgi kitobimni chiqardi Eron va Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi: Mosaddeqning qulashi, buni Eron va AQSh o'rtasidagi hozirgi dushmanlik bilan bog'lamoqchi. Ularning asosiy maqsadi - 2017 yilda Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasining maxfiy fayllari chiqarilishi halokatli zarba bergan obro'siz hikoyani qayta tiklash. Quyida keltirilgan arxiv dalillari o'quvchilarga 1953 yil avgustda Eron bosh vaziri Muhammad Mosaddeq hukumati taqdirini ag'darish holatlari to'g'risida mustaqil hukm chiqarishga imkon berishi kerak.

1989 yilda "AQShning tashqi aloqalari" turkumida qisman Mosaddekga qarshi ingliz-amerikalik to'ntarish rejasi bilan bog'liq bo'lgan Davlat departamenti maxfiy hujjatlarining birinchi partiyasi chiqarildi. Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi fayllari va fitnaga to'g'ridan-to'g'ri havolalar kiritilmagan. kod nomi TPAJAX, o'zgartirildi. Shunga qaramay, nashr etilgan materialda Eyzenxauer ma'muriyati va AQSh siyosatining tadbir oldidan ham, undan keyin ham tafakkuri haqida qimmatli ma'lumotlar bor edi.

AQShning ag'darilishdagi ishtiroki gumon qilingan edi, lekin birinchi rasmiy qabul 2000 yil mart oyida Davlat kotibi Madlen Olbraytdan kechirim so'rash shaklida qabul qilingan. New York Times Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi maslahatchisi Donald Uilber tomonidan tuzilgan voqea sirini oshkor qilgan Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasining ichki tarixini e'lon qildi.

1954 yilda yozilgan hisobda rejalashtirish va operatsiyalar haqida ajoyib tafsilotlar ochib berilgan. Uilber tarixi o'zining sinchkovlik bilan tayyorlangan beshta qo'shimchalari bilan to'ldirilib, asosiy ma'lumot manbai bo'lib qoladi. Nihoyat, 2017 yilda, ko'p yillik tinimsiz talablardan so'ng, Davlat departamenti 375 ga yaqin maxfiy hujjatlarni e'lon qildi, ularning asosiy qismi voqea paytida bo'limga ko'chirilgan Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi fayllari edi.

Alvandi va Gasiorovskiyning so'zlariga ko'ra, eronliklar marionettalar va yollangan xakerlardan boshqa narsa emas edi va ular 1953 yil avgust voqealarida hech qanday agentlikka ega emas edilar.

So'nggi o'ttiz yil mobaynida Gasiorovskiy, Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi Tehronda, Kermit Ruzvelt boshchiligida, Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi to'ntarish tashabbusi muvaffaqiyatsizlikka uchraganidan so'ng, Mosaddeqga jiddiy zarba berish uchun reja tuzganini aytgan. 1953 yil 15-16 avgust tunlari va Eron shohi Muhammad Rizo Pahlaviyning keyingi parvozi.

Bu rivoyatga ko'ra, Ruzvelt 19-avgustda bezorilar va bezorilarni ko'chalarga joylashtirish uchun ruhoniylarni qo'rqitish va yuqori martabali ruhoniylarga pora berish orqali Tuda partiyasi boshchiligidagi shohga qarshi mitinglarni uydirish orqali Tehron ko'chalarida tartibsizlikni sochdi. hukumatni ag'darish uchun Mosaddeqning uyiga hujum qilish uchun harbiy qismlarni yolladi. Bu rivoyatga ko'ra, eronliklar marionettalar va yollangan xakerlardan boshqa narsa emas va 1953 yil avgust voqealarida ularga hech qanday agentlik etishmagan.

Gasiorovskiy hisobi, birinchi marta 1987 yilda nashr etilgan maqolada e'lon qilinganidek Xalqaro Yaqin Sharq tadqiqotlari jurnali, Kermit Ruzveltning 1980 yil yozgan xotirasida yozilgan. Hisoblagich- fantazagorik josuslik triller va Ruzveltning Tehron va Vashingtondagi hamkasblari tomonidan ishlab chiqarilgan. To'g'risi, Ruzvelt 1953 yil 28 -avgustda Virjiniya shtatining Langli shahridagi Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi qarorgohida o'tkazgan yig'ilishida, AQSh elchixonasi binosida ikki kecha oldin "urush kengashi" da yashirincha ikkinchi zarbani rejalashtirganini aytdi. Elchi Loy Xenderson haqida ma'lumot. Ammo oshkor qilinmagan hujjatli yozuvlar uning o'zini maqtagan hikoyasini qo'llab-quvvatlamaydi.

