DOCSLIB.ORG

New Documents About 1953 Iran Coup Enliven Regime Change Debate

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
New Documents About 1953 Iran Coup Enliven Regime Change Debate New Documents about 1953 Iran Coup Enliven Regime Change Debate atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/iraninsight/new-documents-about-1953-iran-coup-enliven-regime-change-debate July 13, 2017 By Malcolm Byrne Sixty-four years on, the effects of the 1953 coup in Iran continue to resonate inside Iran and outside. Last month, the State Department released a highly anticipated official collection of declassified documents covering US policy toward Iran from 1951-1954. While it did not change the basic understanding of that period, it did provide more detail about who was pushing for regime change on both the US and Iranian sides, what they feared and how presumptuous they were. Coincidentally, Iran is nosing its way back into public awareness by means of a number of renewed calls by neoconservative op-ed writers for regime change in the Islamic Republic. In one sense, this is mere coincidence. The volume of documents, part of the State Department’s venerable Foreign Relations of the United States series, has been in the works since the early 1990s. In 1989, the volume that was supposed to be the official word on the coup period turned out not to have a single reference to Western involvement in the overthrow of Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh. Public scandal ensued and the State Department promised to produce a more reliable account. It took more than a generation to accomplish. For several years, US and British government refusal to declassify most of what was in their files held things up. But that was mainly for reasons of spy craft – an insistence on holding onto anything having to do with sources and methods. The British also demanded (and continue to this day) that their part in the coup not be acknowledged at all. By contrast, two US presidents have admitted to America’s role. Hopes for release edged upwards under President Barack Obama – one of the two aforementioned presidents – but his Secretary of State, John Kerry, decided after concluding the contentious 2015 nuclear deal with Iran that releasing records on a topic that remained so sensitive for many Iranians might give hardliners in Iran a pretext to attack the accord. So the Department continued to sit on the volume. In one of the great ironies of this extraordinary political period, it was the administration of Donald Trump – not known as champions of transparency – that finally consented to release the current volume. Officials from different agencies this author has spoken to will not even speculate on the record about the reasons but do acknowledge that it was “surprising” how quickly things moved from the original April 2017 internal memo from the Historian’s Office proposing release, to the mid-June decision to publish. From the comfort of the private sector, speculation is easier. Suffice to say it seems highly likely that, at a minimum, the president, who campaigned on promises to tear up the nuclear agreement, and his secretary of state, who also thinks it is a terrible deal, would not have the same qualms as Obama or Kerry on this score. At over 1000 pages, the volume consists of previously closed files from the State Department, the CIA and the National Security Council (NSC) that complement a small universe of previously known materials on the coup period. The documents mainly provide a backdrop of political reporting and analysis, a smattering of reports during the coup itself and more assessments of the aftermath. The analyses start with attempts to understand the state of play in Iran during this critical period. The title of the first section identifies Mosaddegh as the chief topic of interest but the 1/3 tall shadow of the Soviet Union towers over most of the reports. One of the strengths of the collection is that it covers not just the analytical arms of each agency but operational divisions as well, such as CIA’s Directorate of Plans, and the offices of top administration officials. The result is a wide range of perspectives that dovetail well with previously released materials. (See, for example, the National Security Archive’s e-book, “CIA Confirms Role in 1953 Iran Coup,” August 19, 2013, http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB435/.) Interestingly, the most important known record of the coup, a 200-page internal CIA history written in early 1954, has never been declassified, but The New York Times got its hands on a leaked copy and posted it on its web site in 