[Forum Game] - Twilight Struggle

[m.equitum]

IMPERIAL STATE OF IRAN
Marā dād farmūd-o khod dāvar ast ​

THE POLITICS OF IRAN
A Prelude to the Royalist Restoration​

The Politics of Iran
Shifting Political Sands: Growing Power of the Shah​

In modern Iran, the Office of the Prime Minister, the Cabinet and Parliament [Majlis] continue to serve as the established instrument of power and government. The latter instrument, the Parliament, functions without an effective party system. Concepts of left or right, democrats or monarchists have not taken root in Iran, where politics is akin to shifting desert sands as one faction or another seeks to advance its narrow interests.

The Iranian Parliament​

Increasingly, however, amongst intellectual and popular circles alike, a strong Shah is viewed as a bulwark against factional turmoil. The prestige accrued to the monarchy in the wake of the Azerbaijan Crisis of 1946 had not only augmented the growing power of the Crown, but had forged an inextricable link between the Shah and the Army, an arm of the state that had its reputation tarnished by the aforementioned military debacle but now enjoyed something of a revitalisation, basking in the limelight alongside the Shah.

Prime Minister Razmara

The Rise and Fall of Prime Minister Razmara (1950 - 51)
All the King’s Men: The Shah’s Prime Minister​

Thus it came as no surprise when on 26 June 1950 the Shah appointed the former military chief, General Ali Razmara, as Prime Minister. Unlike previous premiers, Razmara was not Moscow’s or London’s man in Tehran, nor was he beholden to a particular faction in the legislature. He was the Shah’s man. Razmara’s eminent military reputation did not, however, carry over into the political sphere. In Moscow he was criticised as being in the pay of the British and Americans, in London he was berated for his alleged communist sympathies, and, most importantly, in Tehran he was expected [by the various court factions] to both preserve the status quo as well as enact far-reaching reforms.

Funeral of Prime Minister Razmara​

The divided Persian legislature could agree on one issue: the renegotiation of the country’s relationship with the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (A.I.O.C). Opposition to the company and its operations were echoed by all significant political groups. As such, Razmara’s support of a moderate solution allowed his domestic rivals to brand him as a traitor. Parliament rejected a profit-sharing proposal and convened the Assembly’s Special Oil Commission, chaired by Dr. Mosaddeq, which recommended nationalisation. Prime Minister Razmara challenged this recommendation with directness and vigor, dismissing the proposed nationalisation of the A.I.O.C as impracticable. For his staunch position against nationalisation, on 07 March 1951, Prime Minister Razmara was assassinated.

Prime Minister Mosaddeq

The Rise of Prime Minister Mosaddeq (1951 - 1953)
Home and Abroad: The Shah Eclipsed and the Shah Resplendent

Foreign Relations and the Nationalisation of the A.I.O.C (1951)​

The Persian Parliament came quickly to be dominated by one man, Dr. Mosaddeq. Having risen to prominence as the chairman of the parliamentary oil commission, and having secured for himself a loose-knit coalition, known as the Jabha-yi Milli (trans. The National Front), Mosaddeq gained daily in popularity in the streets and bazaars across Iran’s cities. The radiant glow of the Shah’s high estimation in the eyes of his people was eclipsed by the ever-increasing reputation of Mosaddeq. It was thus with grave misgivings the Shah yielded to the overwhelming tide of popular will and appointed Mosaddeq to the office of Prime Minister.

Notwithstanding his popularity at home, Mosaddeq’s perception abroad was hardly that of an eminent statesman. Unlike Nehru, India’s Harrow-educated parliamentarian, Mosaddeq was not well-regarded in London, and was viewed in some cases as a figure of fun. His excessive rhetoric has been seen as further evidence to the widely-held belief that Arabian passion often clouds pragmatism. Had Mosaddeq’s premiership been cast against a different tableau – that is, should it have transpired in a context other than the emerging Cold War – its comic elements would have taken pride of place. Nevertheless, the times are such that political deviations and experiments are inevitably cast within the milieu of cold calculation and constant mistrust that is part and parcel of the ongoing contest between East and West.

Prime Minister Mosaddeq announcing the nationalisation of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company​

While Mosaddeq’s fervent nationalism has fallen upon receptive ears at home, it has earned an increasingly unfavourable reception in London as well as Washington. It was well known that Mosaddeq could not rely upon the Shah’s support in the eviction of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. Nevertheless, the Prime Minister assumed that American petroleum interests would relish the opportunity to dislodge the British from their preeminent position in Iran. Although the United States voiced no objection when, on 01 May 1951, Prime Minister Mosaddeq announced the nationalisation of the A.I.O.C, the realities of the Cold War brought, by 1953, Washington more closely in line with London in opposing Mosaddeq.

The Bitter Quarrel with the Shah (1952)​

It was one thing not to have the Shah as a friend, it was quite another to turn the monarch into an enemy. Yet, with tensions brewing between Tehran and London, this is precisely what Mossadeq opted to do when in 1952 he insisted that the power to appoint the Minister of War rested within the purview of the prime-ministerial office. The Shah, relying on the traditional dignity of his title and the enduring loyalty of the military corps, rejected Mosaddeq’s encroaching influence within the Armed Forces.

Pro-Mosaddeq Supporters rally in Tehran​

Mosaddeq resigned in protest, accusing the Shah of violating the constitution. Violent riots ensued, and the Shah was forced to reinstate the wayward Prime Minister. In defiance and arrogance, Mosaddeq took the post of Minister of War for himself and set out to humble the Shah by launching a purge of the upper ranks of the officer corps and cutting the military budget by fifteen percent.

To the Victor Go the Spoils (1953)

A Triumphant Mosaddeq Celebrating the Nationalisation of the A.I.O.C​

Buoyed by popular support following the July 1953 Referendum, which accorded to the Prime Minister special extraordinary powers, Mosaddeq did not waver in his mission to humiliate the Shah. The Prime Minister nationalised the Shah’s private estates, reduced the funds allocated to the Royal Court, and brought royal charities under government surveillance. To add insult to injury, the Shah was prohibited from receiving diplomats, who would now conduct their business through the Foreign Ministry. The Shah’s glistening war medals and glowing international reputation did not prevent one British observer from commenting: “so much power is concentrated in the office of the Prime Minister and so little in the hands of the Shah.”​

​

​

 

[KeldoniaSkylar]

Le Beaujolais Nouveau est Arrivé!