2010 yildagi kitobimda men yuqoridagi hikoyaga qarshi chiqdim, buning o'rniga ichki siyosiy kuchlarga e'tibor qaratdim. Bu gipoteza quyidagi faktlarga asoslangan edi:

15-16 avgustdagi to'ntarish muvaffaqiyatsizlikka uchragach, Vashington TPAJAXni ta'qib qilishdan voz kechishga va Mosaddeq bilan to'siqlarni tuzatishga qaror qildi. Shunga ko'ra, Langli Tehrondagi Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi stantsiyasiga Ruzvelt va Xendersonning qat'iy tavsiyalari bo'lmagan taqdirda TPAJAXdan voz kechish kerakligini ma'lum qildi.

Ruzvelt, general Fazlollah Zaxediy bilan birga, zararni nazorat qilish choralarini ko'rdi, lekin ularning maqsadi poytaxt tashqarisidan qo'zg'olonni qo'zg'atish va taxmin qilinayotgan kommunistik boshqaruvni kutish uchun Eronning janubiy qabilalarini safarbar qilish edi. Poytaxtdan 300 mil g'arbda va Iroq chegarasiga yaqin bo'lgan Kermanshoh shu maqsadda tanlangan. Langlining bunday ssenariy uchun favqulodda vaziyat rejalari bor edi, xususan, TPAJAX fitnasidan oldingi Qashqay qabilasi bilan aloqada.

Vilberning batafsil tarixida ruhoniylarga hech qanday pora qayd etilmagan, shu bilan birga harbiy ofitserlarga hech qanday to'lov to'lanmagan.

Ruzveltning giperbolik da'vosi, u 17-avgust kuni bo'lib o'tgan urush kengashida Kermanshoh brigadasini 19-avgustga rejalashtirilgan operatsiyalari uchun Tehronga ko'chib o'tishni uyushtirganini aytdi.

Shohparast harbiy qismlar 19 avgust kuni tushdan keyin aralashdilar-bu oldindan rejalashtirilgan davlat to'ntarishi uchun dargumon.

Xenderson, Davlat kotibi Jon Foster Dalles va Buyuk Britaniya Tashqi ishlar vazirligi o'sha kuni sodir bo'lgan voqealarni o'z -o'zidan sodir bo'lgan deb ta'riflashdi.

Qo'shma Shtatlar Eronning oxirgi demokratik liderini ag'dardi

Vashingtondagi tarixiy revizionizm kampaniyasiga qaramay, arxiv ma'lumotlariga ko'ra, AQSh hukumati Eron ruhoniylarini emas, balki 1953 yilgi Muhammad Mosaddikni ag'darib yuborgan to'ntarishdagi asosiy aktyor bo'lgan.

Gasiorovskiy o'z asarlarida Eronning asosiy fikrini chetlab o'tgan: yoki shohni qo'llab -quvvatlaganlar yoki Mosaddeqga qarshi bo'lganlar. Bu muvaffaqiyatsizliklar, aks sado berdi Tashqi siyosat parcha - mualliflarni yo'ldan ozdirdi. AQShning eski va yangi oshkor qilinmagan hujjatlaridagi ko'plab dalillar 19 avgust to'ntarishi arafasida muxolifatning mavjudligi va faolligini tasdiqlaydi.

Darhaqiqat, 1953 yil mart oyida, Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi Mosaddeqni ag'darishni rejalashtirishdan bir necha hafta oldin, Zaxidi boshchiligidagi mahalliy to'ntarish rejasi rivojlangan bosqichda edi. Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasining 1953 yil 31 martdagi hisobotida aytilishicha, davlat to'ntarishi ikki -uch haftadan so'ng amalga oshirilishi rejalashtirilgan bo'lib, u muvaffaqiyat qozongan taqdirda Zahidi bosh vazir, general Abbos Garzan bo'lishini ko'rsatgan. shtab boshlig'i bo'lish.

