By William Pomeroy

S sion about in an oil-greased crisis
of their own long-term making, imperial
interests are finding it increasingly hard to
distinguish their friends from their foes in
the Middle East. All of the old imperialist
equations in the region have been upset by
the oil-producing countries’ assumption of
control over their resources and the pricing
of them in the world market.

Recent threats of military intervention
-in the Middle East, made with an air of
desperation by President Ford and Henry

Kissinger, are not directed only against ~

anti-imperialist governments in Iraq, Syria,
Egypt, Lebanon and Libya, as before, but
also against the conservative, repressive
regimes in Saudi Arabia, the Arab Emir-
ates of the Arabian Gulf, and Iran. In the
new Middle Eastern situation the right-
wing monarchies and shiekhdoms have
become as much of a problem for the im-
perialist powers as the Arab countries
where national liberation forces have long
been in command.

A leading example of the ambivalent
relationship that has developed between
the imperialist powers and their old sub-
servient allies is the case of Iran. One of
the world’s worst ultra-right dictatorships,
Iran has been a prime example of neo-
colonialism of the U.S.-dominated variety.
Today, under the inflrence of sudden oil
wealth, it is not just 2a unpredictable part-
ner for the U.S. ane. other western powers
but has also declaved ambitions to be a cap-
italist rival.

The despotic ruler of Iran, the Shahin-
shah Mohamraad Reza Pahlevi, whose hold
on his throxe was literally made possible
by a CI“. coup in 1953, is the object of some
bitte: mutterings by U.S. leaders today.
List July, U.S. Treasury Secretary William
Simon’s muttering became a public tirade
in which he denounced the Shah as “‘a nut”’
and as “irresponsible, reckless and just
plain ridiculous."” Why? Because, accord-
ing to Simon, the Shah wanted to make Iran
a *‘superpower” by investing all, his’ oil
revenues at home instead of channeling
them into imperialist financial institutions.
Such heresy from a CIA client is unheard of.

A quarter of.a century ago Iran threw
the first big scare into the imperialist oil
companies. Nationalist forces won power
under Premier Mossadegh and in 1951 na-
tionalized the big Anglo-Iranian Oil Com-
pany that had dominated the country’s econ-
omy. In an imperialist counter-attack, the
CIA masterminded the overthrow, of the
Mossadegh regime in 1953 (it was the first
major CIA operation for the overthrow ofa
government) and put the Shah (who had
been compelled to leave Iran) back in su-
preme and absolute power. Nationalism
and democracy were obliterated and the oil
companies were back in the picture.

| pS however, was not whol-
ly reversed. An eight-company western oil
consortium gained a 25-year concession in
1954 for the production, refining and sale of
Iranian oil, out of which Iran merely got
royalties. This was chiefly a U.S. triumph.
Previously the British AIOC was the mas-
ter, but five U.S. companies moved into the
consortium, cutting the British share to
40%. A U.S. military advisory team took
command of and built up Iran’s army and
para-military police force. In 1955 John
Foster Dulles made Iran the keystone of
the U.S.-conceived anti-Soviet, anti-nation-
al-liberation Central Treaty Organization,
A ruthless autocrat, the Shah, well-
schooled by the CIA, created with U.S. aid
a thoroughgoing police state. His State
Security Organization, or SAVAK (Saz-
man-e Amniyat va Keshvar), as brutal a
gang of torturers as the Gestapo, has vir-
tually exterminated opposition at home
and terrorizes exiles abroad as well. SA-
VAK, headed by General Ne’ma Tollah
Nassiri, is answerable to the Shah alone.
The chief target_of SAVAK has been the
Communist Tudeh or People’s Party,
which has been outlawed since 1949 (the
support it mobilized for the Mossadegh

oil nationalization policy was conducted
from -underground). Prior to being out-
lawed it had 20,000 members and had or-
ganized one million workers and peasants
into trade unions, and its influence was
considerable in government and army cir-
cles (900 army officers were Tudeh mem-
bers or supporters). SAVAK discovered
and destroyed every single Tudeh cell, and
reconstruction of the party has been slow,
difficult and painful.

Iran’s development as an imperialist
problem-child has been due to the Shah and
the Iranian ruling class elements around
him. In one of the most significant shifts in
developing countries, the Shah, once a vast
feudal landlord, set out to transform his
power base from semi-feudal landlordism
to industrial capitalism and a new bour-
geoisie.

