Was the Iranian Revolution inevitable?

[hx87]

Well yes, but there's a basis for why such anti-Western ideas exist, which is that the West can choose their own leaders, while we cannot truly do so...

So IYO it would have been better to let the Soviets pull off their version of the 1953 coup, let Iran be somewhat pro-Soviet for ~25 years while losing legitimacy, then wait for a revolution where the revolutionaries chant "Death to the Soviet Union"?

Legitimacy can be won, albeit slowly, as pretty much every foreign-supported revolution showed. The Shah had plenty of time to win his, but he failed.

 

[Realpolitik]

After a certain point in the 70s, yes, I believe so. It could have had a different outcome, but something was going to blow.

 

[yourworstnightmare]

Avoid 1953 Crisis and Mossadegh Remained in Power or Khomeini never Existed and Butterflying 1979 Iranian Revolution, Persecution of Iranian Sunnis, Iran-Iraq War, Gulf War and Iraq War

Iran would be Pro-US Country like Turkey

Iran would be Better off Without Khomeini

Mossadegh was not pro-west at all. So Iran would not be pro-US with him in charge.

 

[M. Adolphe Thiers]

The Shah failed the balancing act so many rulers who are deposed in revolutions. He acted like a strongman like his father, but was really timid and sensitive. He wasn't callous enough to act like Saddam Hussein and wanted the public's approval.

He was also paranoid after the coup in 1953. After that he went from being a firm anti-communist to a paranoid nut expecting the Red army to depose him any second. He wanted liberalization, yet he didn't trust the liberals enough to have them as allies, because the fear that the Tudeh was lurking ready to strike. Part of the reason Khomeini was so successful was he had repressed the left-wing opposition so effectively.

The revolution was far from inevitable, it was a series of mistakes that doomed the regime.

 

[M. Adolphe Thiers]

Mosaddegh was a pretty poor leader. He'd subverted the semi-democratic system that had placed him in power and was ruling by decree when he was overthrown. As you stated he alienated his support on the Left and on the Right and through his own actions became politically isolated, creating the perfect opportunity for intervention by the US or the USSR. Not to mention that the British were willing to make significant concessions and give the Iranians all the Majlis had asked for when they originally voted for nationalization, but he wouldn't end the crisis and in the process alienated the originally pro-Iranian United States which had hoped that the British and Iranians would reach a deal similar to the one between the Arabian-American Oil Company and the Saudis. There's also the fact of the matter that he came to power because his supporters murdered the Prime Minster Razmara (who unlike Mosaddegh was actually working towards democratization) and threatened to kill the Shah, forcing the Shah to appoint Mosaddegh to try and placate National Front.

FINALLY! Another person well read enough to not drink the Mossadegh kool aid!

 

[SlideAway]

FINALLY! Another person well read enough to not drink the Mossadegh kool aid!

Also, the 1979 Revolution wasn't initially *that* anti-American. It became much more anti-American after the Shah fell. Khomeini was deeply anti-American, and as he consolidated power, he and his followers instigated a period of nationalist hysteria that took an increasingly anti-American direction.

The Hostage Crisis was crucial to this; both sides (the Iranians and the Americans) unwisely fanned a nationalist hysteria around it which ultimately backfired on Carter and helped the revolutionaries oust the moderates and consolidate clerical rule.

The other thing to keep in mind is that the Shah himself was not really an American dupe. Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, the Shah, while a major US ally, pursued a fairly nationalistic and independent foreign policy.

 

[oreocruncher]

Mossadegh was not pro-west at all. So Iran would not be pro-US with him in charge.

Well, he wasn't pro-Soviet either...I don't think...
I think he was a bit like Nehru in that regard...

 

[voss749]

The 1979 Revolution probably can be avoided, but for the Shah not be overthrown by some kind of coup/ revolution... you basically need him to be a very different man and his regime to be very different than OTL.

Or have him die sooner and have the son inherit the throne say 1976-1977.

 

[Bmao]

Well, he wasn't pro-Soviet either...I don't think...
I think he was a bit like Nehru in that regard...

I think a better comparison would have been to Nasser, as Mossadegh seemed like a man who had great personal charisma and had a ability to manipulate the masses. One can also compare the nationalization of Iran's oil to Egypt's nationalization of the Suez, and had Mossadegh succeeded in preventing the coup, he would have been in a similar light in being perceived as a man who stood up to colonial powers, and who probably would have tried to play the US and the Soviets against each other to achieve Iran's policy goals.

Of course, as his rule progressed his early democratization probably would have devolved to some sort of authoritarian rule.

 

[TickTock The Witch's Dead]

Not if the shah was smart to listen to his people.

 

[GeneralInTheShell]

A good PoD to avoid the revolution and avoid the appearance of the Shah being a puppet of the west would be to have Prime Minister Haj Ali Razmara manage to ratify the supplemental oil agreement between Iran and the AIOC and then not get assassinated.

I think a better comparison would have been to Nasser, as Mossadegh seemed like a man who had great personal charisma and had a ability to manipulate the masses. One can also compare the nationalization of Iran's oil to Egypt's nationalization of the Suez, and had Mossadegh succeeded in preventing the coup, he would have been in a similar light in being perceived as a man who stood up to colonial powers, and who probably would have tried to play the US and the Soviets against each other to achieve Iran's policy goals.

Of course, as his rule progressed his early democratization probably would have devolved to some sort of authoritarian rule.

His rule was already becoming increasingly authoritarian when he was overthrown. He kept trying to get his emergency powers extended and was ruling by decree. For Mossadegh to be remembered as Iran's Nasser, he's going to need to stick around for a while and I really don't see that happening. Ayatollah Kashani had stopped supporting him and he'd alienated the Tudeh. His popular support was beginning to dry up and unlike Nasser, he didn't have enough support in the military to keep power by force.

 

[Michel Van]

The Revolution in 1979 was the result of several factors

The Shah pushed his Westernization of Iran, to fast. Who opposed that was killed by the Secret police (the reason why Khomeini went in exile)
The Shah governmental machinery was highly corrupt
A gigantic gap between the Rich and poor in Iran during Shah reign,
This was encouraged by economical deal, the Shah had with Europeans and American oil companies (the reason for 1953 Putsch, who brought the Shah in absolut power)
Most of that profit went to oil companies and rest to the Shah , left not much for Iranian people.

This let to revolution and nationalization of Oil infrastructure in Iran
for Hate of Iran revolutionary toward USA, the US Support the Shah reign and US oil companies making the biggest profit with Iran oil.

for more on that topic and alternate scenarios see this You tube video .

 

[Maponus]

Why were the US giving Iran such a generous amount of weapons? What was the main reason?

Iran was one of the key-pins of CENTO, the Middle Eastern NATO, which was intended to be primary stabilising force in the region as Britain gradually withdrew. They didn't just sit around with all that equipment either. Iranian troops played a key roll in stopping Communism spreading into the Persian Gulf via the South Yemeni Marxist insurgency against the Omani Sultan in Dhofar, effectively replacing the old British garrisons as the primary foreign manpower for the Sultan's regime there. It was also the only out-of-the-closet and proud ally Israel has ever had in the region.