Shuningdek, Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi va MI6 to'ntarish rejasini ishlab chiqishdan oldin Tehron garnizonidagi ofitserlar orasida qo'zg'olon yadrosi mavjud edi. Men 2010 yilgi kitobimda Tehrondagi TPAJAX harbiy rejalashtiruvchisi Jorj Keroll tasodifan bu tarmoq borligini bilib olganini hujjatlashtirdim. Markaziy razvedka boshqarmasi rejalashtiruvchilari nafaqat bu ofitserlarni pora bilan vasvasaga solishi kerak edi, balki Eron boshliqlari Kerrollni va uning rejasini tuzatib bo'lmaganda TPAJAX to'ntarishini muddatidan oldin buzgan bo'lardi.

Shia diniy ierarxiyasining oliy rahbari oyatulloh Seyid Husayn Borjerdi katta ta'sir ko'rsatdi. Borujerdi monarxiya institutini shia e'tiqodining qo'riqchisi deb bilgan va shuning uchun uni himoya qilish kerak deb hisoblagan. Shoh 16 avgustda Bag'dodga uchganidan keyingi kunlarda monarxiya qulashi yaqinlashar ekan, Borujerdi Tehrondagi vakili Oyatulloh Muhammad Behbahoniy orqali harakat qilishga tayyor edi. Ruhoniy juggernautni ochgan yashil chiroq uch so'zli ibora edi. mamlekat shah mikhahad, "mamlakat shohga muhtoj" deb tarjima qilinadi.

Borujerdi xonadonidagi muhit, uning Mosaddeq bilan yomon qoni va uning qulashi haqidagi xabar Borujerdining yozgi qarorgohida qanday qabul qilinganligi, oyatulloh Husayn Ali Montazerining xotiralarida tasvirlangan. Borujerdi.

2017 yilda chop etilgan bir qancha fayllar Borujerdining shohni qo'llab -quvvatlashi va harakat qilishga tayyorligini tasdiqlaydi. A CIA intelligence report dated April 17, 1953, reads: “On 11 April, Mullah Borujerdi, Kashani, and Behbehani … were reaching mutual understanding on the need to bolster the Shah in his resistance to Mossadeq.” In another assessment on Aug. 17, 1953, Roosevelt cabled to Langley, “According my information he [the shah] has latent support [of the] majority of Iranian population including its most eminent clerics, including, of course, Borujerdi.” In another cable Roosevelt wrote, “Religious leaders now desperate. Will attempt anything. Will try save Islam and Shah of Iran.”

The decisive evidence against Gasiorowski’s narrative is a secret situation report cabled by Roosevelt to Langley in the early morning hours of Aug. 19. Its full and unredacted text was among the 2017 CIA declassified files.

The cable reveals that on the morning of August 19, the day Mosaddeq was overthrown, Roosevelt was in the dark about the momentous events that were unfolding in the streets of Tehran. The Roosevelt situation report—a mixture of complaints, future plans, and talk of a possible insurrection in remote areas of Iran—contained no hint of even a rumor about the events that he subsequently claimed to have planned during his so-called council of war two nights earlier.

While an intelligence operative might feel compelled to conceal a covert move from his superiors, someone of Roosevelt’s stature—the Harvard University graduate grandson of a U.S. president for whom anything was possible and permissible—would not deliberately mislead his superiors. Roosevelt’s previous days’ reporting to Langley and other CIA stations would have in effect been plainly misleading had he truly planned a military-political coup for Aug. 19.

Instead, on the evening of Aug. 17—shortly before his claimed council of war—he sent a message to Langley saying in essence that while Mosaddeq’s position was improving, the opposition policy to him should continue. In another cable, he requested arrangements for the exfiltration of 15 unnamed people and asked Langley whether the station should continue with the TPAJAX plan or withdraw. He did not ask for any extension of his mission.