2000. The author of the history was Donald Wilber, one of the architects of the operation. The new FRUS volume contains only one short appendix from his study. Oil nationalization is naturally another focus of attention – since that was the act that started the British, and later Americans, down the road to Mosaddegh’s ouster. The new materials are sure to add to the ongoing scholarly debate over whether the coup was more about strategic fears -- the Soviet threat -- or crass commercial interests. CIA and State Department assessments also review the actions and thinking of a number of key individuals starting with Mosaddegh but including the Shah, Mosaddegh’s replacement Fazlollah Zahedi and other pro-Shah, military and opposition figures. Particularly interesting are some of the assessments of senior Islamic clerics. Ayatollah Abolqasem Kashani, who was also very active in politics – at one point serving as Speaker of the Majles - appears as someone, in the eyes of the analysts, who has a worrisome capacity to create problems for US policy objectives. American officials variously fret about his forming an “unholy alliance” with Mosaddegh or, improbably, siding with the Communist Tudeh Party. Such was the level of concern at the time that almost any combination of political forces seemed plausible – and all were likely to be bad for Washington. Of course the Tudeh itself appears throughout the files. The Communist threat was uppermost on the US list of concerns, not as high for Great Britain. A few pieces of British analysis pop up occasionally in these records and are useful as points of comparison. For years, the US government has bowed to London’s wishes to keep their participation under wraps. But indications of their involvement slip through. For instance, an editorial note on page 611 reveals that Kermit Roosevelt learned on July 1, 1953 that the British Prime Minister “has approved the plan.” The note goes on to imply, without stating it directly, that the plan indeed has to do with the coup. Here, Wilber’s history comes in handy – it explicitly confirms July 1 as the date Winston Churchill gave his approval for Mosaddegh’s overthrow. As indicated, there is relatively little about the unfolding of the coup itself. Several reporting telegrams are reproduced, some of which include extremely interesting nuggets about events on the ground, and even point fingers after the botched first attempt of August 14-15, although they don’t reveal much about shifting tactics in the wake of that initial failure. Tragically, most of the operational cables for the key timeframe of August 16-19 no longer exist. A source note to the volume explains that CIA officers destroyed a large number of records in the early 1960s as part of a routine “office purge,” and allegedly in the belief that a backup file existed. In fact, a microfilm set had been made and some of the cables in this collection were transcribed from it several years ago originally for use in the 1989 FRUS volume. Where is that backup set now? The source note provides the answer in what may be the most inexplicable statement in the entire volume: “The microfilm was later destroyed in accordance with a National Archives approved records schedule.” How many other irreplaceable files about other historically significant or controversial intelligence operations have met the same “approved” fate? Fortunately, the leaked internal history goes into deep detail about the operation. On the other hand, as useful as that is, there is no substitute for contemporaneous accounts, written or dictated in the heat of the moment, which are 2/3 the most likely to offer an unvarnished picture of events and officials’ thinking. Wilber, the author of the 1954 internal history, was one of the operation’s planners but was not in Tehran at the time so his account is often one or two steps removed from the immediate action. Some of the most interesting new additions to the story are the notes of meetings that took place after the coup. For instance, Kermit Roosevelt met with senior CIA officials on August 28 and went into some depth about what happened and why he made some of the decisions he did – crucially, refusing to close up shop when it looked like the whole operation had gone south. The volume includes the cable from CIA headquarters advising Roosevelt to evacuate his team. Instead he stayed in Tehran and worked with a number of Iranians to put the operation back on track. One of the questions about this episode that has gotten significant play in recent years is whether the coup was an American and British venture or whether Iranians were the ones who ultimately pulled it off. Not surprisingly for such a significant – even emotional – issue, opinions are sharp on all sides. Already, “I-told-you-so” articles, web postings and interviews have appeared, insisting the new materials conclusively support a given interpretation. More information does not always bring greater clarity. The fact is that the full story of the coup will never be told, at least not to everyone’s satisfaction. No significant troves of contemporaneous Iranian documents are likely to appear after this long, although one can always hope.