The Beaujolais Wine Country​

At one past midnight on the 15th of November, hundreds of thousands of cases of Beaujolais Nouveau begin their journey from sleepy little towns in the Beaujolais Region to cities and towns across France and the world.
Beaujolais Nouveau began as local event for the people of Beaujolais and Lyons. Each fall the Beaujolais would arrive in the bars, cafes and bistros to much fanfare and patrons would receive their wine in pitchers filled from growers’ barrels. It is a wine made fast to drink, while the more traditional Beaujolais fermented at more leisured pace.

In 1951, Beaujolais Nouveau was officially recognized under the Appellation d'Origine Contrôlée, and by then had already become a popular drink in Paris. Resulting in somewhat of race to get the Beaujolais Nouveau out on the same date nation, and worldwide. Despite this rush to get to market, all grapes in the Beaujolais region must be hand-picked – the only region other than Champagne where hand harvest is mandatory.

What makes Beaujolais Nouveau so special? Beaujolais is about as similar to a white wine that a red wine can taste, as it pressed only three days after harvest, the phenolic compounds, particularly the tannins, have yet to develop, creating an easy to drink fruity wine. It is meant to be drunk chilled and gulped rather than sipped, it is enjoyed in high spirits rather than critiqued.

 

[m.equitum]

IMPERIAL STATE OF IRAN
Marā dād farmūd-o khod dāvar ast ​

THE POLITICS OF IRAN
The Royalist Restoration

President Eisenhower and Secretary of State Dulles authorising the Overthrow of Mosaddeq​

Shift in American Foreign Policy​

The election of President Eisenhower heralded a notable shift in American foreign policy regarding Iran. Whereas the Truman Administration had taken a growing interest in Persian affairs, the former president had been reluctant to act against Iran’s democratically elected government. President Eisenhower did not let such principles interfere with his pragmatism. It was increasingly clear that something had to be done about the troublesome politician Mosaddeq, and Eisenhower was prepared to carry out the task. The State Department soon joined the British Foreign Office – which had long been lobbying the White House for decisive action – in sponsoring the overthrow of Prime Minister Mosaddeq.

Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi​

Through secret correspondence with the young Shah, who had by this time vacated Tehran and taken up residence by the Caspian Sea in an effort to escape Mosaddeq’s stifling surveillance, a plot was hatched. Whereas the initial American proposal had been the simple elimination of Mosaddeq by assassination, with the still-popular Shah stepping in to fill the inevitable power vacuum, it was the British insistence that matters were “carried out properly” that prompted London and Washington to chart an altered course. The British insistence on propriety led to a plan that rested, to some degree, in legality, reliant, in no small measure, in the dubious and rarified nature of the law. It was agreed that the royal prerogative of the monarch to appoint and dismiss the Prime Minster – a prerogative that had been readily exercised by the Shah’s father but had since been reduced to a ceremonial power – would be resurrected as the legal instrument by which Persia would be rid of Mosaddeq.

General Zahedi [behind the Shah]​

Despite efforts by the Prime Minister to restrict the Shah’s communication with London and Washington, the C.I.A and M.I.6 maintained regular contact with the Persian king, who in mid-August signed a memorandum which at once dismissed Mosaddeq and appointed the loyal General Zahedi as Prime Minister. It is rumoured that the pen is mightier than the sword, yet if a stroke of a pen were sufficient to rid the world of troublesome men, the Shah of Iran would have dismissed Prime Minister Mosaddeq long ago. Sometimes a sword is needed. General Zahedi, a capable military commander and personal friend of the Shah, pledged his sword to the royalist cause, cementing further the ever-deepening ties between the military and the royal household.

Iran’s Communist Revolution​

On the fifteenth of August, Colonel Nassiri, Commander of the Imperial Guard, delivered to Mosaddeq a letter notifying the politician of his dismissal as Prime Minister. Having received prior word of the plot, possibly from Soviet intelligence, Mosaddeq had prepared himself for the event and had Colonel Nassiri arrested. As news circulated of the Shah’s attempt to dismiss the Prime Minister, the streets flooded with Mosaddeq’s supporters as well as communist affiliates, believed to be funded by the U.S.S.R., who angrily protested the Shah’s action.

Pro-Mosaddeq Supporters Take to the Streets of Fars​

Fearing that all had been lost, the Shah fled first to neighbouring Baghdad and then to Rome. The British ambassador to Iran, witnessing the pro-Mosaddeq demonstrations in Tehran, wrote in his diary: “…someone had blundered.” It was at this moment that the sheer power and expert planning of C.I.A was plainly displayed. In an attempt to create order from chaos, the C.I.A funded both pro- and anti- Mosaddeq demonstrators, engineering clashes in the streets as the factions turned towards violence. Outlaying significant sums, the C.I.A. took the surprising step of staging a communist revolution. Iran’s communist faction came out in full force in support of the revolution, looting private businesses, destroying “symbols of religion and capitalism” in their wake.

Growing pro-Shah Groups Assemble in Tehran​

But Iran is by no means a communist country. Apart from a small but organised communist faction, known as the Tudeh Party, the country remained divided into various political groups and special interest. These disparate cliques, however, were united in their opposition to communism. Property-owners, Islamists, militarists and monarchists were all alarmed by the prospect of a communist revolution and became increasingly to turn against Mosaddeq, by now branded [not undeservingly] as the country’s socialist Prime Minister. The generous outlay of U.S. dollars further precipitated Mosaddeq’s political isolation. Iran began to look to one man to bring an end to the chaos: Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the Shah.

The Man of the Hour: The Shah​

Iran’s Royalist Restoration​

The collapse of the Prime Minister’s National Front left him reliant upon the communist faction. Realising this situation and hoping to re-build his crumbling political base, Mosaddeq asked his supporters to end the protest return home. Turning to his characteristic bluster he proudly proclaimed that he had put an end to the Shah’s ambition to usurp power from the people. It was at this juncture, as Mosaddeq’s supporters retreated to the comfort of their homes, that the demonstrations of the Shah’s loyal subjects intensified. An outpouring of support for the Shah – induced in some cases by generous foreign contributions and in others by genuine sentiments – could be witnessed across the country. Common citizens carrying images of the Persian King, clerics calling for prayers in his honour; Iran was a country in search of a saviour, and in the Shah they found their redemption.