The liquidation of semi-feudal landlord-

isrn began with land reform in 1962. A great ©

demagogue, the Shah called it his ‘‘White
Revolution” and his ‘‘genuine Iranian com-
munism.” Previously 70% of the land was
owned by a few large absentee landlords,
and 90% of the people were share-cropping
peasants in subsistence farming. Although
big loopholes have existed in land reform
(landlords have retained large estates on
the grounds that they have ‘‘mechanized”’
them), by 1971 it was claimed that 2,300,000
peasant families had benefited,

The Shah was not averse to kicking
aside his imperialist CENTO ties to gain
his new industrial base. ;

To obtain the means of development,

the Shah has been capable of delivering ~

some ‘severe jolts to imperialist interests.

In 1973 he abruptly gave an ultimatum to ~

the oil consortium that there would be no
extension. of its lease beyond 1979, and
that there were only two alternatives open:.
either continue with the existing agree-
ment until 1979 and then become ordinary
buyers of Iranian oil on Iran’s terms, or
else negotiate another agreement in which
the consortium would shrink to a mere pro-
duction contract agency, with special buy-
ing privileges for 20 years. The consortium
settled for the latter alternative, the Shah’s
National Iranian Oil Co. taking over full
ownership and control of the industry.

l. was after the 1973 Arab-Israeli War,
however, that U.S. officials like Secretary
Simon began to shout imprecations at the
Shah. Instead of heeding .U.S. and other
imperialist countries that called for the
massive increase in oil revenues accruing
to the Middle Eastern oil producers from
greatly boosted prices to be ‘‘recycled”’
back to the west, the Shah’s government is
pouring these into an enormously augment-
ed development program. (Iran’s oil reve-
nues are up by about 450%, and are expected
to hit $22 billion in the current fiscal year,
with a $10 billion surplus. ) .

In August 1974 the Shah at one stroke
literally doubled the planned expenditures

4

for his 1973-78 development plan. Within
the past half-year Iran has signed some
staggering investment contracts and indus-
trial purchase agreements. With Frarice
alone the projects have amounted to $6
billion, including a 250,000 -ton “special
steel’’ mill, a 100,000 Refault. car factory,
two nuclear power plants, a 40-mile sub-
way system for Teheran, ship manufactur-
ing, chemical products, a food industry,
telecommunications, housing (200,000
units), hospitals, and many others.

From Italy industrial projects totalling
over $3 billion are being negotiated, includ-
ing a 3-million ton steel plant, a railway,
port, shipyard, power station and desalini-

* zation plant. Large projects for paper-mak-

ing and car manufacture (a $600 million
plan for 400,000 cars to be produced by 1980)
are being discussed with Britain and West
Germany, with the U.S. not in the picture.

This is one aspect of the Iranian trans-
formation. Another, that more unsettling
to imperialism, is that Iran, the develop-
ing country, has become. an exporter of
capital and is moving in on the west. In July
Iran bought 25% of the West German Krupp
steel corporation, Krupp Huttenwerke, and
gained a board membership on the whole
Krupp empire of shipbuilding, engineering,
heavy equipment and aerospace manufac-
ture. This was followed up by steps to buy
a large slice of the Daimler-Benz moter
company (Mercedes cars).

‘A 45% Iranian share will be held in the
French portion of the $2.3 billion European ~

”

IRAN: power in the Mid-East

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 1975—Page 10

- that’ permits Iranian naval patrolling of

uranium enrichment project. In December
talks were being held with the U.S. Pan-
American World Airways for a large Iran- —
ian share (Pan-Am is in financial difficul- _
ties), A move has been under way for Iran —
to acquire a share in the Shell oil com- |
pany’s distribution chain in the U.S. }
The Shah has not been shy about pro-
claiming that he intends to make Iran, with |
its 32.5 million population, the industrial
power of the Middle East and of southern —
Asia as well. He has already made prelim-
inary trade tours to Southeast Asia, and has
sewn up a 20-year $140 million trade deal |
with Australia, getting Australian bauxite,

tion party” that had been set up as a pre- @
tense of a “two-party” system. ;
Iran is still the imperialists’ ally in the
Middle East, currently having 6,000 troops 7
in Oman to help. suppress a liberation |
movement and giving military aid to rebel”
ing Kurds in progressive Iraq; however, it}
acts increasingly on its own. The Shah]
wants control of the Arabian Gulf and re- 7
cently reached an agreement with Oman

the waters at the gulf entrance. At the
same time the Shah calls for a nuclear-free
zone in the Indian Ocean and the exclusion”
of foreign navies from the Indian Ocean”
and the gulf. :
The new set of relationships and contra”
dictions have only begun to make them: @
selves felt. in the Middle East. The new
forces being released are likely to startle
poth the imperialists and the Shah of Iran.

WORLD MAGAZINE