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • In Yohanan Friedmann (Ed.), Islam in Asia, Vol. 1 (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1984), P
    Notes INTRODUCTION: AFGHANISTAN’S ISLAM 1. Cited in C. Edmund Bosworth, “The Coming of Islam to Afghanistan,” in Yohanan Friedmann (ed.), Islam in Asia, vol. 1 (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1984), p. 13. 2. Erica C. D. Hunter, “The Church of the East in Central Asia,” Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 78 (1996), pp. 129–42. On Herat, see pp. 131–34. 3. On Afghanistan’s Jews, see the discussion and sources later in this chapter and notes 163 to 169. 4. Bosworth (1984; above, note 1), pp. 1–22; idem, “The Appearance and Establishment of Islam in Afghanistan,” in Étienne de la Vaissière (ed.), Islamisation de l’Asie Centrale: Processus locaux d’acculturation du VIIe au XIe siècle, Cahiers de Studia Iranica 39 (Paris: Association pour l’Avancement des Études Iraniennes, 2008); and Gianroberto Scarcia, “Sull’ultima ‘islamizzazione’ di Bāmiyān,” Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli, new series, 16 (1966), pp. 279–81. On the early Arabic sources on Balkh, see Paul Schwarz, “Bemerkungen zu den arabischen Nachrichten über Balkh,” in Jal Dastur Cursetji Pavry (ed.), Oriental Studies in Honour of Cursetji Erachji Pavry (London: Oxford Univer- sity Press, 1933). 5. Hugh Kennedy and Arezou Azad, “The Coming of Islam to Balkh,” in Marie Legen- dre, Alain Delattre, and Petra Sijpesteijn (eds.), Authority and Control in the Countryside: Late Antiquity and Early Islam (London: Darwin Press, forthcoming). 6. For example, Geoffrey Khan (ed.), Arabic Documents from Early Islamic Khurasan (London: Nour Foundation/Azimuth Editions, 2007). 7. Richard W. Bulliet, Conversion to Islam in the Medieval Period: An Essay in Quan- titative History (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1979); Derryl Maclean, Re- ligion and Society in Arab Sind (Leiden: Brill, 1989); idem, “Ismailism, Conversion, and Syncretism in Arab Sind,” Bulletin of the Henry Martyn Institute of Islamic Studies 11 (1992), pp.
    [Show full text]
  • Confronting Threats Before They Materialize: the United States and the Overthrow of the Iranian Government
    Confronting Threats Before They Materialize: The United States and the Overthrow of the Iranian Government --- Daniel Goldsmith In 1953, the United States government funded and orchestrated a coup that deposed Dr. Mohammed Mossadegh, the popular, democratically elected leader of Iran. Although Mossadegh’s government never professed Communist allegiances, members of the Eisenhower administration accused it of harboring nascent Communist influences imported from Moscow. In the early years of the Cold War, American officials perceived Communism’s spread as a palpable threat. The United States intervened in Iran in 1953 due to a combination of geo-political and ideological interests, in conjunction with a strong sense of fear and paranoia. This was a significant example of “big stick” diplomacy, and proved to be a decisive turning point in Cold War international relations. It set a precedent for many future American interventions and an example for non-aligned nations that would have a far- reaching impact on diplomacy worldwide. Early US Cold War Policy: The Truman Years The intervention must be understood as the culmination of several years of early American Cold War policy. Although it took place under Dwight D. Eisenhower, its formulation came as a result of global developments that began during the presidency of Harry Truman. After the Second World War, Soviet Communism became an aggressive challenge to US interests. This threat intensified during the late 1940s with the Czechoslovak coup, the Berlin Crisis, the fall of China, Soviet development of nuclear arms, and the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950, prompting both official and popular fears of Soviet expansion.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Instigated the White Revolution of the Shah and the People in Iran, 1963?