During his tenure as Prime Minister, Mosaddeq, a scion of the former Qajar dynasty, had taken every available opportunity to humiliate the Pahlavi Shah. He had brashly stated in the legislature that Mohammad Reza ought to be a figure-head, “reigning but not ruling.” During the height of public unrest, Mosaddeq’s Foreign Minister, Hossein Fatemi, had even called for the ouster of the King and the proclamation of a republic. In his private journal Mosaddeq would document his repeated insults of the Shah, writing in the margins: Sic Semper Tyrannus (trans. Thus always to tyrants). With the tide of public opinion having turned decidedly in favour of the Shah, Prime Minister Mosaddeq received an overdue rejoinder from Mohammad Reza. A tank lobbed a shell directly into Mosaddeq’s residence. When news of this incident reached the Shah, he is said to have smiled with satisfaction. Later that evening he wrote: Ultima Ratio Regum (trans. Force is the final argument of kings).

Prime Minister Mosaddeq Preparing to Surrender Himself to the Authorities

The Restoration in the Anglo-American Press​

Shortly after, Mosaddeq surrendered himself to authorities and was promptly placed under arrest. The foreign media praised the royalist restoration as a necessary check against the dictatorial tendencies of Prime Minister Mosaddeq as well as a decisive check against the expanse of communism. The New York Times celebrated the accomplishment, publishing a special edition to promulgate the news. The Wall Street Journal was ecstatic that “Persian Oil Flows Once More!”. The British Press took a similarly jubilant tone – “Mosaddeq is Gone!” proclaimed the Times. The mood on Fleet Street, however, betrayed an undertone of uncertainty that inserted itself if ever-so-subtly in British media coverage. Embedded deep within an otherwise euphoric article, the Financial Times reported: “American corporate imperialism may once again elbow Great Britain from a historic stronghold in Persia.”

The Much Loved Shah Speaks to His People​

For the Shah, the success of the Royalist Restoration had shown that the West was prepared to back him, but also that his people love him. In a radio broadcast H.M. Mohammad Reza Pahlavi said: “Until now I was a hereditary king, but now I am an elected one. You, my people, have elected me.”​

 

[Spectre17]

The Indian Subcontinent before the Age of Imperialism​

The Indian Subcontinent, including not only the modern Republic of India but also Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan and Sri Lanka, is believed to have been first settled by humans around 30,000 years before the beginning of the current era however it took until 7,000 years BCE for settlements to appear in Western Pakistan. These settlements would eventually coalesce into the Indus Valley Civilization which flourished along the banks of the Indus river between 3,300 and 1,300 BCE. Although western historians emphasize the emergence of the Egyptian and Mesopotamian civilizations the Indus civilization emerged shortly after the Mesopotamians and before the Ancient Egyptians in addition to developing independently from either of the previously mentioned peoples.

The Ruins of Mohenjo-Daro, One of the Largest Settlements of the Ancient World​

Following the collapse of the Indus Civilization much of India separated into 16 oligarchies and kingdoms. It was during this period that the major religions of the Subcontinent would develop, first Hinduism and then, at the end of the period, Buddhism. It was in this situation of divided Kingdoms that Chandragupta Maruya would become the first man to unite India under one King. His dynasty, the Maruyans, would rule India between 322 and 185 BCE before falling and following the Empire's collapse the Subcontinent would be again divided into three different Kingdoms. Around 320 CE the Gupta Empire would follow in the footsteps of the Maruyans and again unite much of the Indian Subcontinent under one ruler. During this period architecture, science, astronomy and mathematics flourished across India until the Empire collapsed like it's predecessor around 550 CE.

Angkor Wat in Cambodia, a Hindu Temple and the Largest Religious Monument in the World​

During the Middle Ages India was divided into several Indian Kingdoms who were unable to successfully conquer the others. Due to the substantial numbers of capital cities large parts of India became highly urbanized compared to other areas as well as resulting in the construction of large numbers of temples across the Subcontinent. During this period Indian merchants, scholars and sometimes armies also transmitted Indian cultural and historical traditions across South-East Asia with Hinduism penetrating into Burma and, indeed, throughout areas that include modern day Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia and even the isles of Malaysia and Indonesia.

The Ruins of Daulatabad, One of the Capitals of the Delhi Sultanate​

While originally sheltered from the Islamic invasions that befell Persia and Central Asia by the treacherous mountains of the Hindu Kush that great mountain range could not halt the invasion of the nomadic central Asian clans. In 1206 a former slave led an army of cavalry across the Hindu Kush and successfully conquered much of Northern India forming the Delhi Sultanate which lasted until 1526. During this period it effectively halted a Mongol Invasion and saved India from the ravaging that occurred across Persia and even as far as Baghdad and Syria. As the Vijayanagar Empire reached it's greatest extent in the south and the Delhi Sultanate began large raids into Southern India it seemed as if a war would begin to decide who would ultimately rule the Subcontinent when, on the 20th of May 1498, Vasco da Gama landed at Calicut. India would never be the same again.

 

[Stormbringer]

Draft
Top Secret.
Copy #1

RESOLUTION OF THE CPSU CC
Proposals of the USSR Ministry of Foreign Affairs

With the aim of further strengthening the USSR positions in Germany and increasing the counteraction of the aggressive plans of the Anglo-American bloc in Europe, the CPSU CC believes it necessary to carry out the following measures:

1. Convene on 10 February a conference in Berlin of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the USSR, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania and the German Democratic Republic.

To reach an agreement with the governments of these countries regarding the following agenda:

a) the adoption of a declaration on the German question;

b) the conclusion of a treaty of friendship and economic and cultural cooperation between the participant countries of the conference.
The USSR MFA will present for ratification drafts of the declaration and the treaty by 5 February.

2. Send on 20 February a note on the German question from the Soviet government to the governments of the USA, England and France.
The USSR MFA will present for ratification the draft note by 15 February.

3. Bearing in mind the need to strengthen the friendly relations between the GDR and the USSR, as well as to raise the authority of the GDR, it is expedient to enact the following:

a) reorganize the USSR diplomatic mission in Berlin and the GDR diplomatic mission in Moscow into Embassies by authorizing the USSR MFA to negotiate an agreement with the GDR government on this question.

Appoint Cde. Semyonov as the USSR Ambassador to the GDR and concurrently the USSR Chief Commissar in Germany;

b) cease the collection of reparation payments from the German Democratic Republic, starting with 1 January 1954;

c) sell on favorable terms all Soviet enterprises in Germany to the GDR Government, with payment by installments over 10 years;

d) establish an exchange rate between the ruble and the GDR mark, bearing in mind the actual buying power of the mark and the ruble;

e) recognize the expediency of establishing a joint Soviet-German enterprise on the basis of the Soviet join-stock enterprise “Wismut.”

