Mansoureh Ebrahimi

British Interest in Iran’s Oil: Prelude to Conflict

Historical studies on the twentieth century indicate that Britain, as a significant world power, did much to rewrite history in the Middle East, especially Iran. Many authors have called attention to Iran’s geopolitical location and massive oil reserves as causes for regional quarrels that did not actually bring prosperity to Iranians but merely covered the royal family’s expenses. Other scholars hint at British intentions to reap oil benefits and practise hegemony at Iranian expense. Literature on the Iranian oil industry prior to its nationalisation indicates that the D’Arcy Concession of 1901—later named the Anglo-Persian Oil Company (APOC) in 1908 and the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC) in 1933—was intimately tied to Great Britain. When the oil was exploited by the Abadan refinery, British economic interests increased annually until early 1951, when the Majlis (Majlis-i Shūrā-yi Millī or parliament) unanimously voted to nationalise the industry under Dr. Mohammad Mosaddeq (Dr. Mohammad Mosaddeq’s name is spelled in this book according to Encyclopaedia Britannica; at: http://global.britannica.com/biography/Mohammad-Mosaddeq.), leader of the nationalist movement who was committed to re-establishing a democratic constitutional monarchy. The 70-years-old patriot and secular anti-imperialist nationalist was Iran’s prime minister (PM) from 28 April 1951 to 16 July 1952 and, after a nearly unanimous vote of the Majlis, from 21 July 1952 to 19 August 1953. Some Iranian scholars argue that his tenure at this critical juncture was a pivotal factor in Iran’s history.

On Iran’s Eastern Borders: Origins and Consecutive Treaties with the British During the Nineteenth Century

This chapter examines various treaties between Iran and Britain during the nineteenth century. It discusses the imposition of unjust treaties by regional and western powers as pacts that eventually separated Herat from Iran, a traditional component of the Persian Empire from ancient days. Moreover, Iranians, though not intimate with Afghans, nevertheless regarded their people as close tribal relatives with similar languages, religion and culture. Long before Afghanistan independence, and even after it, Afghans paid taxes, ransoms and tributes to the Iranian government. After its long history as part of Iran, Herat became independent by British cunning, and for the first time in its modern history, Afghanistan became an independent nation by means of British impositions.

Introduction: The Russian Heartland Versus the British World Island

The themes discussed hold meaningful connections between geography, state power (economic, military and political) and political decision-making in the scramble between Russia and Britain to control and delineate Persian territory. The objective of our introduction is to examine political geography within the context of nineteenth-century colonial contests for power, influence, territory and resources.

Conclusion: The Geopolitical Struggle for Iran, Central Asia and the Caspian Sea Basin

The authors have presented various issues related to Iran’s geopolitical significance for the last four hundred-plus years. Iran has consistently attracted the interests of rival imperial powers, especially Russia and Britain, in an ongoing scramble for the dominion and control of its lands and resources. From the early nineteenth century through to 1970, Iran lost several territories due to this activity.

Economic, Political, and Strategic Issues in Iran–Turkey Relations, 2002–2015

This article assesses the effects in terms of economic, political, and cross-border relations between Iran and Turkey after the Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi (AKP) came to power and examines how and to what extend Turkey intervened in several regional equations while balancing its Western advantages for its national benefit with a clear view toward achieving specific goals. Iran also reaped several positive outcomes even as regional tensions increased. The findings highlight that to manage Western strategic goals in its new international niche, Turkey optimized every potential opportunity for global bargaining to its benefit. Turkey’s relations with Iran were carefully balanced by its Western designs through the calculated applications of choices in various fields of Iran’s foreign policy.

Politics of Oil and Natural Gas vis-à-vis the Foreign Policy of Iran

Abstract: This study discusses the relationship of Iran’s oil and gas resources with its foreign policy. Because these resources play a major role in government power, they serve as a major focus of Iran’s governmental policy and relations with other countries. Our review led us to conclude that despite Iran’s abundant reserves – the world’s fourth-largest crude oil and largest natural gas reserves-international powers influenced the country’s foreign policy sufficiently for Iran to decrease its oil production. The authors will demonstrate how fluctuations in oil and natural gas production were the outcome of a globalized structure that affected instability in Iran’s foreign policy in specific ways. Our conceptual investigation of energy politics after the 1979 revolution revealed different policies that caused numerous concerns for the new government. While Iran’s politicians strove to retain the Islamic Republic above all, both doctrine and foreign policy revolved circuitously from a radical 1979 Revolution position to renewed radical position in 2005 with two intermediate shifts in position. One was pragmatic shift in the late 1980s, and the second took a more moderate tone in late 1990s by focusing almost entirely on the production of oil and natural gas.