It is legitimate to ask why the CIA leadership turned a blind eye to these glaring contradictions in Roosevelt’s reporting. One answer, though conjectural, is not far-fetched. TPAJAX was the very first operational assignment entrusted to the CIA. The National Security Act of 1947, by which the agency was created, had given the CIA a limited mandate of intelligence-gathering and analysis. During the administration of President Harry S. Truman and CIA head Gen. Walter Bedell Smith, the agency managed to expand that limited role. The failure of TPAJAX would have hence been a severe blow, notably vis-à-vis rival military and State Department intelligence agencies.

Roosevelt’s claim to have snatched victory from the jaws of defeat was thereafter adopted by Langley. With the exception of President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who likened Roosevelt’s account to a “dime novel,” others inside the Beltway fell for the deceit. In the coming years, whenever the agency felt less secure, it would, through press leaks or historical researchers, tout its achievements. The bulk of the CIA files related to events in Iran in 1953 were destroyed in 1962 in Langley on the dubious grounds that there was a shortage of shelving capacity. The move was more likely designed to protect the agency’s secret in any future congressional inquiry.


Evidence proves MI6 footprint in 1953 coup

TEHRAN, Aug. 02 (MNA) – For the first time as of 1958, a documentary reveals evidence confirming a British spy’s role in the 1953 Iranian coup d'état, known in Iran as the 28 Mordad coup d'état.

As The Guardian reported on Sunday, the hidden role of a British secret service officer who led the coup that permanently altered the Middle East is to be revealed for the first time since an Observer news story was suppressed in 1985.

The report, headlined “How MI6 and CIA joined forces to plot Iran coup”, appeared in the 26 May edition but was swiftly quashed. It exposed the fact that an MI6 man, Norman Darbyshire, had run a covert and violent operation to reinstate the Shah of Iran as ruler of the country in 1953. Yet just a few days after the newspaper came out, all fresh evidence of this British operation and of Darbyshire’s identity disappeared from public debate.

The background to the 1953 coup d’etat has long been the cause of international suspicion and conjecture. Prime Minister Winston Churchill opposed the rule of the country’s first democratic leader, Mohammad Mossadegh, largely because it threatened Britain’s interests in Iran’s oil industry. Working with the CIA, who also hoped to see the Shah Reza Pahlavi back on the throne, it is now clear that MI6 did much more than agitate for Mossadegh to be overthrown.

In June 2020, documents found in a Washington archive showed how Queen Elizabeth II’s name was mistakenly used to persuade the Shah to stay in Iran prior to the coup. Coup 53 now makes a clear case that the British were orchestrating an uprising, going as far as kidnapping, torturing, and paying for protesters to go out on to the streets of Tehran, The Guardian reported.

In August 1953, the British and American intelligence agencies initiated a coup by the Iranian military, setting off a series of events, including riots in the streets of the capital, Tehran, which led to the overthrow and arrest of the time Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq.

Mosaddeq, who was convicted of treason by a court-martial, served three years in solitary confinement and then died under house arrest in exile in 1967.

His overthrow, which is still given as a reason for the Iranians' mistrust of the UK and the US, consolidated the Shah's rule for the following 26 years until the victory of the Islamic Revolution in 1979, led by Imam Khomeini, which toppled the US-backed monarchy.

The Iranian premier had played a key role in the country’s 1951 movement that resulted in the nationalization of Iran’s oil industry, which had been mainly controlled by the British-owned Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), now known as BP.

Experts say the 28 Mordad coup, was aimed at making sure the Iranian monarchy would safeguard the West's oil interests in the country.

Six decades after the notorious coup, the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) for the first time published a document in August 2013 which confirmed Washington’s role in the coup d’état.

"The military coup that overthrew Mosaddeq and his National Front cabinet was carried out under CIA direction as an act of US foreign policy, conceived and approved at the highest levels of government," reads a brief segment from an internal CIA history.


QAYDLAR

[1] Just in the last several years, books in English, French and Farsi by Ervand Abrahamian, Gholam-Reza Afkhami, Mohammad Amini, Christopher de Bellaigue, Darioush Bayandor, Mark Gasiorowski (and this author), Stephen Kinzer, Abbas Milani, Ali Rahnema, and others have focused on, or at least dealt in depth with, Mosaddeq and the coup. They contain sometimes wide differences of view about who was behind planning for the overthrow and how it finally played out. More accounts are on the way (including an important English-language volume on Iranian domestic politics by Ali Rahnema of the American University of Paris).

