[eternalban]

I must object to your "puppet monarch" comment here. By the standards of 'puppetry' that we can discern from historic documents the Shah of Iran was no more of a puppet than a certain "poodle".

Do you always prefix "puppet minister" before say mentioning Tony Blair or any of the post Suez UK PMs?

People like you who in the tradition of "lingering propaganda" continue to cast calumny on the late Shah of Iran need to let us know what exactly is your definition of "puppet" and "overseas interests".

For example, "overseas" interests that held the alledged "puppet's" strings felt Iran choosing a path of industrialization was not acceptable in the 1960s. So the puppet gets industrialization support, including Iran's steel industry bootstrap, from the USSR. 1960s, btw.

"Overseas interests" also didn't want the oil producers from organizing and getting their act together. Wasn't the "puppet" one of the key figures behind the rise of OPEC? Remember that?

[pjc50]

From the point of view of the revolutionaries, who objected to "foreign influence". Regardless of how much the Shah was under American influence or Charles I under Papal influence, the perception that they were was used against them by their enemies.

(I have to say that running into a partisan defending the honor of the late Mohammad Reza Pahlavi on the internet is a new experience. I was sort of expecting someone to object that the claim that a Catholic monarch was a puppet of the Pope was sectarian - which it is, but again that's not my position but the position of the Cromwellians)

[eternalban]

final note regarding your "defending the honor of the late Mohammad Reza Pahlavi":

You should recognize that you denigrate the honor of an entire generation of thoughtful, intelligent, progressive Iranian men and women in industry and academy that very much believed in the Shah's program for Iran.

In fact, what is one saying about a nation when their king is declared a puppet?

[knolax]

> I have to say that running into a partisan defending the honor of the late Mohammad Reza Pahlavi on the internet is a new experience

That's a really unnecessary quip to make against GP, especially since you failed to address the substance of his argument.

[eternalban]

"I have to say that running into a partisan defending the honor of the late Mohammad Reza Pahlavi on the internet is a new experience."

Yeh, it's called "propaganda". As you can see, it works.

However you have chosen in your oblique reponse to not respond to a simple question: what is your definition of puppet? And how does Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi qualify per that standard?

Looking forward to your thoughtful response.

[laurencerowe]

I imagine being the beneficiary of the 1953 US/UK backed coup would qualify him for puppet status.

[eternalban]

Gee, I can reach back 14 centuries and name an Sassanid Shah that took refuge with Rome during a period of crisis and division in the Sassanid Empire. No one has ever accused Khosrow II of being a "puppet of Rome".

A sub-set of Iranian society (including military, and clergy) were on the side of the counter-coup that removed Dr. Mossadegh. These Iranians had a shared interest with the US and UK. That is it. And the main military players in the 50s were in fact purged by the 60s, when Shah started his White Revolution after assuming actual power in Iran.