Iran: An Island of Stability in a Sea of Turmoil

That’s what President Jimmy Carter called Iran when he was a guest of the Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, in 1977. Two years later the people overthrew him. So why was it an "island of stability"? Was it democracy? No. Was it freedom of speech and assembly? No. Were people free to address their grievances to the government? No again.


Let’s ask some more questions. Was it because the CIA overthrew the democratically elected government in 1953 and propped up a government under the Shah? Was it because we sold the Shah planes, ships and weapons? Was it because we sold him a “turn-key” CIA/NSA spy system? Was it because he was a dictator with absolute power over the people? Was it because the CIA had top-secret electronic spy sites in Iran watching over Soviet missile tests in the Caspian Sea? Was it because the CIA paid the Ayatollahs a lot of mullah to stay calm and not rock the political boat? It was probably all of the above and then some. We bought the stability. The only flaw in the plan, however, the Shah was unable to stay in power- even with all our support and money. The song, “Can’t buy me love” comes to mind here.


We lost control of Iran because we went “all in” with the dictator, not the people. The people didn’t like the Shah, but they were powerless to do anything about it. A real grass roots revolt took place. It grew rapidly- too rapidly for the state police to suppress it. In a matter of weeks the people overthrew the Shah. It reminds me of the French revolution- fast, brutal, and by the people. So, do they have freedom and democracy today? Some people might say- sort of, others would say absolutely not. What’s interesting though, they accept the government they have. It wasn’t pressed on them the way the Shah was. So even though it may not have changed their freedoms and democracy, they live with it. They actually have maintained stability in a theology-based government.


So why bring this up? It’s coming up on 30 years since the Islamic Revolution in Iran. There are similarities to Afghanistan. Afghanistan was also a theology-based government under the Taliban. They came into power after we supported them with stinger missiles to kick out the Soviets. They harbored al Qaeda, so we invaded and overthrew their government. We propped up a leader, and now expect the people to re-elect him, so we can have another “island of stability”, but the people aren’t buying it. They’re fighting to get their government back.


Eliminating al Qaeda is a noble goal. We should be unrelenting in our resolve to rid the world of terrorists. But we should admit the distinction between al Qaeda and Taliban. The Taliban are indigenous people of Afghanistan. Are we fighting the Taliban to rid the world of al Qaeda, or just to create another island of stability? It’s time we got out of Afghanistan and focus more on ridding the world of al Qaeda. We should be catching criminals, not overthrowing governments.


And stay tuned for more government intervention- another scary “island of stability” has the bomb- Pakistan. But we’ve been told not to worry; their military has it under control. Great.