Decisive Crackdown and Concluding Remarks

The events discussed below refer to an intensely dynamic Iranian society, especially with regard to political movements. The political status of contemporary Iran has been uniquely fragile, influenced by politicians, the clergy and popular movements. Reforms were much needed at the time (and are needed at present too) to keep pace with globalisation and the effects of extremism. The significant lesson from Mosaddeq’s time is that great powers constantly strive to maintain their hegemony. Although Iranian aspirations were high and their leader did his utmost to establish an independent government, several actors contributed to his ouster after a coup. Self-serving opportunists from various groups, under the influence of subtle British interferences returned the ‘old royalist guard’ to power. The clergy, who naively replaced national aspirations with the age-old religious ploy attended by traditional elite, played a crucial role. Thus, the ultimate challenge Iranians still face is accomplishing their dream of becoming a modern democratic and progressive nation. New developments since the 1980s have offered much optimism and hope for freedom and prosperity through revolution, even if they were short-lived. Since the late twentieth century to the present, reformist movements tried to offer better prospects.

British Retaliation After the Nationalisation of Iran’s Oil

The efforts of the Majlis to nationalise the oil industry strained Iran’s relations with Britain and led to a catastrophe as the latter took extraordinary measures to maintain status quo and to secure their enormous Iranian assets. They refused to comply with the Iranian government and launched aggressive responses including the filing of an official complaint against Dr. Mosaddeq’s government with the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to which the court responded saying Iran had an oil agreement with a British company rather than with the British government. The case was deemed unsuitable for a court established as an arbiter between governments. Thereafter, British warships in the Persian Gulf stopped the passage of all Iranian oil tankers, thus forming a blockade to prevent all foreign trade. In addition, the larger international oil companies joined the embargo over growing concerns that the nationalisation of Iran’s oil would set an undesirable precedent. The British launched intelligence operations with a view to overthrow Dr. Mosaddeq’s government when all negotiation attempts collapsed. Their spies even selected a new PM and purchased the support of opposition groups. Eventually, and especially after the expulsion of British workers, the boycott yielded untenable economic and political results. What follows is a detailed retrospective review of these and related events.

Diverse Strategies Solidify Amid Anti-Mosaddeq Sentiment

The British learned from the uprising of 21 July 1952 (30 Tir 1331) that they needed greater control over Iran’s army and an intensification of divergence and antagonism among Dr. Mosaddeq’s supporters, which would work in favour of his political opponents. If the Iranian people had held to their alliances of 21 July 1952, foreign impositions could have been dismissed. However, conspirators observed the strength of the solidarity among those associated with Dr. Mosaddeq and immediately set about weakening it. The impact of such subversive measures was felt by different groups including the Durbar, the clergymen and the Majlis. This chapter shows how Dr. Mosaddeq’s government responded and then projected its foreign policy, particularly during and after devastating conflicts and internal political tensions inspired by the Anglo-American alliance. The British strategy consciously focused on creating a chaotic social and political milieu designed to implement the collapse of Dr. Mosaddeq’s government. The coup was meticulously planned and finally accomplished on 28 February 1953 (9 Esfand 1331).

The battle of manzikert in 1071 a.d and its consequences to the Byzantine empire

This study aims to analyze the battle of Manzikert in 1071 A.D, and to examine its consequences on the Byzantine Empire. The methodology used in this article are primary sources namely manuscripts, historical records as well as secondary sources. The impact of Manzikert battle which occurred between the Byzantine Empire and the Seljuk State in 1071 A.D. indicates the powers and forces of the Byzantine Empire were destroyed economically and militarily. Actually, it is a turning point in the history of Christian-Muslim conflict. The Byzantine Empire started to set its eyes on the Catholic West to save it from dangers of the Islamic State and heathenish dangers represented by Pechenegs and Turkmen. However, it was not able anymore to defend itself after this battle. Hence, Manzikert battle increased Byzantine internal confusion and helped the Seljuk to interfere onto the Empire affairs. Finally, this study reveals that the Byzantine Empire was beginning to end from 1071 to 1204 A.D.