[2] Tim Weiner, “C.I.A. Destroyed Files on 1953 Iran Coup,” The New York Times, May 29, 1997.

[3] Tim Weiner, “C.I.A.’s Openness Derided as a ‘Snow Job’,” The New York Times, May 20, 1997 Tim Weiner, op. cit., May 29, 1997. (See also the link to the Archive’s lawsuit, above.)

[4] Kermit Roosevelt, Countercoup: The Struggle for the Control of Iran (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1979) The New York Times, April 16, 2000.

[5] Precht recalls that he was originally not slated to be at the meetings, which usually deputy assistant secretaries and above attended. But the Near East division representative for State was unavailable. “I was drafted,” Precht said. Being forced to “sit through interminable and pointless talk” about extraneous topics “when my plate was already overflowing” on Iran contributed to a “sour mood,” he remembered. (Henry Precht e-mail to author, June 2, 2011.)

[6] Joshua Botts, Office of the Historian, U.S. Department of State, “‘A Burden for the Department’?: To The 1991 FRUS Statute,” February 6, 2012, http://history.state.gov/frus150/research/to-the-1991-frus-statute.

More on the Coup

Mohammad Mosaddeq and the 1953 Coup in IranBy Mark J. Gasiorowski and Malcolm Byrne, Syracuse University Press, May 1, 2004

The house of ousted Prime Minister Mosaddeq lies in ruins after a prolonged assault by coup forces, including several tanks. (Stephen Langlie, courtesy of Mark Gasiorowski)

Several coup participants gather. Front row, from left: Ardeshir Zahedi (the prime minister’s son, later ambassador to Washington), Abbas Farzanegan, Fazlollah Zahedi, Nader Batmanqelich, Hedayatollah Guilanshah. Nematollah Nassiri, who attempted to serve Mosaddeq with a firman from the Shah, is directly behind the prime minister. (www.iichs.org)

Have the British Been Meddling with the FRUS Retrospective Volume on 1953?

Foreign Office Worried over “Very Embarrassing” Revelations, Documents Show

The United Kingdom sought to expunge “very embarrassing” information about its role in the 1953 coup in Iran from the official U.S. history of the period, British documents confirm. The Foreign Office feared that a planned State Department publication would undermine U.K. standing in Iran, according to declassified records posted on the National Security Archive’s Web site today.

The British censorship attempt happened in 1978, but London’s concerns may play a role even today in holding up the State Department’s long-awaited history – even though U.S. law required its publication years ago.

The declassified documents, from the Foreign Office (Foreign and Commonwealth Office since 1968), shed light on a protracted controversy over crucial gaps in the State Department’s authoritative Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS) series. The blank spots on Iran involve the CIA- and MI6-backed plot to overthrow the country’s prime minister, Mohammad Mosaddeq. Six decades after his ouster, some signs point to the CIA as the culprit for refusing to allow basic details about the event to be incorporated into the FRUS compilation.[1]

Recently, the CIA has declassified a number of records relating to the 1953 coup, including a version of an internal history that specifically states the agency planned and helped implement the coup. (The National Security Archive obtained the documents through the U.S. Freedom of Information Act.) This suggests that ongoing CIA inflexibility over the FRUS volume is not so much a function of the agency’s worries about its own role being exposed as a function of its desire to protect lingering British sensitivities about 1953 – especially regarding the activities of U.K. intelligence services. There is also evidence that State Department officials have been just as anxious to shield British interests over the years.

Regardless of the reasons for this continued secrecy, an unfortunate consequence of withholding these materials is to guarantee that American (and world) public understanding of this pivotal episode will remain distorted. Another effect is to keep the issue alive in the political arena, where it is regularly exploited by circles in Iran opposed to constructive ties with the United States.