    Agent or Client: Who Instigated the White Revolution of the Shah and the People in Iran, 1963? A thesis submitted to The University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Humanities 2015 Michael J. Willcocks School of Arts, Languages and Cultures ! 2! Contents Photographs & Cartoons 5 ! Abstract 6 ! Declaration 7 ! Copyright Statement 8 ! Acknowledgements 9 Introduction 10 Literature Review: US-Iranian Relations and 10 Reform in Iran 1961-63 ! Approach 26 Contribution to Knowledge 28 ! Research Questions 28 ! Hypothesis 28 ! Methodology & Sources 29 ! Thesis Structure 31 ! Transliteration 32 ! ! Chapter 1: Iran! and the United States 1945-61 33 ! 1.1 US-Iranian Relations 1946-61 33 1.2 Iranian Situation 1953-61 39 Chapter 2: ʻAlī Amīnī: The Last Chance? 47 2.1 The Appointment of ʻAlī Amīnī 47 2.1.1 The Man 48 2.1.2 The Controversy 50 2.1.3 Events 52 2.1.4 Explanation 59 2.2 Amīnī’s Plan and Team 66 2.2.1 Amīnī’s Plan 66 2.2.2 Amīnī’s Cabinet 67 2.2.2.1 Ḥasan Arsanjānī 70 2.2.2.2 Nūr al-Dīn Alamūtī 72 2.2.2.3 Muḥammad Dirakhshish 73 2.2.3 A Divided Government 75 2.3 The White House Reacts 77 2.3.1 Economic Assistance 78 ! ! 3! 2.3.1.1 Transition to the Decade of Development 80 2.3.1.2 Reacting to the Crisis in Iran 84 2.3.2 The Iran Task Force 87 2.3.2.1 Policy Objectives 89 2.3.2.2 US Support for Amīnī 93 2.4 Amīnī’s Government: Generating Momentum 97 2.4.1 Anti-Corruption 98 2.4.2 Managing The Economy 100 2.4.3 Third Plan Preparations 101 2.4.4 Land Reform 102 ! Chapter 3: Controlling! the Future 106 !
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Changes in Iranian Education System Before and After Islamic Revolution
    BASIC CHANGES IN IRANIAN EDUCATION SYSTEM BEFORE AND AFTER ISLAMIC REVOLUTION A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES OF MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY YASİN TAMER IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF MIDDLE EAST STUDES DECEMBER 2010 Approval of the Graduate School of Social Sciences Prof. Dr. Meliha Altunışık I certify that this thesis satisfies all the requirements as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts. Assoc. Dr. Recep Boztemur This is to certify that we have read this thesis and that in our opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts. Assoc. Dr. Mustafa Şen Examining Committee Members Asssoc. Dr. Erdoğan Yıldırım (METU, PHIL) Assoc. Dr. Mustafa Şen (METU, SOC) Assoc. Dr. Recep Boztemur (METU, MES) I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work. Name, Last name: Yasin TAMER Signature : iii ABSTRACT CHANGES IN THE EDUCATION SYSTEM OF IRAN Tamer, Yasin M.A., Department of Middle East Studies Supervisor : Prof. Dr. Mustafa Şen December 2010, 86 pages This thesis analyzes the changes occurred in the Iranian education system. The changes occurred before and after the Islamic Revolution are main themes. Reform attempts, modernization, westernization, secularization, purification and Islamization of Iranian education system will be discussed along with comments of notable figures.
    [Show full text]
  • Musaddiq's Spectre: on the Recent Declassification of US Documents
    Musaddiq’s Spectre: On the Recent Declassification of US Documents Jul 17 2017 by Eskandar Sadeghi-Boroujerdi and Siavush Randjbar-Daemi [Tanks in the streets of Tehran in 1953. Image via Wilipedia] Following the 1989 release of the first Iran-related volume of the State Department’s Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS) series, a plethora of books and articles have been written detailing the MI6-CIA coup d’état in Iran on 19 August 1953. The coup resulted in the ouster of the much-celebrated Prime Minister Muhammad Musaddiq, who—to the profound chagrin of United Kingdom—nationalized the Anglo- Iranian Oil Company (today known as British Petroleum) in March 1951. One might therefore be forgiven for asking why the June 2017 release of a new FRUS volume series, Iran, 1951-1954, should spark so much public and scholarly interest. The main social networks used by Iranians, such as Telegram and Twitter, have been awash with commentary from amateur historians, political pundits, politicians, and casual observers alike. They have also carried the translation of the initial in-depth articles in response to the publication of this latest FRUS volume and produced by seasoned scholars of the period and topic. These include those of Ervand Abrahamian, Mark Gasiorowski, and Malcolm Byrne, published by Lobelog and the Wilson Center. A number of print publications in Tehran are readying extensive dossiers, and discussions are being held to produce a translation of most, if not all, of the documents contained in this new volume. What could this latest set of documents possibly add to what many both within the scholarly community and general public consider a cut-and-dried matter? Prior to the 15 June 2017 release, there was no paucity of sources attesting to the nature of the coup in the public domain.