Assign Cdes. Molotov, Mikoyan and Zverev to present in a week's time a proposal that would provide specific measures for the enactment of this Resolution with respect to articles “b,” “c,” “d,” and “e.”

4. Recognize the expediency of the arrival of the GDR government delegation to Moscow on 25 February, that will include representatives of all parties of the governing GDR coalition.

Reach an agreement with the GDR government delegation on the publication of the Soviet-German communiqué, which must reflect the following: the positions of the USSR and the GDR governments on fundamental questions pertaining to German unification and the conclusion of a peace treaty; the economic measures of the Soviet Union, directed toward strengthening the GDR; the decision to reorganize the USSR and GDR diplomatic missions into embassies, and other questions.

5. Recognize the expediency of launching a broad campaign in the press and on the radio, both in the Soviet Union and abroad, on the aforementioned measures.

Suggest to the SED CC leadership to popularize on all fronts among the German people the Soviet government's proposal on the questions of German unification and the conclusion of a peace treaty with Germany and, above all, on the question of establishing a Provisional All-German government as an important real step on the path toward German unification.

 

[Dadarian]

Beginning of an Uprising; 1952​

The Mau Mau Uprising was born out of economic necessity and political reality. The Kikuyu, the main ethnic group of British Kenya, was firmly under British thumb. Their land, seven million acres of it (11,000 sq miles), was seized by the British colonial government to give to white settlers while African tribesman (including the Kikuyu) were "encouraged" to be wage labourers, slavery in all but legal technicalities. The ways that the British "encouraged" the Kenyan tribes to become wage labourers were immoral at best and illegal at worst.

These methods included taxation on housing as well as their own censuses, denying the native Kenyans the ability to grow and sell cash crops, forcing the native Kenyans to buy labour passes in order to work (named Kipande), forcing of each tribe onto different reservations in order to exacerbate overcrowding within the tribes and finally the exemption of wage labourers from certain colonial tasks such as (the thoroughly detested) conscription. All of which forced the Kenyan tribes into political and economic frailty based on the "generosity" of their colonial overlord.

Kikuyu Home Guards, Kenya Police and British Troops on patrol on a Kenyan reservation; 1950​

​

These political and economic conditions led to widespread discontent with British rule in the Kenyan colony by all the tribes. This discontent crystalised into the first real anti-colonial group in 1942 by the name of the Kenyan African Study Union (KASU), which tried to push through meaningful colonial changes via peaceful and non-violent protest. However the KASU was subject to widespread failure due to changing leadership and dissatisfied backers. This led to a name change (dropping the word study from the title) in 1946 and a leadership shuffle, with a man by the name of Jomo Kenyatta assuming leadership of the Union. However this was not enough for the more militant branches of the Kenyan African Union (KAU). This led to a young and militant group to form in 1952 under the name of the Kenya Land and Freedom Army (KLFA) which was led by Dedan Kimathi. This militant group was derogatorily labelled the Mau Mau by the British in order to paint it as a violent tribal horde seeking the removal of British civilisation and the institution of a domestic Kenyan barbarism. This was the beginning of the Mau Mau Uprising.

Propaganda Poster for the Mau Mau Movement; 1952​

​

 

[Stormbringer]

The USSR diplomatic mission in Berlin has delivered to the representatives of the American armed forces a diplomatic note regarding the situation in Germany and Berlin.

 

[Bonecracker(NL)]

The United States shares the desire of the Soviet Union to bring about a permanent solution to the German situation that favours all parties. In line with this, I am pleased to announce talks between representatives of the United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the French Republic concerning the future of the German state and its political position.

-J. F. Dulles, Secretary of State

 

[Stormbringer]

Presidium, CC CPSU
To: Comrade G.M. Malenkov and Comrade N.S. Khrushchev

MEMORANDUM

URGENT

The situation regarding the German question has changed significantly since the death of Cde. Stalin. Despite repeated Soviet requests for a negotiated resolution to the question Western powers have taken steps towards the transfer of sovereignty to the FRG. The transfer of sovereignty will be followed by FRG NATO membership and the re-arming of the FRG armed forces. Re-armament of the German armed forces and deployment of additional NATO forces to Germany is preparation for a simultaneous invasion of the DDR and at attack on the USSR to be launched in 1956.

American representatives have rejected the possibility of a diplomatic solution to the German question. The latest communique from Washington warns that any Soviet attempt to delay or mitigate FRG NATO membership with regards to the city of Berlin would result in nuclear war. Intelligence indicates that Western powers believe the death of Cde. Stalin to present an opportunity for the destruction of the USSR and are prepared to take immediate action. The threat of a nuclear attack should be taken as credible.

It is recommended that in light of the developments Soviet diplomacy continue to focus on finding a resolution to the German question. The diplomatic diversion is necessary to secure sufficient time for the armed forces to prepare a first strike against USA and NATO allies to take place before the scheduled NATO invasion of the DDR and attack on the USSR.

The draft resolution for the CC of the CPSU is enclosed.

I ask you to examine it.

V.M. Molotov 26 January 1954

 

[Harpsichord]

Treaty of Hanoi

Article I: Concerning the Diplomatic Relations of the Signatories
•The Việt Minh shall be recognized as the legitimate government north of the provisional military demarcation line, as is defined by the terms set in this treaty by all signatories.
•The State of Vietnam shall be recognized as the legitimate government south of provisional military demarcation line.
•The State of Vietnam shall be free to remain an Autonomous State within the French Union.
•A state of peace hereby exists between all signatories.

Article II: Concerning the Territory of the Signatories
•The provisional military demarcation line shall run approximately along the 15.88 latitude, from the mouth of the Sông Thu Bồn and its course to the Sông Vu Gia, then the course of that river west till its northern bend, and from that parallel west to the Laos-Viet Nam frontier. The Cham islands are recognised as to the north of this line. ((As drawn by a child in Annex A))
•The State of Vietnam’s lands shall be defined by the pre-war border with Cambodia and the Sông Vu Gia and the Sông Thu Bồn.
•A demilitarized zone (DMZ) of 6 kilometres in width will be placed along the demarcation line.
•All signatories recognise that the essential purpose of the agreement relating to Vietnam is to settle military questions with a view to ending hostilities and that the military demarcation line is provisional and should not in any way be interpreted as constituting a political or territorial boundary.