Background on FRUS and the Mosaddeq Period

By statute, the FRUS series is required to present “a thorough, accurate, and reliable documentary record” of American foreign policy.[2] That law came about partly as a consequence of the failure of the original volume covering the Mosaddeq period (published in 1989) to mention the U.S. role in his overthrow. The reaction of the scholarly community and interested public was outrage. Prominent historian Bruce Kuniholm, a former member of State’s Policy Planning Staff, called the volume “a fraud.”[3]

The full story of the scandal has been detailed elsewhere,[4] but most observers blamed the omission on the intelligence community (IC) for refusing to open its relevant files. In fact, the IC was not alone. Senior Department officials joined in opposing requests for access to particular classified records by the Historical Advisory Committee (HAC), the group of independent scholars charged with advising the Department’s own Office of the Historian.[5] The head of the HAC, Warren Cohen, resigned in protest in 1990 citing his inability to ensure the integrity of the FRUS series. Congress became involved and, in a display of bipartisanship that would be stunning today (Democratic Senator Daniel P. Moynihan getting Republican Jesse Helms to collaborate), lawmakers passed a bill to prevent similar historical distortions. As Cohen and others pointed out, while Moscow was disgorging its scandalous Cold War secrets, Washington was taking a distinctly Soviet approach to its own history.[6]

By 1998, State’s historians and the HAC had decided to produce a “retrospective” volume on the Iran coup that would help to correct the record. They planned other volumes to cover additional previously airbrushed covert activities (in Guatemala, the Congo, etc.). It was a promising step, yet 15 years later, while a couple of publications have materialized, several others have not – including the Iran volume.[7]

Institutional Delays

A review of the available minutes of HAC meetings makes it apparent that over the past decade multiple policy, bureaucratic, and logistical hurdles have interfered with progress. Some of these are routine, even inevitable – from the complications of multi-agency coordination to frequent personnel changes. Others are more specific to the realm of intelligence, notably a deep-seated uneasiness in parts of the CIA over the notion of unveiling putative secrets.

In the Fall of 2001, an ominous development for the HO gave a sense of where much of the power lay in its relationship with the CIA. According to notes of a public HAC meeting in October 2001, the CIA, on instructions from the Director of Central Intelligence, decided unilaterally “that there could be no new business” regarding FRUS until the two sides signed an MOU. Agency officials said the document would address legitimate IC concerns HAC members worried it would mainly boost CIA control over the series. The agency specifically held up action on four volumes to make its point, while HAC historians countered that the volumes were being “held hostage” and the HO was being forced to work “under the threat of ‘blackmail’.”[8]

The CIA held firm and an agreement emerged in May 2002 that, at least from available information, appears to bend over backwards to give the IC extraordinary safeguards without offering much reassurance about key HO interests. For instance, the MOU states that the CIA must “meet HO’s statutory requirement” – hardly something that seems necessary to spell out. At the same time, it allows the CIA to review materials not once, but again even after a manuscript has passed through formal declassification, and once more after it is otherwise in final form and ready for printing. In the context of the disputed Iran volume, HAC members worried about the “random” nature of these provisions which gave the agency “a second bite at the apple.”[9] The implication is that the CIA will feel little obligation to help meet the HO’s legal requirement if it believes its own “equities” are at stake. (This of course may still affect the Iran volume, currently scheduled for 2014 publication.)

Is It the British?

As mentioned, the CIA has begun to release documentation in recent years making explicit its connection to the Mosaddeq overthrow. Even earlier, by 2002, the State Department and CIA jointly began compiling an Iran retrospective volume. These are not signs of a fundamental institutional unwillingness to publish American materials on the coup (although parts of the CIA continued to resist the notion). The HO even tried at least twice previously to organize a joint project with the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office on Iran, but the idea evidently went nowhere.[10]

In 2004, two years later, the State Department’s designated historian finished compiling the volume. According to that historian, he included a number of records obtained from research at the then-Public Record Office in London. Among his findings was “material that documents the British role.” He added that he had also located State Department records “that illustrate the British role.”[11] By no later than June 2006, the Iran volume had entered the declassification queue. At the June 2006 HAC session, CIA representatives said “they believed the committee would be satisfied with the [declassification] reviews.”

