A ‘Special Relationship?’ American and British Soft Power in Iran, 1953- 1960 PhD in History Department of History Darius Wainwright July 2019 I confirm that this is my own work and the use of all material from other sources has been properly and fully acknowledged. Darius Wainwright Acknowledgements Yes, my name is at the front of this thesis, but it would not have been possible without the help and support of a number of people. First, my supervisor, Dr Mara Oliva. Her guidance and feedback have been invaluable, as has her belief in this project and, more importantly, in myself. Mara’s not just been such a huge help with this thesis, but with my professional development, too. For both these things, I am eternally grateful. Thanks must also go to the University of Reading’s Department of History. I arrived as a naïve, eager 22-year-old MA student and will leave as a historian and more well-rounded human being. More than anything else, this is a testament to the department’s staff, who have all, in a myriad of ways, helped me achieve my goals. Discussions on wrestling and Liverpool teams of yesteryear aside, Dr Dafydd Townley has been an invaluable sounding board for ideas and a keen listener when I’ve needed to talk things through. He also lived with me for a week when we undertook research in the US, which is no mean feat! A huge thank you, too, must go to Professor Emily West and Dr Jacqui Turner. Both have frequently enquired about my progress and have been incredibly supportive. Special thanks must also go to Dr Dina Rezk for her constructive comments and feedback. While writing this thesis, I have taught undergraduates at both Reading and the LSE’s Department of International History. From the varying personalities you encounter, the people you help progress and develop and, most important of all, the thought-provoking ideas students espouse, teaching in higher education is an absolute pleasure and a privilege. A massive thank you to all my students for all the discussions, questions and laughs. If you got half out of our classes as I did – or if you all just placed footnotes at the end rather than the middle of the sentence – then I’d be very happy indeed! Speaking of students, the postgraduate community at Reading have been fantastic, too. There’s far too many to name here, but whether it’s an email, a catch-up in the corridor, discussions over a coffee (or something stronger!), you’ve all been great company. I wish you all the greatest success going forward. Outside Reading, the Political Studies Association’s American Politics Group have been a great sounding board for research ideas. Without the combined financial support of the British Association of American Studies, the Royal Historical Society and the Dwight D. Eisenhower Presidential Library, I would have been unable to afford to undertake research in the US. A huge thank you to them, particularly the latter’s Hosting Committee who made my stay in Abilene, KS as comfortable and enjoyable as possible. A huge shout out, in particular, has to go to Dean. When my travel plans to depart Abilene fell through, Dean and his family volunteered to drive me 3 hours to Kansas City. I’ll forever be grateful for that act of kindness, the introduction to Midwestern cooking and the ice cream! I’d also like to say a massive thank you to Philip Davies and the Eccles Centre at the British Library. Receiving an Eccles Centre Fellowship was one of the highlights of my PhD and something I never thought I’d receive. The research I was able to do thanks to that proved fruitful for this thesis and, more crucially, future projects. A big shout out to all my friends, from school, university and beyond. Thank you for sticking by me and understanding when I was unable to be there – who knew PhDs could be such an exhausting, time-consuming experience?! Your encouragement and questions have kept me going, as has your fascination with all things academia and thesis-related. I hereby promise that I can now be present at all events in both body and in spirit! Last, but must crucial of all, a huge thank you to my parents. From a very young age, they have been firm advocates of education, instilling this in me and my brother. Without their initial encouragement and support, none of this would have been possible. I hope this thesis makes you proud. Abstract This thesis examines Britain and the United States’ use of cultural diplomacy and propaganda in Iran between 1953 and 1960. It identifies why British and American policymakers placed so much importance on cultural ties with Iran, how officials from both countries used these initiatives to attract Iranians to their respective ways of life and the extent to which they perceived these policies to be successful. This PhD considers how Britain and the United States sought to strengthen ties with Iran at an elite and popular level. It explores how the UK Foreign Office and the US State Department forged links with their Iranian counterparts to instruct them on the