    [Show full text]
  • SECRETS of HISTORY: the C.I.A. in Iran -- a Special Report.; How a Plot Convulsed Iran in '53 (And in '79)
    April 16, 2000 SECRETS OF HISTORY: The C.I.A. in Iran -- A special report.; How a Plot Convulsed Iran in '53 (and in '79) By JAMES RISEN For nearly five decades, America's role in the military coup that ousted Iran's elected prime minister and returned the shah to power has been lost to history, the subject of fierce debate in Iran and stony silence in the United States. One by one, participants have retired or died without revealing key details, and the Central Intelligence Agency said a number of records of the operation -- its first successful overthrow of a foreign government -- had been destroyed. But a copy of the agency's secret history of the 1953 coup has surfaced, revealing the inner workings of a plot that set the stage for the Islamic revolution in 1979, and for a generation of anti-American hatred in one of the Middle East's most powerful countries. The document, which remains classified, discloses the pivotal role British intelligence officials played in initiating and planning the coup, and it shows that Washington and London shared an interest in maintaining the West's control over Iranian oil. The secret history, written by the C.I.A.'s chief coup planner and obtained by The New York Times, says the operation's success was mostly a matter of chance. The document shows that the agency had almost complete contempt for the man it was empowering, Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlevi, whom it derided as a vacillating coward. And it recounts, for the first time, the agency's tortured efforts to seduce and cajole the shah into taking part in his own coup.
    [Show full text]
  • Preface Introduction
    Notes Preface 1. William Roger Louis, ‘Britain and the Overthrow of the Mosaddeq Govern- ment’, in Mark Gasiorowski and Malcolm Byrne (eds), Mohammad Mosaddeq and the 1953 Coup in Iran (New York: Syracuse University Press, 2004), p. 126. 2. Kermit was the grandson of President Theodor Roosevelt; his account of the events was narrated in his book, Countercoup: The Struggle for the Control of Iran (New York: McGraw- Hill, 1979). 3. This CIA internal report, entitled ‘Clandestine Service History; Overthrow of Pre- mier Mossadeq [sic] of Iran, November 1952–August 1953’ (hereinafter referred to as Overthrow). The author is Donald Wilber who, as Iran point-man at CIA headquarters in Washington, had a hand in the drafting of the coup plot against Mosaddeq codenamed TPAJAX. He was not, however, in Iran at the time of the events in August 1953. Introduction 1. On 13 March 1983, commemorating the twenty-first anniversary of the death of Ayatollah Kashani, Iran’s parliamentary Speaker, later President, Ali-Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani made the following statement: ‘We honour the memory of the exalted Ayatollah Kashani and request the Iranian nation to participate in the commemoration ceremonies that will be held tomor- row and in the following days; on the same occasion we should express indignation over the injustice done to him and to the Islamic movement by the nationalists [i.e., the Mosaddeq supporters] and the blow inflicted by them on the Islamic movement in one episode in Iran’s history. On this historical day, we express our sorrow to his honourable family and to the Iranian nation and celebrate the life of this great man.’ See, Hashemi- Rafsanjani and Sara Lahooti, Omid va Delvapasi¯ , karnameh¯ va khater¯ at’e¯ Hashemi Rafsanjani, sal’e¯ 1364 (Hope and Preoccupation, the Balance-Sheet and Memoirs of Hashemi-Rafsanjani, year 1364/1985), (Tehran: Daftar’e Nashr’e Ma’aref’e¯ Eslami publishers, 2008), p.
