Pahlavi and the opportunistic view of the Palestinian issue

Mehr News, :%20After%20the%20victory%20of%20the%20Iranian%20Islamic%20Revolution%20in%20February%201357,%20one%20of%20the%20keywords%20that%20was%20repeated%20in%20the%20world%20was%20the%20withdrawal%20of%20a%20pro-Zionist%20government%20in%20the%20region%20and%20A%20pro-Palestinian%20current%20that%20does%20not%20recognize%20the%20Zionists%20has%20come%20to%20power.%20Meanwhile,%20the%20Pahlavi%20government%20traveled%20a%20long%20way%20in%20reaching%20a%20commercial,%20political%20and%20strategic%20partner%20of%20Tel%20Aviv,%20which%20happened%20based%20on%20Pahlavi’s%20opportunistic%20view.%20The%20ups%20and%20downs%20of%20Pahlavi’s%20relations%20with%20the%20Zionist%20regime,%20regardless%20of%20the%20nature%20of%20the%20case,%20were%20formed%20on%20the%20basis%20of%20other%20components%20such%20as%20relations%20with%20America,%20security%20agreements,%20maintaining%20relations%20with%20Arab%20countries%20and%20neutralizing%20internal%20pressures.

%0A

Early non-recognition of Israel (1947)

The Pahlavi government is under the influence of the people’s disgust with the crimes of the Zionists, despite being under the pressure of the supporters of the Zionists, i.e. Britain and America. was and knew that the condition of receiving the financial aid provided in Article 4 span style=”background-color:white”> Truman of the United States recognized “Israel”, but Israel’s membership in the United Nations Voted against. It means the famous resolution 181 called the partition of Palestine in 1947.

Mansour al-Sultaneh Adl, who headed a delegation from Iran to convene the United Nations General Assembly in those days, gave a sober and brief speech as follows:

dir=”RTL” style=”text-align:justify”>

Mr. Speaker – Mr. Representatives, the delegation of Iran has paid full attention to the negotiations held in this commission regarding the Palestinian issue. All the aspects of this complicated matter and especially its great importance in terms of maintaining peace in the Near East and the Middle East, have been fully explained by the respected representatives who have raised objections so far.

Iran’s representative in the Palestine Special Commission could not agree with the majority vote of that commission, which in his opinion may be in full compliance with the principles that should be the leader and guide of the United Nations. whether or not, the discussion of the principles of justice and fairness according to which all nations can determine their own destiny freely and without indefinite interference, and also the representative of Iran could not get a suitable ground for the other members of the commission to agree with his personal vote, so with the lack of a solution that According to the honorable representative of the Swedish government, it is both logical and practical, Iran was forced to propose a moderate solution, or in other words, a peaceful solution, and in this opinion, it agreed to the formation of a federal government, but at the same time, it was selfish and reserved the right of its respective government to be able to adopt any position that he deems necessary and useful to maintain peace in the Middle East.

Ahmed Qavam’s cabinet in this period when anti-Zionist public opinion among scholars and clerics and even among the public It is superior to the independent members of the government and is opposed to establishing relations with the Zionist regime. It issued a statement condemning the establishment of the Jewish state and declared its readiness to cooperate with other Islamic governments for the liberation of Palestine.

Even the Iranian government at the time of issuing on 9 December 1949, announced his vote in favor of the Arab countries not to establish an international regime in Jerusalem.

At this time, according to experts, Iranian politicians believed that the establishment of a Jewish government in The region and the Arab countries will face a crisis in the region.

This partisan behavior had several reasons that have been listed in this context, one of which is to support the feelings of the people of the countries at that time. It was Islamic, and on the other hand, Iran believed that a regional rival would gradually be created for Iran, so it did not agree with the formation of the Israeli government.

Recognition of Israel (1950)

But this Pahlavi stance did not last even a year. After the recognition of the Israeli government by the majority of the UN countries, including India and Yugoslavia, which were Iran’s allies in the federal Palestine plan, as well as Turkey among the Islamic countries, Iran de facto recognized Israel and supported the Iranian citizens present in announced Israel as the official reason for this recognition.

A series of events occurred that created an opportunity to change Pahlavi’s foreign policy towards the Zionist regime. At this historical moment, the assassination of the Shah took place (February 4, 1949/15 Bahman 1327), martial law was established in the country, anti-Zionist religious leaders such as Ayatollah Kashani were arrested and exiled for a while, and with the propaganda that took place, an atmosphere of opposition to the establishment of Israel was created. decreased.

