After World War II, it became clear to both the axis and the allied powers that the world can no longer afford another world war. World War II was a war in which the total number of civilians who perished far outweighs the number of soldiers who died. After the war, the United States of America lead the world in creating an institution to maintain the peace. And despite the numerous failures by the UN, it had been able to prevent another world war. This alone is a sign that if war is something we can create, then peace is also that which we can collectively create or maintain. So the United States had lead the world in creating an institution to prevent another war, it has helped negotiate peace treaties between countries around the world, for example, that between north and South Korea. The United States has done so many good things from maintaining the peace to ensuring that clean water flows in certain parts of the world where it is needed. But when it comes to foreign affairs, America has always acted based on its selfish interest. It is one thing to act based on one’s own interest, since that is what prosperity demands, but it is a whole different thing to substitute for the very ideals that America “stands” for around the world: Freedom, Equality and Justice for all. “For all” means every human being including the IRANIANS.
Shirin Ebadi’s Iran Awakening is by far, the most informative story that I have encountered on the living conditions in Iran Before, during and after the Islamic Revolution of 1979. Iran’s first democratically elected leader, according to Ebadi, “was tossed out of the government in a coup organized by the CIA and its puppet.” (Ebadi 13). The United States had helped organize the coup against Mohammed Mossadegh because he nationalized the Iranian oil, which gave the United States no window to manipulate the oil in Iran. Mossadegh represented a figure like Gandhi. He put his country first by nationalizing the oil resources, which until Mossadegh came to power, was exploited by Western firms at the expense of the Iranian people. To the Iranians, Mossadegh represented not just a political leader, but also a personal role model to commoners who saw him as “a beloved nationalist hero, a figure worthy of their zealous veneration, a leader fit to guide their great civilizations.” (Ebadi 4). And as Ebadi said, “Until the d’etat of 1953, it could be said that the Iranian people were effectively governed by their elected representatives.” (Ebadi 5).
The question I ask myself is, what would I say about Iran today, if the United States had simply “LEFT IT AND ITS PEOPLE ALONE?” There is absolutely every reason to believe that if Iran was left undisturbed by the Reagan Administration, Democracy would have flourished, freedom of speech, press and association will ring in every corner of Iran, and Iran with its nationalized oil industry would have become a richer, stronger and a more stable nation. Not only these, there would also be no room for any dictator to undermine democracy in the struggle for power. As we saw from Ebadi’s memoir, the problem started with the overthrow of the democratically elected leader. The shah, after assuming power, made very little effort to develop Iran and its people. Instead, the Shah fancied itself with entertaining the rest of the world. One of such was the spending of “$300 million on makeshift silk tent with marble bathrooms, and on food and wine for twenty-five thousand people flown in from Paris.” (Ebadi 23). This unnecessary spending, coupled with the inadequate attention paid to the Iranians by the Shah, ignited the Revolution in 1979. The new Regime of Hayatollah Khomeini betrayed the supporters of the revolution by failing to solve the problems they already faced, but instead, created new and complicated ones. so this goes back to my question of, what would become of Iran today if the Democratic Administration of Mossadegh was left undisturbed? Many good things would have come to pass but most of all, Democracy would have gained a ground firm enough to avoid any disturbance by a dictator.
But what do we hear about Iran today in America? Do we hear of Iran as a unfortunate victim of a greedy super power, or do we think of it as a nation that has no respect for human rights, no interest in the development of its own people, and a nation that knows no freedom or liberty. The world might soon forget what Ebadi’s memoir uncovers, but the Iranian people would never forget what happened on their soil in 1953, 1979, 1980 and 1984. We can’t change the world unless we changed ourselves. We can lead the world unless we lead ourselves. We can’t speak like saints but act like devils. This is what I call on the United States of America.
To be continued tomorrow.
Mohammed Adawulai,
Simon’s Rock.