    [Show full text]
  • HOOD MUSEUM of ART Quarter Y
    HOOD MUSEUM OF ART DARTMOUTH quarter y COLLEGE 50th Issue | Autumn 2016 HOOD MUSEUM OF ART STAFF Susan Achenbach, Art Handler Gary Alafat, Security / Buildings Manager Juliette Bianco, Deputy Director Elizabeth Brown, Assistant to the Director Patrick Dunfey, Head of Exhibitions Design and Planning Rebecca Fawcett, Registrarial Assistant Stephanie Fournier, Business Assistant Kate George, Tour Coordinator Cynthia Gilliland, Associate Registrar Katherine Hart, Senior Curator of Collections and Photo by Robert Gill. Barbara C. and Harvey P. Hood 1918 Curator of Academic Programming Jessica Havrda, Business Officer LETTER FROM THE DIRECTOR Deborah Haynes, Collections Documentation Manager and Cataloguer Amelia Kahl, Coordinator of Academic Introducing the Hood Downtown Exhibition Space Programming Hood Downtown, a temporary venue on Hanover’s Main Street, will be the Hood’s pub- Barbara MacAdam, Jonathan L. Cohen Curator of lic face during our expansion project, offering us an entirely new way to present works of American Art art. The difference will be clear right away. The exhibition space is located at street level. Neely McNulty, Images and ArtStart Instructor You can see the art through the windows and walk right in for a closer look. Each show Nils Nadeau, Associate Director, Strategy and will be designed to be visually arresting from outside or inside. Accessibility is key. External Relations Ugochukwu-Smooth Nzewi, Curator of Hood Downtown is a double gift. First, it is the inaugural project funded by the African Art Charles Gilman Family Endowment that supports the museum’s exhibitions and pro- Kathleen O’Malley, Registrar grams. We are grateful to the Gilman Family for this wonderful gift.
    [Show full text]
  • The US Stay-Behind Operation in Iran, 1948-1953
    Intelligence and National Security ISSN: 0268-4527 (Print) 1743-9019 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fint20 The US stay-behind operation in Iran, 1948-1953 Mark Gasiorowski To cite this article: Mark Gasiorowski (2019) The US stay-behind operation in Iran, 1948-1953, Intelligence and National Security, 34:2, 170-188, DOI: 10.1080/02684527.2018.1534639 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02684527.2018.1534639 Published online: 18 Oct 2018. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 94 View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=fint20 INTELLIGENCE AND NATIONAL SECURITY 2019, VOL. 34, NO. 2, 170–188 https://doi.org/10.1080/02684527.2018.1534639 ARTICLE The US stay-behind operation in Iran, 1948-1953 Mark Gasiorowski ABSTRACT This article explains a US initiative to prepare resistance forces for use in the event of a Soviet invasion or communist attempt to seize power in Iran during the early Cold War era. It begins by discussing similar ‘stay- behind’ operations in Europe in this era and the conditions that led US officials to develop one in Iran. It then explains what this stay-behind operation consisted of and why US officials eventually abandoned it. The paper concludes with a discussion of how the stay-behind operation in Iran differed from those in Europe and the important role it played in the decision-making that led to the 1953 coup in Iran. Introduction On 2 August 1951, the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) approved a plan to develop ‘stay- behind’ capabilities in Iran in cooperation with the Qashqai tribal confederation, which was based in south-central Iran, around Shiraz.