Article III: Concerning Political Expression
•All citizens of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia are to be integrated without discrimination into their respective national communities and to be guaranteed enjoyment of fundamental freedoms guaranteed by democratic institutions established as a result of free general elections by secret ballot.

Article IV: Concerning the Presence of Military Forces in Foreign Lands
•The Việt Minh shall withdraw all armed forces from the Kingdoms of Cambodia and Laos, and south of the DMZ.
•The French Republic and the State of Vietnam shall withdraw all armed forces from the Kingdoms of Cambodia and Laos, excepting from bases at Seno and in Mekong Valley either in Vientiane Province or downstream from Vietiane, and north of the DMZ. Effectives in these two French bases may not exceed 3,500 men.

Article V: Concerning the Movement of Migrants and Militaries
•The borders of the Việt Minh and the State of Vietnam shall remain open to all transferrals of population, supplies, and soldiers for a total of one year.
•All signatories shall pledge to protect any and all migrants and/or refugees from persecution, harm, or other actions affecting their mobility towards their intended destination.
•All signatories agree to the allowance of international observation teams from Belgium, India and Poland (with a committee led by these nations to oversee said teams) to ensure all migration is carried out and none who want to migrate with their material possessions are stopped from doing so, as well as to ensure the establishment of the DMZ.

Article VI: Concerning the Maintenance of Vietnamese Culture
•The Việt Minh and State of Vietnam pledge to maintain any and all cultural and historical monuments of Vietnam, regardless of their nature.

Article VII: Concerning the governments of the Kingdom of Laos and the Kingdom of Cambodia.
•In the Kingdom of Laos a national unity government shall be established, with Souvanna Phouma as Prime Minister, and including Souphanouvong and members of his political movement.
•In the Kingdom of Cambodia a national unity government shall be established, with Norodom Sihanouk as Prime Minister and including members of the Krom Pracheachon.

((Annex A - Best map ever http://i.imgur.com/SJblDGe.jpg))

Signed
[X] League for the Independence of Vietnam (Việt Nam Độc Lập Đồng Minh Hội), also signing on behalf of Pathet Lao and the Khmer Resistance Forces
[X] State of Vietnam
[X] French Republic
[] Kingdom of Laos
[] Kingdom of Cambodia

 

[MastahCheef117]

A Brief History of East Germany
Prologue: The Birth of the German Democratic Republic​

When the proclamation of the "Basic Law" (the Constitution) of the Federal German Republic was made on 23 May 1949, the Soviet administration in the East immediately made plans to give the East Germans the tools they needed to draft their own constitution. That same month, elections were held throughout the entire Occupation Zone for delegates to the German People's Congress, whose job it now was to draft and ratify a constitution for the new proposed socialist state. Members eligible for election to the Congress were screened and handpicked from a large list of figures from the so-called "anti-fascist coalition"; seeing as how many of these were indeed communist (and therefore members of the SED), the constitution thereafter adopted reflected strongly the ideas of Marx and Lenin.

The Constitution thus adopted on 7 October 1949, officially establishing the German Democratic Republic (GDR or DDR), was surprisingly liberal in language: it guaranteed the absolute legal equality of men and women, guaranteed all citizens the right to vote, submit petitions to the "popular representative body", and "personal liberty, inviolability of the home, secrecy of the mail, and the right to take up residence at any place". The document banned state-controlled or censored press and protected the right to "express [one's] opinion freely and publicly". Of course, this Constitution was one more of language than of complete truth, and the true apparatus of the East German government -- at least, for the first several years of its existence -- failed to follow many of these guidelines.

Wilhelm Pieck -- a staunch communist since before the Second World War -- was elected the first President of the DDR. Walter Ulbricht, previously serving as Deputy Prime Minister, was made General Secretary of the Central Committee of the SED, making him the defacto head of government. Two days later, the Soviet Union withdrew their military headquarters from Berlin. Without a military, the Ministry for State Security (Ministerium für Staatssicherheit; MfS or Stasi) was established to uphold the laws of the Republic and to ensure domestic stability. Its first Minister, Wilhelm Zaisser, began the foundational aspects of the organization that would soon make it an intelligence agency of great efficiency and renown.

Four key leaders of the "Second World" after World War II: (L-R) Mao Zedong, Nikolai Bulganin, Josef Stalin, and Walter Ulbricht​

The first of several planned Five Year Plans (borrowing from the playbook of Stalin in the 1920s and 30s) concentrated on rebuilding the heavy industries of the nation after most of them were either destroyed during the war or confiscated by the Soviet military in its aftermath. However, the result of the great pressures put upon the war-weary and exhausted East German population with this economic plan was a mass-exodus of thousands to West Germany in search of a seemingly better life.

To counter the potentially disastrous effects of this emigration, early designs for a second Five Year Plan to level economic priorities and prioritize consumer goods were tossed about within the Central Committee; however, these plans were put on hold as the events of mid-June 1953 began to unravel.

 

[Groogy]

The Sinuiju Student Incident of 1945​

This article examines the city of Sinuiju in the Ibuk region currently under Soviet occupation, focusing specifically on the Sinuiju incident of 23 November 1945. A violent clash between local youth and Communist suppression forces, the incident revealed the combustible mixture of factors present in the communist Korea.The Soviet military government's deadly response to the protests seriously threatened Korean perception of the Korean Communist Party and to the Soviet Union and it forced the communist regimes to tighten their control to keep the Korean population from revolting.

Sinuiju City before the Soviet Invasion​

For the port city of Sinuiju, the twentieth century brought transformation and trauma. At a pivotal location along the Yalu River, which connects Korea to Manchuria, the city expanded into a symbol of Japanese ambitions. In the Korean War it saw its bridges nearly obliterated by U.S. bombs as American generals assumed that the city would again be the default capital for rulers fleeing Pyongyang. After its encounter with the U.S military, Sinuiju was flooded with Chinese People's Volunteers. However let's get back on the subject of the communist rule and the massacre of 1945.

As Korea's most populous northwestern port city, Sinuiju embodies the story of the communist rebels formation, including the process of political consolidation. Sinuiju rapidly became a site of heated interaction between nationalists and Communists. Evidence reveal the powerful existence of nationalism and anti-Soviet sentiment present in North Korea, a majority of this movement lying in Sinuiju, and the Red Army was known to have worked tirelessly to forestall outbreaks of anti-Soviet resistance. However the Soviets did not always successfully mitigate the concerns of the Korean people as self-mobilized Koreans in North Pyongan Province, especially students, started opposing the Communist rule.

