This is what happened to the last time the United States forced the regime to change Iran
Iran on Monday hours before Iran attacked U.S. military bases at three U.S. nuclear facilities in Qatar, U.S. President Donald Trump said some experts feared that history could be repeated.
“Why not make an administration change?” Trump wrote in an article on the truth about the social media platform on Sunday afternoon.
For Mohamad Tavakoli-Targhi, a professor of Near and Middle Eastern civilization at the University of Toronto, the answer exists.
If the United States overturns the Iranian government again – Tavakoli-Targhi said: “This will cause greater chaos in the Middle East than people think.”
This is unlikely after Trump's claims in an article published Monday night, that Iran and Israel began bombing Iran's nuclear and military sites on June 13, and a ceasefire agreement has been reached. But this is not the first time the United States has been involved in the conflict in Iran.
Richard Haas, a former U.S. State Department official, said President Donald Trump's change to the Iranian regime is of no help. Haas said it was not a viable strategy and could cause more revenge from the Middle East countries.
What happened in 1953?
In 1953, a coup planned by the CIA forced Mohammad Mosaddegh, Iran's first democratically elected leader, to arrest the House of Representatives. This also led to the Islamic Revolution of 1979 and the repressive government that ruled the country today, according to experts who spoke with CBC News.
But replacing the government with external forces will put more turmoil in the region, they said.
“I just don't understand the game plan,” said Lucan Way, a professor of democracy at the University of Toronto. “My intuition is that it will make an unpopular regime even more popular.”
In August 1953, documents declassified by the CIA in 2013 revealed that the U.S. intelligence group overthrew Iranian Prime Minister Mosaddegh, which expressed sympathy for Shah of Shah of Shah of Shah of Shah of Shah of Shah.
Mosaddegh was arrested and then tried in Shah Military Court and convicted of treason. Pahavi restored his monarchy, which was sympathy for Western interests, namely Britain's control over Iran's oil reserves.
Mosaddegh was chosen as a commitment to nationalizing Iranian oil. At the time, the British-owned Anglo-Iranian oil company (now known as BP) shared only a small amount of profit with the country, which was dissatisfied.
The Red Panic of the 1950s
Despite the initial support of Mosaddegh’s desire and his Liberal government, it began to worry that he would be put under pressure from the Soviet Union, which fought for power in the global world order.
Wilson Chacko Jacob, a history professor at Concordia University in Montreal, said the goal was to give back to the people, especially in former colonial countries, which were easily seen as a step towards communism and thus pose a threat to their interests.
“The United States is seeing post-World War II efforts to defend itself to 'freedom', capital freedom bypassing freedom around the world,” he said. “Of course, by the end of World War II, most of the capital was in the United States.”
Jacob said the 1950s were also an era of “not complete” decolonization. Like Britain, ancient colonial forces were trying to hold on to power abroad. “this [was] Mainly a defense of global capitalism. ”
Today, many believe that Israel maintains the interests of the United States in the region. Others, however, believe that Benjamin Netanyahu was turbulent due to his own expansionist actions, such as allowing settlements in the Israeli-occupied West Bank to develop, and now seeking to control Gaza.
“The heart of conflict [between Israel and Iran] It is the ideological and political commitment of the Iranian state to the establishment of a Palestinian state. Otherwise, Iran is far from Israel [and] Tavakoli-Targhi said: “There is no reason to worry Israel.
Worry about nuclear development
Tavakoli-Targhi said the threat of the 1950s could be communism, the Soviet Union might be communism, the Soviet Union said the perceived threat had evolved into “Islamic fundamentalism, terrorism and nuclear weapons.”
Israel sees Iran's nuclear program as an existential threat, but both he and the University of Toronto noted that Israel has not yet signed a treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, which came into force in 1970, but Iran does.
Russia's invasion of Ukraine has increasingly sympathized with states without nuclear weapons, although Israel wants to pursue Iran's nuclear energy “makes meaningful.”
“Unless you are a big country that can defend its borders, nuclear weapons are a cheaper option as an insurance policy against foreign invasions,” he said.
After Iran's Pahlavi regained control of the Iranian parliament in 1953, he worked hard to gain legitimacy within his borders, and the religious movement advocated by Ruhollah Khomeini began to win recognition, which eventually led to the Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979.
“Part of the reason for putting the current regime in power is this anti-Americanism, which took root in 1953,” Way said.
Hamed Esmaeilion, former president of the PS752 Flight Family Association and Canadian Iranian human rights activist, shared his thoughts on the escalation of the Israel-Iran conflict. Esmaeilion lost his wife and daughter when Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps shot down Ukrainian International Airlines Flight 752 with two ground-to-air missiles, killing all 176 passengers in 2020.