production and dissemination of propaganda. The project proceeds to explore the role played by government-affiliated institutions at a non-state level to promote British and American cultures, norms, values and ways of life in Iran. These include the British Council, the Iran-America Society and the United States Information Agency (USIA). The analysis of British and American soft power in Iran between 1953 and 1960 makes three key contributions to the literature on this topic. First, it views Anglo-American relations with Iran through the prism of soft power. This is an original take on the topic. Previous research has emphasised economic and military interactions between the UK, US and Iran. Second, the thesis explores how Britain and the United States responded to the changes in their respective global positions. During this period, the UK was a declining power, crippled by the financial cost of the Second World War and was in the process of relinquishing most of overseas colonies. The US, in comparison, was a booming superpower, talking a greater interest in the struggle against Communism in regions such as the Middle East. Finally, it highlights the tensions and competitive element of Anglo- American relations in the Middle East. Both countries, while collaborating in many fields, had similar aims but different regional priorities. The project points out the ways in which they co- operated and competed with one another for regional supremacy Table of Contents Abbreviations 1 Abbreviation of Terms Used in the Footnotes 2 Introduction 3 Chapter I - The ‘Special Relationship’, the Cold War and Soft Power: The Motives Behind Greater American and British Cultural Diplomacy in Iran 52 Chapter II - Maintaining Geopolitical Stability: The USIS’ backing of the Shah’s Regime and its Attempts to Counter the Spread of Soviet-inspired Communism in Iran 95 Chapter III – Education and Socio-Economic Development: Promoting the American Way of Life in Iran 138 Chapter IV – Containing Communism and Maintaining Britain’s Position in Iran: The Information Research Department, SAVAK and Anti-Soviet Propaganda 179 Chapter V – Anglicising Iranian Society and Culture Through Education: The UK Foreign Office and the British Council 214 Chapter VI: The Impact of American and British Soft Power in Iran 251 Conclusion 302 Bibliography 314 Abbreviations AIOC – Anglo-Iranian Oil Company BP – British Petroleum BBC – British Broadcasting Corporation CIA – Central Intelligence Agency DPB – Department of Press and Broadcasting FOA - Foreign Operations Administration GATT – General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade ICA – International Cooperation Administration IRD – Information Research Department NATO – North Atlantic Treaty Organisation NSC – National Security Council OCB – Operations Coordinating Board PAO – Public Affairs Officer SIS – Secret Intelligence Service TVI – Television Iran UAR – United Arab Republic UN – United Nations UNESCO - United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation USIA – United States Information Agency USIS – United States Information Service VOA – Voice of America 1 Abbreviation of Terms Used in the Footnotes BBC WAC – British Broadcasting Corporation’s Written Archives Centre DDEL – Dwight D. Eisenhower Presidential Library FRUS – Foreign Relations of the United States NAII – National Archives II (US) TNA – The National Archives (UK) 2 Introduction ‘At the heart of the Iran deal was a giant fiction that a murderous regime desired only a peaceful nuclear energy program.’1 In May 2018, the US President, Donald Trump, withdrew the United States from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. Dubbed the ‘Iran deal’, the agreement pledged that the country would halt its nuclear programme in return for the lifting of economic sanctions.2 The incumbent President claimed that the Iranian government had flouted the agreement by cultivating plutonium, something its leadership in Tehran vehemently denies. The treaty had been a key foreign policy achievement of Trump’s predecessor in the White House, Barack Obama. Presuming that both countries shared mutual regional goals, he had adopted a more conciliatory approach towards Iran, working with moderate Iranian government elites to achieve these goals. Between 2013 and 2015, Obama and his then Secretary of State, John Kerry, worked with the Iranian President, Hassan Rouhani, and his Foreign Minister, Javad Zarif, to construct the ‘Iran deal’ and create an international consensus around this agreement.3 The juxtaposing approaches taken by Trump and Obama towards the Iranian regime here are nothing new. Echoing the stance adopted by the incumbent in the White House, George W. Bush used his 2002 State of the Union Address to place Iran, among 1 ‘Remarks by Donald Trump on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action’, The White House, 8 May 2018, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-joint- comprehensive-plan-action/ (accessed 31 May 2019).