To make matters worse, it is suspected that already in late 1945 there was a grain deposit shortage thanks to the Communist Land Reforms performed in Pyongan Province. This suspicion is based on the known fact that local conservative landlords actively struggled against the Red Army by disrupting grain production at harvest time. The food that was available was claimed by the Communist troops in order to keep the soldiers feed but this caused a raise in tension between the Soviets and the urban population. This situation was highly similar to the Japanese extreme export of Korean rice at the height of the Pacific War. From reports that could be found from 1945 it can be deducted that the price of rice had tripled from 30-40 won to 110 won under Soviet occupation.

Starving children of Sinuiju City​

The spark to light this tinderbox came from a middle school where the unlawful arrest of the principal were made by the Soviets. The news spread quickly and students at several nearby schools organized their resistance. Several student leaders were transported to the headquarters of the Communist Party to broker a compromise, however they allegedly never got that far and was instead intimidated with force by Soviet police. This triggered a stronger and growing radicalism in the young students which burst out as a full blown revolt. The reported numbers wary from five hundred and one thousand students who at 23rd of Nvember 1945 charged at the People's Committee's main building. The unnarmed students were massacred down by machine gun fire.

A mere 3 days after, without time for the parents to grief their lost children, Kim Il Sung is seen in Sinuiju to hold a speech. No apology was given and no promises of betterment or removal of Soviet forces. Instead blame was put on the people that they had caused civil strife and not put up with starvation and miss use of power. This incident in Sinuiju caused other students to rise up in Pyongyang and Wonsan against the Soviet presence and this would continue for several months. The way forward to solve this according to the Leader was to "discipline" the children.

Publication from Andong Normal School in 1953​

 

[KeldoniaSkylar]

The French Fourth Republic

Indochine, l'Algérie, et l'Union Française​

The war in Indochina finally draws to a close, allowing for peace to return to a region that has suffered for more than a decade under the threat of war, destruction, and occupation. The issue of North and South Vietnam is being resolved in a manner similar to that of Korea, in a process that willing hopefully lead to a lasting peace for all in the region.

The end of the conflict will bring peace once again to the French Republic and the French Union. A peace that will allow for the development and advancement of their peoples. It will also allow for the return of many soldiers to their homes and families.

However, the end of this crisis also presents an opportunity to learn from the conflict and what drove it. The peoples of Indochina desired increased autonomy, and more control over local matters. It is probably an understatement in some of these cases the locals will know about pressing matters to a greater extent than Paris. Thus I propose to the National Assembly that some greater autonomy is allowed within the French Union for the departemental assemblies and increased democratization. As part of this, in addition to the full citizenship rights allocated to those in the Quatre Communes and French Algeria. In those areas, the representation in the regional assembly shall be distributed based on population not the previous split of 50% of the seats allocated to the Pieds-noirs and 50% to the originaries, reducing the role of political apartheid and welcoming them as fully French people. Similarly, they will be equally represented in the National Assembly as they are a fully and indivisibly part of the French Republic.

~ Joseph Laniel, Prime Minister of the French Fourth Republic

 

[XVG]

7th Politburo of the Communist Party of China
​

The 7th Central Committee of the CPC has 44 members and 33 alternate members. The Chairman of both the Central Committee and the Politburo is comrade Mao Zedong. Members of the 7th Politburo of the CPC were elected by the Central Committee of the CPC on June 19th, 1945:

1. Mao Zedong
2. Zhu De
3. Liu Shaoqi
4. Zhou Enlai
5. Chen Yun
6. Kang Sheng
7. Gao Gang
8. Peng Zhen
9. Dong Biwu
10. Lin Boqu
11. Zhang Wentian
12. Peng Dehuai​

 

[MagnificentOne]

Facing the future; 1945-1950​

For six long years, the British Empire and her dominions had fought across the seas against the dark and perverted forces of fascism, at one point representing the sole enemy of the Nazi regime during the dark days after the fall of France. Together with her allies in the United Nations, the United Kingdom would prevail.

The crowds were massive in 1945 when Sir Winston Churchill greeted a vast crowed in Whitehall, where he would proudly proclaim to the British people: 'This is your victory'. Despite the jubilation that ran rampant in 1945, however, the Conservatives would soon encounter a gloomy future. Only two months later, when the 1945 elections were held, would Churchill and the Conservative Party experience a massive shock as the Labour Party managed to snatch a surprising victory.

Campaign posters during the 1945 election.​

Self-assured in their victory owing to Churchill's personality, the Conservatives did very little to offer much in way of a new future. Incidents such as Churchill claiming that Labour would have to fall back on 'some sort of Gestapo' to deliver their promises was acknowledged as a poor move. When policy was debated, Labour attacked the Conservatives from all corners and brought back memories of the Conservatives handling on the 1930s, from the policy of appeasement to failing to deal with the Great Depression. The Conservatives remained confident that they could win by playing up the the personal aspect of Churchill’s feats. In doing so, they had misjudged the mood of the nation; Churchill may have been beloved for his wartime record, but few people were confident that Churchill could run a successful peacetime government, and furthermore they were disheartened by his personal contempt towards social reform.

Conversely, the Labour Party under Clement Attlee had only risen in popularity amongst the common people. When it came to personalities, Labour had no shortage of men who had worked well during the coalition government of the war; Attlee in particular was recognised for ensuring that the wheels of the home front kept turning during the war. When it came to policy, Labour had eagerly proposed building a welfare state based upon the the best-selling Beveridge Report, which documented the five ‘social evils’ plaguing Britain. This proved to be an immensely popular concept to not only the ordinary families of Britain, but also the returning soldiers – who harboured fears over being abandoned in the streets under a Conservative Government which had failed to deliver the promises of a 'home fit for heroes' in the aftermath of the Great War. Labour therefore proclaimed a grand promise of 'winning the peace'.

When the victorious Attlee went to Buckingham Palace, he and the similarly quiet George VI stood in silence.
Attlee finally commented: 'I've won the election.'
The King replied: 'I know. I heard it on the six o'clock news.'​

Having campaigned with the slogan of 'Let us face the future', and backed with a conviction of transforming Britain into a socialist commonwealth, the Labour Party would prove to be Britain’s most radical government yet. Legislative reforms, a limited amount of public ownership and the official adoption of Keynesianism allowed for Labour to dramatically raise the standard of living, grant more equal opportunities in life, and ensure high life expectancy.

