WI Democratic Iran had not ahd the cou in 53

anamarvelo

Banned
What would be a good PoD I wonder. Oh you'd have to butterfly away Eisenhower as president probably, which would mean changes back in the Truman administration.
eisenhower was the one who put the green light on the cou
turman told britain to stick where the sun don't shine when they asked him
 
POD: MacArthur dies a bit after Inchon, so Truman has three terms and doesn't start Ike's coup precedent.
 
Iran were going down the Indian road in the early 50is. Trying to balance between autocratic political leadership and trying to find a balance between democratic centralization/decentralization that suited both central leaders and local leaders personal authority. In this they also balanced between command economy and open market solutions, the nationalization attempts of AIOC is good example of this. A good POD is actually a combination of more savvy British diplomatic strategy in Persia and a series of renegotiations that sooth the egos of some Persian leaders and dampen public opinion would be enough to avoid the coup 53.

Democratic Persia post 53 would look like India whit Oil I guess. There is great pressure for social reforms, educational reforms and infrastructure investments. The oil money would also give Persia a good national finance but might make the corruption problem worse. I would guess the oil trade would make the western powers reluctant to let USSR attack Persia in late 50is early 60is. But I would guess Pakistan more likely to turn towards USSR ITTL as it would be sandwiched between India and Democratic Persia that both would not be all that friendly whit it. Going for more help from USSR is a good counter weight to this as neither would be “communist enough” for USA to give Pakistan support but they are “capitalist enough” to be a thorn in USSR side to finally answer Ali Khan overtures for partnership in late 50is.

Pakistan coming under Soviet influence will butterfly a lot of things in both India and Persia so after that I can’t guess how things will turn out. Development in middle east will also be much different whit a Democratic successful Muslim nation to counter all the dictatorships (and Israel) in the region. Religious development of Islam is also going to be utterly changed by democratic successful institutions in Persia. This would also effect Indonesia and thousands of other small things that is utterly unpredictable.

I think the Islamic clergy would still be a reactionary force. IOTL the mullahs were very pro Shah at the time of the 53 coup.
 
It's certainly possible. I mean, the U.S. did force the British to give up the Suez to Egypt, despite Nasser's connections to the USSR. Maybe the USSR threatens to go to war with Britain over Iran if they attempt a coup, and the U.S., fearful of nuclear war, tell the British to back off?

Going by this logic, a lack of U.S. support in Iran could cause Britain to develop the same condition it did from the Suez Crisis. This could mean that Britain would pursue decolonization earlier. For a real dark-horse scenario, have it that Republican Iran borders a unified, democratic India (see "WI No Partition of India" thread for my thoughts on the subject) or that while decolonizing, Britain hands Kuwait over to Hashemite Iraq.
 
Top