Up to that point, the agency’s signals seemed generally positive about the prospects of making public previously closed materials. But in the six years since, no Iran volume has emerged. Even State’s committee of historians apparently has never gotten a satisfactory explanation as to why.[12]

When the IC withholds records, “sources and methods” are often the excuse. The CIA is loath to release anything it believes would reveal how the agency conducts its activities. (For many years, the CIA kept secret the fact that it used balloons to drop leaflets over Eastern Europe during the Cold War, and would not confirm or deny whether it compiled biographical sketches of Communist leaders.) On the other hand, clandestine operations have been named in more than 20 other FRUS publications.[13] One of these was the retrospective volume on PBSUCCESS, the controversial overthrow of Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala in 1954. Furthermore, the agency has released troubling materials such as assassination manuals that demonstrate how to murder political opponents using anything from “edge weapons” to “bare hands.” In 2007, in response to a 15-year-old National Security Archive FOIA request, the CIA finally released its file of “family jewels” detailing an assortment of infamous activities. from planning to poison foreign leaders to conducting illegal surveillance on American journalists.

If the agency felt it could part with such high-profile sources and methods information, along with deeply embarrassing revelations about itself, why not in the Iran case? Perhaps the British are just saying no, and their American counterparts are quietly going along.

State Department Early Warning – 1978

The FCO documents in this posting (Documents 22-35) strongly support this conclusion. Theytell a fascinating story of transatlantic cooperation and diplomatic concern at a turbulent time. It was a State Department official who first alerted the FCO to plans by the Department’s historians to publish an official account of the 1953 coup period. The Department’s Iran expert warned that the records could have “possibly damaging consequences” not only for London but for the Shah of Iran, who was fighting for survival as he had 25 years earlier (Document 22). Two days later, FCO officials began to pass the message up the line that “very embarrassing things about the British” were likely to be in the upcoming FRUS compilation (Document 23). FCO officials reported that officers on both the Iran and Britain desks at State were prepared to help keep those materials out of the public domain, at least for the time being (Document 33). Almost 35 years later, those records are still inaccessible.

The British government’s apparent unwillingness to acknowledge what the world already knows is difficult for most outsiders to understand. It becomes positively baffling when senior public figures who are fully aware of the history have already acknowledged London’s role. In 2009, former Foreign Secretary Jack Straw publicly remarked on Britain’s part in toppling Mosaddeq, which he categorized as one of many outside “interferences” in Iranian affairs in the last century.[14] Yet, present indications are that the U.K. government is not prepared to release either its own files or evidently to approve the opening of American records that might help bring some degree of closure to this protracted historic – and historiographical – episode.

[1] A recent article drawing attention to the controversy is Stephen R. Weissman, “Why is U.S. Withholding Old Documents on Covert Ops in Congo, Iran?” Christian Science Monitor, March 25, 2011. (http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2011/0325/Why-is-US-withholding-old-documents-on-covert-ops-in-Congo-Iran )

[2] Section 198, Public Law 102-138.

[3] Bruce Kuniholm, “Foreign Relations, Public Relations, Accountability, and Understanding,” American Historical Association, Perspektivlar, May-June 1990.

[4] In addition to the Kuniholm and Weissman items cited above, see also Stephen R. Weissman, “Censoring American Diplomatic History,” American Historical Association, Perspectives on History, September 2011.

[5] Joshua Botts, Office of the Historian, U.S. Department of State, “‘A Burden for the Department’?: To The 1991 FRUSStatute,” February 6, 2012,http://history.state.gov/frus150/research/to-the-1991-frus-statute.

[6] Editorial, “History Bleached at State,” The New York Times, May 16, 1990.

[7] Retrospective compilations on Guatemala (2003) and the intelligence community (2007) during the 1950s have appeared collections on the Congo and Chile are among those that have not.

[13] Comments of then-FRUS series editor Edward Keefer at the February 26-27, 2007, HAC meeting,http://history.state.gov/about/hac/february-2007.

[14] Quoted in Souren Melikian, “Show Ignores Essential Questions about Iranian King’s Role,” The International Herald Tribune, February 21, 2009.


Videoni tomosha qiling: Britaniya sobiq elchisi Kreg Murrey bolajak saylovlar va Shavkat Mirziyoyev haqida fikr bildirdi (Dekabr 2021).

Video, Sitemap-Video, Sitemap-Videos