'The Labour Party is a Socialist Party, and proud of it' was emblazoned in the Labour manifesto, and they were intent on living up to it. One by one, the key industries of Britain would fall out of private hands and into that of the government’s. From the Bank of England to the coal mines, and from the railways to the steel industry, the nationalisation would prove popular amongst the ordinary civilians of Britain. As a party committed to looking out for the workers, it is for good reason that Labour’s economic institutions over British industries were also widely seen as a humanitarian one, as the process of nationalisation would grant safer working conditions. Despite a cumbersome bureaucracy soon dampening the initial euphoria that had accompanied nationalisation, the policy remained broadly popular. However, the effects of Britain's deadliest winter in 1947, and the fact that it was a broke nation attempting to cling to a worldwide empire, would not lead to a happy nation.

The National Coal Board, established in 1947, began to ran the coal mines. British coal would soon become the cheapest in Europe.​

Attlee took to foreign affairs and began the process of decolonisation at a bewildering pace. While Churchill clung to the days of the Victoria era and dreamed of the romantic image of an eternal British Empire, Attlee took a more pragmatic view to the matter and began to prepare for the inevitable, ensuring that legislation that would dismember the colonies from the motherland began to pass Parliament. In 1947, the subcontinent was abandoned and King George VI would remain the last British monarch to be titled the Emperor of India. Sir Cyril Radcliffe was given the task of leading the boundary commissions in the aftermath of the Indian Independence Act, and by quickly scrawling down lines that displaced millions of Hindus and Muslims in the wrong nation, had accidentally let loose a terrible mayhem in which 500,000 were estimated to have died. Famously, he refused his salary in horror of what he had done.

When it came to the area of social reforms however, notable success was achieved. Attlee’s Health Minister, Aneurin 'Nye' Bevan, fought hard against the British Medical Association to ensure the creation of the National Health Service by 1948, which promised to provide every imaginable service in the arts of medicine free of charge. It was a hugely ambitious plan, but it paid off; the NHS would become responsible for boosting the everyday health of the working-class man as well as dramatically reducing the risk of disease in post-war Britain. Pensions were increased, and sickness benefits, unemployment benefits, funeral benefits and child benefits were all established as part of social security. A cradle to the grave welfare state had been implemented in Britain, and in only five years had Labour managed to eradicate the worst of the deprivations that had plagued the Conservative Party for two decades.

The father of the NHS meets its first patient, the 13 year old Sylvia Diggory.​

 

[XVG]

4th Plenary Session of the 7th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China
​

At a Politburo meeting on the 24th of December 1953, Chairman Mao Zedong asked the CPC Central Committee to draft a resolution on party unity. This task was assigned to Liu Shaoqi. For this reason, the 4th Plenary Session of the 7th Central Committee of the CPC was held in Beijing from 6th to 10th of February 1954. Surprisingly, Chairman Mao himself didn’t participate in the meeting. Thus Liu Shaoqi delivered the report of the Politburo, and effectively acted as Mao Zedong’s representative.

Statements were made by 44 comrades, including Zhu De, Zhou Enlai, Chen Yun and Deng Xiaoping. After an extended discussion, the Central Committee adopted the Resolution on Strengthening the Party Unity. The following passage shows the importance of the Resolution, clearly directed at Gao Gang and his accomplices.

One of the most important methods of the imperialists and counterrevolutionaries for sabotaging our cause is, first and foremost, to undermine the unity of the Party…
...These are momentous historical lessons that show that the enemy not only will always seek agents within our party but in the past has found them, and it may be in the future, too, he will find vacillating and disloyal elements and those who join the Party with ulterior motives to act as his agents.

In mid-February, entrusted by the CPC Central Committee, Zhou Enlai held a seminar on the Gao Gang issue, and Deng Xiaoping, Chen Yi, Tan Zhenlin held a seminar on the Rao Shushi issue. Thus, under the leadership of the Central Political Bureau, a series of meetings were held to further expose and criticize the errors of Gao Gang and Rao Shushi. Zhou Enlai accused Gao Gang, who governed most of Manchuria, of setting up an 'independent kingdom' and criticized his opinions of the position of the PLA in the Party politics, as well as his views on Liu Shaoqi.

 

[Stormbringer]

Council of Ministers of the USSR

31 January 1954

As part of the diplomatic strategy regarding the German question cde. Molotov presented language of a diplomatic proposal to be made publicly to the government of the USA. Proposal adopted unanimously. MID USSR charged with delivering the following proposal to representatives of USA and the public of USA and Europe:

"The USSR proposes that the USA and USSR take upon themselves a mutual, solemn, and unconditional commitment not to use atomic, hydrogen and other weapons of mass destruction."

MID USSR charged with delivering the diplomatic position of the USSR regarding nuclear weapons and the German question to the representatives of UK, France, and Italy. Cde. Molotov to report on progress in one week's time.

 

[Harpsichord]

Independence – Freedom – Happiness​

Democratic Republic of Vietnam
1953-


Statements on behalf of the Workers Party of Vietnam
Ho Chi Minh, 1954, responding to the speech by 'Head of State' Bảo Đại concerning the Treaty of Hanoi

Minutes of the Central Committee and Politburo
2nd Politburo of the Workers Party of Vietnam
6th Plenary Session of the 2nd Central Committee, 1954
12th Plenary Session of the 2nd Central Committee, 1957
13th Plenary Session of the 2nd Central Committee, 1957

Foreign Policy Statements
Phạm Văn Đồng, 1955, issuing a statement on the unlawful killing of Vietnamese troops by collaborationist militia
Phạm Văn Đồng, 1956, issuing a formal complaint to the International Observation Committee concerning the conduct of the State of Vietnam both during and after the ceasefire
Phạm Văn Đồng, 1957, issuing a statement on the response of the collaborationist government, and requesting the ICC launch an inquiry into the Hanoi Killings

Treaties of the Democratic Republic
Treaty of Hanoi (1954)
Sino-Vietnamese Treaty of Friendship, Alliance and Mutual Assistance (1955)

​

 

[m.equitum]

IMPERIAL STATE OF IRAN
Marā dād farmūd-o khod dāvar ast ​

LETTER TO THE FOREIGN SECRETARY
Rt. Hon. Anthony Eden, Foreign Secretary of the United Kingdom​

Foreign Secretary, -- You will no doubt, have been attentive to the current events in Persia, particularly on account of the involvement of British intelligence services in the recent change in the Iranian leadership. Please regard this letter as an expression of my gratitude to the Foreign Office for decisive steps taken to ensure stability in Persia.

