was Iran better off under the Shah?

The electoral protests in Iran this summer showed Iran wasn't a backward country like the media led many Americans and Europeans to believe, this year also marks 30 years of Iran as an Islamic Republic, however during a summer focused closely on Iran a lot has been stated of Iran being better in the 1970's at one point promoting the Shah's son of all people!



But was Iran really better in the 1970's?

The second half of the 1970's saw the United States coming out of the Vietnam War and further militarize Iran, the Shah Reza Pahlavi was in power for a long time, after having all political opposition eliminated in a CIA and MI6 backed coup in 1953, the Shah was technically therefore a dictator over his people.

That being said the Shah's time as a dictator didn't mean his people weren't exactly that badly off, life in the big cities did see opportunity for the younger generation and through this Iran was becoming modernized and westernized very rapidly throughout the 1970's.



But the Shah had in turn alienated political and religious groups throughout the country, while he claimed that his women had shorter skirts than those in Paris, he was in turn attempting to sweep his real problems under the rug.

In the late 70's Carter had stated that Iran was a powerful and stable ally in one of the more troubled parts of the world his words reflecting how the Shah had secured Iran for America's use as a large buffer against the spread of communism.

While Khomeini was forced into exile (later to Paris) the Shah had his armed forces breakup his protests with his army (the fifth largest in the world at the time) at one stage slaughtering 100 people, this wasn't something that was to have been forgotten, but the people had a name to rally behind, Khomeini was representing everything those repressed wanted giving them a will that was near impossible to break.



The Shah had lived apart from his people, he was kept in power by a vicious security force, however Khomeini had bought the people behind him, after the Shah had fled leaving the army in command Khomeini returned promising the people freedom to religion and a republic, the revolution had then taken full swing, in Tehran police stations and military outposts were attacked, guerrillas gaining a large amount of arms, with the military in disorder and tatters former Shah generals and army officers were purged shortly after surrendering.



It took merely over ten days, after they were refused the return of the Shah (to trial and execute for treason) Islamic students who seized the US embassy were given the go ahead to continue with it leading to the 444 day hostage crisis with the United States, this showed the US to be literally powerless as proven by the ill fated Operation Eagle Claw, it destroyed any hope Jimmy Carter had of winning a second term as president.

However the Iranians did release the hostages in the first hour of Ronald Reagans presidency showing just for some time they were eager to once again open up relations with the United States like any other country.

However this was not to be!
Instead the US tried to break the will that rallied the Iranian people together to free themselves (sound familiar) by brutal economic sanctions bullying anyone that attempted to trade with Iran and now trying that on the ultimate scale.

The Iranian revolution had put to power a new government that represented the majority, even though some still say that tying religion and politics into government isn't a good idea, post revolution Iran (like Cuba) had increased literacy rates, a better health care system and the lowest ever infant mortality rates, calling Iran liberal under the Shah would be false, he was a brutal dictator behind the lines and did truly repress his people and their spirit.

The revolution was massively popular for mainly that reason.

if only the US and Iran could get on!

It's been 30 years since the 1979 Islamic Revolution that ousted the Shah, it would be an understatement to say that Iran and the US didn't get on, since then the Islamic Republic of Iran has sponsored groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas and since the end of the Imposed War have been building long range ballistic missiles (Shahabs) and been trying to develop nuclear energy.

Now judging from Operation Opera in 1981 an operation in which the Israeli Air Force bombed an Iraqi nuclear reactor they are neither

a.) worried that the Arabs are trying to build nuclear weapons or
b.) think its fair they're the only ones with nuclear weapons or
c.) don't want the Arabs to have nuclear energy to power the homes of millions of people!



I've written what I think of Iranian missile tests before, if they want to test missiles let them, who are we to judge!

The last eight years also saw Iran surrounded by potential enemies, even though for a brief moment they helped the US against the Taliban, the Iranian backed Northern Alliance allied with the USAF which bombed them a route to Kabul so they could seize the capital city, not long after that 250,000 American soldiers led the invasion of Iraq to topple Saddam Husseins government, Iran became the sand in their underpants when they helped make mines for the Iraqi insurgency which could pierce through the armour of US Humvees on patrol.



The Iranian backed S'hia militia caused more coalition deaths in Iraq around the time of 2005 than any of the present Iraqi insurgents, to be honest with you I never saw a problem with this, I mean when the present regime rose to power in Iran the Americans and Europeans gave Saddam Hussein's Iraq weapons, chemical warfare shells which killed hundreds of Iranians instantly at a time, maybe this to them was pay back since the west wasn't talking to them.

And apart from that heavy sanctions from the United States and any Europeans found trading with Iran punished by America shows Iran is almost self sufficient in everything, but they have problems, such as keeping their passenger planes from falling out of the sky.

Apart from that if Iran and the west actually did get on we would have nearly twice as much oil to import as we do today from Saudi Arabia and Iraq, some 40% of the worlds reserves flows through the Strait of Hormuz, Iranian controlled waters and they have threatened to close that vital strait off if the US or Israel attack them, the world economy would be then crippled overnight!

And the sad truth is that Iran has the right to be this hostile towards the US especially considering the fact the revolution was because the CIA helped the Shah have dictatorial powers over the 70 million or so Iranian people for nearly 30 years!

For relations to normalize between Iran and the west they make these fair demands:



* That the United States accept the legitimacy of the 1979 revolution,

* Not interfere in Iran's internal affairs,

* Deal with the Iranian regime on the basis of "respect and equality."

* Lifting U.S. economic sanctions,

* End to U.S. military presence in the neighboring countries of Iraq and Afghanistan

* An end to one-sided support for Israel

and a fair reparation for damages caused to the Islamic Republic from:

* The US supplied chemical weapons responsible for the death of many of the 1,000,000 Iranians that died in the Iran Iraq War

* Damage caused from the anti Iran terror group the MKO.

* Release of frozen Iranian assets in the United States

* The shooting down of Iran Air Flight 655 by a US missile destroyer.

* US UAV overflights of Iranian air space

* An apology for the US backed 1953 coup.

* And reparation for the damage caused by US backed western economic sanctions.

The US demands border around the Iranians to stop trying to build WMD's, stop being a threat to its neighboring Arab countries (as if the US isn't a threat to world security and peace), to stop threatening to "wipe Israel off the map" (that lie is just getting old!) and to stop sponsoring terrorist organizations.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at that one, I think they are referring to Hezbollah, the organization Iran set up in Lebanon in 1982 because Israel was invading their country, when people defend their country against aggressive foreign invaders the politically correct term is freedom fighters!

Obama's role in diplomacy isn't singing 'Bomb Iran' but rather talking without addressing any of the points Iran wants to and further wasting their time and slowing down any hope of good US Iranian relations.

Maybe a good role of diplomacy would be to, start talking about what they want!