By abusing this space and with the success that the Shah achieved in forming the Constituent Assembly and the Senate with the help of his supporters, his position was strengthened and there was darkness in the international atmosphere. The relations between Iran and the Arabs (especially Iran and Iraq) and the mutual expulsion of Iranian and Iraqi nationals, especially the issue of the expulsion of Iraqi Jews from Iran, provided an effective propaganda tool for the Zionists against Iran.

At that time, the relationship between Iran and Egypt was not in a good state with Fawzia’s separation from the Shah. In addition to all this, the Zionist circles also organized extensive propaganda against our country because of Iran’s initial vote against the Zionists, and every day new news about the displacement of Iranian nationals in Palestine due to lack of relations with Israel was advertised.

But the main story started from the Shah’s trip to America. During his 48-day stay in America, the Shah also had meetings with big financiers and American Jewish circles, and in these meetings, the issue of Israel’s recognition was also discussed and negotiated, and Israel’s recognition was accepted by the Shah. Therefore, on 16 Isfand 1328 (6 March 1950), the government of Iran de facto, while more than 50 countries had recognized this regime, recognized the government of Israel, and this matter was officially announced by Iran’s representative in the organization Nations was announced and the government’s official announcement about this was issued 10 days later. A decision that showed the lack of principles of Pahlavi’s decisions regarding the crisis and the Palestinian issue.

William Shawcross writes about this in the book “The Last Journey of the King”: He obtained a substantial bribe to the then Prime Minister of Iran, Mohammad Saed Maraghei, and the negotiations were led by an American still known as (Adam) who worked with the Mossad, on behalf of the Israeli government. He also knew an Iranian businessman who was a friend and business partner of the Prime Minister. Through this person, the Prime Minister demanded 400,000 dollars to convince the Council of Ministers and the Shah that recognizing Israel’s two facts would serve Iran’s interests.

Restoration of Israel’s recognition (1951)

But the internal and social environment of Iran was a serious obstacle in front of Pahlavi. A year later, after Mossadegh came to power, the government withdrew the recognition of this regime in response to popular protests. At the beginning of June 1330, Hossein Makki, in a speech in the National Council, strongly attacked the recognition of Israel during the time of Mohammad Saed and considered this action possible only by receiving a bribe from the then Prime Minister (Saed).

Ayatollah Kashani as a member of parliament and chairman of the 17th parliament of the National Council in a meeting with the delegation of the Islamic Awqaf Majlis Damascus calls the withdrawal of Israel’s recognition as follows: “We have withdrawn our recognition from the Jewish state, because the former government of Iran, which was a British government, had recognized Israel, and now all Islamic and Arab countries must be united. The breaking of Israel and the return of the cities that have usurped Israel to their true owners.”

Finally, on the morning of the 16th of July 1330, during the session of the National Assembly, Foreign Minister Bagher Kazemi announced Kurd: “Because the Iranian government implemented its decision yesterday and dissolved the consulate general that was in Jerusalem and assigned the handling of their work to the embassy [of Iran in Amman]. On the other hand, the government is not determined to take any other action regarding the official recognition of Israel, and it has not accepted and will not accept a representative of Israel in Iran. This issue was widely reflected in the press and people of the Arab world, and “Al-Fiha” and “Al-Hadi” newspapers in Damascus, “Al-Hawad” and “Aliqaza” newspapers in Baghdad, and “Al-Sharq” newspaper in Beirut reflected on this issue.

But frankly, the statement of the then foreign minister Pahlavi about not recognizing Israel in the future changed very soon.

Recognize Israel again! (1953)

After the coup d’etat on 28 August 2012 and the fall of Mossadegh’s national government, relations were once again established and expanded; In particular, the wide ties between Iran and America led the Shah to improve relations with Israel. After the overthrow of the national government of Dr. Mossadegh during the era of Mohammad Reza Shah, the relations between Iran and Israel were resumed and Meir Ezri came to Iran as the first political ambassador of Israel. Of course, he worked with titles such as the head of the economic relations office, etc.

Shah said in a press interview in response to the question of the editor of Kayhan newspaper about the re-recognition of Israel: “This previous recognition It has happened and it is not a new thing. However, due to current events and perhaps also in terms of economy, our representative was summoned from Israel a few years ago and still has not returned. But this issue of identification is not something new.”

Muhammad Reza Pahlavi’s statements regarding the Palestinian issue are an example of the lack of stability and principles of relations and policy making. Relations have been in the Palestinian issue and crisis.