It is no secret that the long and enduring friendship between London and Tehran was placed under considerable strain during the brief tenure of Prime Minister Mosaddeq. The frayed relations were made most apparent when Mosaddeq brazenly expelled British diplomatic representatives from Persia and closed the British embassy in the capital.

Despite the draconian restrictions imposed upon the Shah, H.M. Muhammad Reza maintained regular correspondence with your predecessors in the Foreign Ministry, relying upon clandestine meetings and secret communiqués to keep the British Government abreast of developments in Iran. As circumstances in the country no longer warrant such measures, H.M. the Shah has authorised me to pursue the restoration of full diplomatic relations with the United Kingdom. I have engaged in frequent communication with Mr. Stevens, the resident representative of British interests in Iran, and would be pleased to accept his credentials should the Foreign Office opt to elevate him to the post of ambassador.

I have already provided to Mr. Stevens, and reiterate herein to you, my assurances that the nationalisation of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Corporation undertaken by Prime Minister Mosaddeq will be reversed. The precise nature of that reversal has been the almost singular subject of considerable discussion within the Iranian Government, which, after careful reflection, has decided to proceed with a course that blends the 1948 Compromise between Venezuela and the U.S.A [Creole Petroleum], 1950 ARAMCO Agreement between the U.S.A and Saudi Arabia, and the proposed 1951 Supplementary Oil Agreement between Great Britain and Iran.

The partial divestiture of the state-owned Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (A.I.O.C) will be made to an international consortium of petroleum interests. The Imperial State of Iran shall create a company, the Iranian Oil Participants Limited (I.R.O.P), registered in London, to which the state-owned enterprise, the National Iranian Oil Company (N.I.O.C) will be transferred. The Imperial State of Iran, the principal stakeholder in the I.R.O.P, will proceed immediately to divest a forty-nine percent stake in the corporation, with preferential allocations as listed in the table below:​

NATIONAL IRANIAN OIL COMPANY
Composition of International Consortium

Iranian Oil Participants Ltd. (I.R.O.P)*	51%
British Petroleum Company Ltd. (B.P.)	20%
Shell Petroleum N.V.	7%
Gulf Oil Corporation	3½%
Mobil Oil Corporation	3½%
Standard Oil Company of California	3½%
Exxon Corporation	3½%
Texaco Incorporated	3½%
Compagnie Française des Pétroles	3%
Iricon Group of Companies‡	1½%

* State-owned Corporate Holding
‡ Iricon Group of Companies consists of: American Independent Oil Company, Atlantic Richfield Company, Getty Oil Company, Signal Oil and Gas Company, Standard Oil Company (Ohio), Continental Oil Company​

Expectedly, on account of American involvement in the 1953 Royalist Restoration, the percentage allocated to the British Petroleum Company Ltd. (B.P.) will be diluted in favour of American petroleum interests. Nevertheless, I have taken steps while structuring the arrangements to ensure that B.P. retains its position as the dominant stakeholder, second only to the Iranian State. Moreover, this international consortium will provided the opportunity for both British and American petroleum firms – hitherto engaged in an unspoken contest over Middle-Eastern oil – to align more closely in advancing their shared interest in the sustained development of Iran’s oil industry.

It is in that latter matter, the continued development of our country’s oil industry, that Iran looks to Great Britain for her lasting support. Historic ties – to wit, the legacy of British involvement in the Persian oil sector – intermixed with mutual benefit [it is well known that the Royal Navy is completely reliant upon Iranian oil], provide the ideal circumstances from which an enduring friendship can be forged.​

Seyed Abdollah Entezam
Minister of Foreign Affairs
IMPERIAL STATE OF IRAN​

 

[m.equitum]

IMPERIAL STATE OF IRAN
Marā dād farmūd-o khod dāvar ast ​

LETTER TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE
Mr. Dulles, Secretary of State of the United States of America ​

Mr. Secretary, -- In the wake of the changes in the Iranian leadership precipitated by the C.I.A., and pursuant to the tacit understanding that emerged from the secret correspondence between the Department of State and the Shah of Iran vis-à-vis the reallocation of a portion of British petroleum concessions in Iran to American firms, the Shah has authorised me to make good on commitments made at the behest of the U.S. Government as regards the entrance of American oil interests in Iran.

Upon the advice of American financiers, Tehran will forthwith to divest herself of forty-nine percent of her assents in the recently registered Iranian Oil Participants Ltd. (I.R.O.P), with the preferential allocation of stock undertaken in accordance with the table below:​

NATIONAL IRANIAN OIL COMPANY
Composition of International Consortium

Iranian Oil Participants Ltd. (I.R.O.P)*	51%
British Petroleum Company Ltd. (B.P.)	20%
Shell Petroleum N.V.	7%
Gulf Oil Corporation	3½%
Mobil Oil Corporation	3½%
Standard Oil Company of California	3½%
Exxon Corporation	3½%
Texaco Incorporated	3½%
Compagnie Française des Pétroles	3%
Iricon Group of Companies‡	1½%

* State-owned Corporate Holding
‡ Iricon Group of Companies consists of: American Independent Oil Company, Atlantic Richfield Company, Getty Oil Company, Signal Oil and Gas Company, Standard Oil Company (Ohio), Continental Oil Company​

Recognising the unspoken competition between British and American oil interests across the Middle-East, it is my hope that the international consortium that results from the partial divestiture of the I.R.O.P will result in a closer Anglo-American alignment apropos the sustained development of Iran’s oil industry. Should the petroleum corporations in Great Britain and the U.S.A. manage to set aside their rivalries, I am confident that Iran’s oil sector will provide a mutually beneficial and exceptionally lucrative investment environment.

If you will permit, Mr. Secretary, I will turn to a separate matter. With the U.S.A having been so intimately involved in the replacement of Prime Minister Mosaddeq and with American corporate interests benefiting so immensely under the Shah’s preferential policies, it would stand to reason that, having gone to such great lengths to restore H.M. Mohammad Reza to power, that efforts would be made with like enthusiasm to keep him there. It is, therefore, in closing this letter that I convey to you an appeal for a generous and sustained developmental aid package – in terms of both capital and personnel – to aid in the various infrastructure, educational and medical projects that will be implemented over the course of the coming years. Iran lies adjacent to the Iron Curtain. We hope to have every confidence in relying upon the magnanimity and steadfastness of the U.S.A. in working very closely with our country on the frontier of the Free World.


​

Seyed Abdollah Entezam
Minister of Foreign Affairs
IMPERIAL STATE OF IRAN​