    [Show full text]
  • THE TWILIGHT of the BRITISH EMPIRE British Intelligence and Counter- Subversion in the Middle East, 1948−63
    Intelligence, Surveillance and Secret Warfare THE TWILIGHT OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE British Intelligence and Counter- Subversion in the Middle East, 1948−63 Chikara Hashimoto The Twilight of the British Empire Intelligence, Surveillance and Secret Warfare Series editors: Richard J. Aldrich, Rory Cormac, Michael S. Goodman and Hugh Wilford Published and forthcoming titles The Arab World and Western Intelligence: Analysing the Middle East, 1956–1981 Dina Rezk Chile, the CIA and the Cold War: A Transatlantic Perspective James Lockhart The CIA and the Pursuit of Security: History, Documents and Contexts Huw Dylan, David Gioe and Michael S. Goodman www.edinburghuniversitypress.com/series/isasw The Twilight of the British Empire British Intelligence and Counter- Subversion in the Middle East, 1948–63 Chikara Hashimoto Edited by Rory Cormac Edinburgh University Press is one of the leading university presses in the UK. We publish academic books and journals in our selected subject areas across the humanities and social sciences, combining cutting- edge scholarship with high editorial and production values to produce academic works of lasting importance. For more information visit our website: edinburghuniversitypress.com © Chikara Hashimoto, 2017 Edinburgh University Press Ltd The Tun – Holyrood Road 12(2f) Jackson’s Entry Edinburgh EH8 8PJ Typeset in 11/14 Sabon by Servis Filmsetting Ltd, Stockport, Cheshire printed and bound in Great Britain by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon CR0 4YY A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 978 1 4744 1045 8 (hardback) ISBN 978 1 4744 1046 5 (webready PDF) ISBN 978 1 4744 1047 2 (epub) The right of Chikara Hashimoto to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, and the Copyright and Related Rights Regulations 2003 (SI No.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Afghanistan's Longest-Lived Constitution
    8_PASARLAY_RTP_2.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 3/28/18 12:06 PM RETHINKING AFGHANISTAN’S LONGEST-LIVED CONSTITUTION: THE 1931 CONSTITUTION THROUGH THE LENS OF CONSTITUTIONAL ENDURANCE AND PERFORMANCE LITERATURE SHAMSHAD PASARLAY, PH.D.* INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 285 I. AFGHANISTAN’S HISTORY OF SHORT-LIVED CONSTITUTIONS (1923–1990) ............................................................................ 287 II. RETHINKING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE 1931 CONSTITUTION OF AFGHANISTAN .................................................................... 292 A. Assessing the Longevity of the 1931 Constitution: The Role of Constitutional Deferral ......................................... 294 B. Assessing the Performance of the 1931 Constitution ........... 300 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................... 306 * Shamshad Pasarlay, Ph.D. from the University of Washington School of Law (2016) and lecturer for the Herat University School of Law and Political Sciences. His publications include: Shamshad Pasarlay, Mohammad Qadamshah & Clark Lombardi, Reforming the Afghan Elec- toral System: The Current Debate and its Implications for the Plans to Amend the Afghan Con- stitution, INT’L J. CONST. L. BLOG (May 8, 2015), http://www.iconnectblog.com/2015/05/re- forming-the-afghan-electoral-system-the-current-debate-and-its-implications-for-the-plans-to- amend-the-afghan-constitution/; Shamshad Pasarlay, Constitutional Interpretation and Consti-
    [Show full text]
  • Archaeologists, World War II, and the Origins of Middle East Area Studies
    From Artifacts to People Facts: Archaeologists, World War II, and the Origins of Middle East Area Studies by Matthew August Kohlstedt B.S. in Radio/Television/Film, June 2002, Northwestern University M.A. in American Studies, May 2008, The George Washington University A Dissertation submitted to The Faculty of The Columbian College of Arts and Sciences of The George Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy January 31, 2015 Dissertation directed by Melani McAlister Associate Professor of American Studies and International Affairs The Columbian College of Arts and Sciences of The George Washington University cer- tifies that Matthew August Kohlstedt has passed the Final Examination for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy as of December 15, 2014. This is the final and approved form of the dissertation. From Artifacts to People Facts: Archaeologists, World War II, and the Origins of Middle East Area Studies Matthew August Kohlstedt Dissertation Research Committee: Melani McAlister, Associate Professor of American Studies and International Affairs, Dissertation Director Thomas A. Guglielmo, Associate Professor of American Studies, Committee Member Andrew Zimmerman, Professor of History and International Affairs, Committee Member ii © Copyright 2015 by Matthew August Kohlstedt. All rights reserved iii Dedication To Sarah and Ben. For everything, for always. iv Acknowledgments More than four years ago, I left my comfortable graduate student home in Wash- ington, DC, for what was supposed to be a one-year psychology job for my wife in Madi- son, WI. One year turned into two; we had a child; I worked non-dissertation jobs; and I grew increasingly uncertain when I would be able to dedicate enough time to this project to see it through to completion.
    [Show full text]