The Beginning of Strategic Relations (1954)

Very soon, sending Iranian oil to Israel started in 1954 (1333). In October 1336, Timur Bakhtiar, the first head of SAVAK, went to Paris and requested to meet with Israel’s ambassador to France, Yaqub Tsur. In this meeting, Bakhtiar praised the Israeli army and its victories in the war with Egypt, expressed his concern about Nasser’s actions in destabilizing the Middle East, and proposed cooperation and exchange of information in the name of the Shah. The Israeli government welcomed this proposal and “Ben-Gurion” considered it the beginning of wider political cooperation between the two countries in the Asian continent.

Ben Gurion traveled to Tehran on December 4, 1961 He was the first Israeli head of state to visit Iran, but he was not the last. Later, “Levi Ashkol”, “Goldameir”, “Ishaq Rabin” and “Menachem Begin” also traveled to Iran. The plane carrying “Ben Gurion” that was going to Burma made a forced landing in Tehran on the pretext of a technical fault. At the government pavilion of the airport, Dr. Amini (Prime Minister) and Major General Pakrovan welcomed him and negotiations were held there.

Ishaq Rabin, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Army, traveled to Tehran on 25 April 1346 as a visit to the Ariana Army. His companions included his wife and the head of his office, Col. Rafael Efrat, who arrived at Mehrabad Airport on a special plane and were welcomed by Army Major Ariana and Col. Nimroudi. During his six-day trip, Robin met and negotiated with the Shah, the Prime Minister, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Ariana, and visited Isfahan and Shiraz.

The fire in Al-Aqsa Mosque in October 1348, which was the foundation for the formation of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, was one of the important turning points in the confrontation between Islamic countries and the Zionist regime; An incident that made Mohammadreza Pahlavi to react rather strongly and of course opportunistically according to the atmosphere inside the country.

The organization announced its existence one month after this incident, during a meeting with the heads of Islamic countries in Rabat, the capital of Morocco. did An organization in which figures such as the Shah of Iran and King Faisal of Saudi Arabia played a leading role in establishing, directing and organizing its conferences.

Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, of course, did not mention a word about the fire in Al-Aqsa Mosque at the Rabat Summit and in his speech, and only the governments He invited Islam to understand and empathize with each other and live peacefully among Arabs and Jews.

Muhammadreza Pahlavi in ​​the year 1967 that Israel occupied the Palestinian territories as well as parts of Egypt and Syria after the six-day war, strongly opposed this move and declared that “the era of occupation Other people’s lands have been ended by the force of arms”. But the 6-day war can be considered a turning point in the relations between the Pahlavi and the Zionists, which of course had already started.

Summary

The examination of Pahlavi’s position regarding the solution of the Palestinian issue and the tension in the Palestinian land between the Arabs and the Jews, shows that the Pahlavi government, despite the concern about the establishment and power Finding a Zionist government in the region, as well as being concerned about public opinion, but from the beginning, he never sought a solution to remove the Zionist regime and return Palestine to the Palestinians, and he did not have a principled position on this issue, but based on the conditions and benefits created. It has changed behavior and policy. Even after the 6-day war and America’s stronger presence in the issue and supporting the Zionists, it greatly expanded its political, economic, security and commercial relations with Tel Aviv.

Perhaps this is why the archive of the Pahlavi era is full of strange, contradictory and different positions of the rulers and Mohammad Reza Pahlavi himself on the Palestinian issue. In such a way that some think that Mohammad Reza was an enemy of the Zionist regime and some think that he considered the issue to be Arab and had no input into this issue.

However, despite all this, Pahlavi’s greatest betrayal of the Palestinian issue, based on opportunism and self-interest, dates back to 1973. The Arabs, defeated in the 6-day war and disappointed by the events, were waiting for a serious revenge. The revenge that started in the month of Ramadan in 1973 with the attacks of Anwar Sadat’s Egyptian army and Hafez Assad’s Syrian army. After the war, a big oil embargo was started by the Arabs against Israel and its supporters, which caused more than 4.5 million barrels of oil per day to be removed from the world market, and oil prices dropped from 3 dollars per barrel will increase to about 12 dollars. But Imperial Iran did not participate in this oil confrontation against Israel in a historical betrayal and by increasing the sale of oil whose price had quadrupled, he gained a great fortune. Iran’s arms purchases from the United States did not affect the country’s economy. In such a way that Iran’s arms purchase in 1972 reached 4.373 million dollars from 519 million dollars in 1974 and experienced a 7-fold increase.