Mossadegh’s Triumph Over Colonial Deals
From Crown to Turban: Betraying the Iranian People, Again
Why Iran’s historic oil nationalization On March, 1951 still inspires the Iranian people to resist all forms of dictatorship and external meddling.
For decades, Iranians have endured a relentless chain of crimes and betrayals by homegrown autocrats, at times supported by foreign governments. The pre-1979 monarchy came to power through two coup d’etats, the first supported by Britain and the second supported by Britain and the United States. The people revolted against the Shah’s dictatorship in 1979. But that revolution was stolen by the clerics, who established a theocracy. The crown was replaced by the turban.
Today, remnants of the deposed Pahlavi monarchy seek to rewrite history by portraying Reza Shah and his son Mohammad Reza as benevolent modernizers rather than cruel autocrats who built their power on surveillance, suppression, and absolute control. Far from acting solely out of nostalgia, these monarchists capitalize on growing opportunities to position themselves as alternatives to the current regime. While some external actors may view them as potential partners in a post-clerical Iran, their revivalist efforts do little to advance the aspirations of everyday Iranians for freedom and democracy. Instead, the remnants of the Pahlavi monarchy risk perpetuating the cycle of authoritarian rule, prioritizing power over genuine secular democracy.
Iran’s Oil: A Legacy of Plunder
Iran’s history of navigating domestic authoritarian rule and external influence dates back to at least the Qajar dynasty. In 1872, Nasser al-Din Shah granted German-born British entrepreneur Baron Julius de Reuter free rein to extract and profit from Iran’s natural resources. That deal, canceled after widespread outcry, foreshadowed future humiliations. The 1901 D’Arcy Concession gave British-Australian businessman William Knox D’Arcy a 60-year monopoly on oil reserves in southern Iran. What little was owed to Iran often arrived late or disappeared into the pockets of local collaborators. By 1909, the Anglo-Persian Oil Company (APOC) controlled major fields, using British government support to purchase Iranian crude at cheap prices, leaving the Iranian people with next to nothing.
Following the 1906 Constitutional Revolution by the Iranian people against the Qajar monarchy’s absolute rule, efforts to revoke or renegotiate these exploitative contracts sputtered in the face of British political and military leverage. Public anger simmered, but real change remained elusive.
The 1933 Betrayal by Reza Shah
In the 1910s, Reza Khan, a mercenary in the ranks of the Russian Cossacks, suppressed resistance activists across Iran, ultimately staging a coup in 1921 with British assistance to pave the way for his subsequent reign as the monarch Reza Shah. Once in control, he quashed parliamentary and press freedoms attained during the Constitutional Revolution, relying on authoritarian force to dictate policy.
In the early 1930s, during the global economic downturn, the Anglo-Persian Oil Company slashed Iran’s royalties from around £1 million to a paltry £30,678 per year—while still paying substantial taxes to Britain. By 1933, Reza Shah had ushered in a new 60-year agreement, effectively chaining Iran’s oil wealth to British interests for decades longer than the original D’Arcy contract permitted.
Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh later exposed this development as a national calamity, warning from his seat in parliament that if the D’Arcy agreement had been left to expire naturally in 1961, Iran would have reclaimed all oil profits. Instead, by capitulating to foreign pressures, Reza Shah denied his nation the lion’s share of its own resource wealth, handing British interests unchallenged control for another 32 years.
As we approach March 17, the anniversary of Iran’s oil nationalization in 1951—championed by Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh—this history gains renewed significance. That pivotal moment, when Mossadegh and the Iranian Parliament reclaimed control over the nation’s oil resources, stands as a powerful reminder of Iran’s enduring struggle for democratic governance, political independence, and economic progress. Even after decades of authoritarian rule—first under the Shah, then the clerical regime—the memory of Mossadegh’s triumph continues to inspire Iranians yearning for a truly sovereign and representative political system.
Mossadegh, pointing to Reza Shah’s destruction of crucial legal documents, denounced this deed as; “one of the greatest acts of treason in modern Iranian history.”
An Unbroken Chain of Exploitation
The personal ambitions of Reza Shah and his close circle meshed seamlessly with Britain’s quest for cheap oil. Their collusion stifled any opportunity for Iranians to truly capitalize on national resources. When Allied forces invaded in 1941, Reza Shah’s unpopular rule collapsed effortlessly. Because he was growing closer to Hitler’s Nazi Germany, Reza Shah was forced by the Allies to abdicate power in favor of his son, leaving behind a monarchy that would never fully gain legitimacy.
After the theocracy replaced the Shah’s rule in 1979, many Iranians hoped for an end to authoritarianism and corruption. Instead, the new regime embraced a different variation of absolute control, restricting democratic liberties at home while pursuing regional and ideological agendas abroad.
Foreign Powers and Proxies: A Recurring Pattern
Now, with discontent simmering under the clerical regime, the global spotlight has turned to new permutations of the same old cycle. Amid discussions about Iran’s future, some exiled or marginalized figures—among them the grandson of Reza Shah, long based in the United States—have sought to elevate their political profiles, at times finding receptive but unaware audiences abroad. Reza Pahlavi pays lip service to a secular and democratic future for Iran. Yet critics note his public endorsements of notorious institutions such as the Revolutionary Guards, the very paramilitary forces that have brutalized dissidents for decades. In a 2018 interview with a Farsi language television channel, he said, “I am in contact with the Army, the Basij and the IRGC. We are communicating.”
What emerges is a well-worn narrative: figures with scant involvement in frontline opposition suddenly recast themselves as key to “rescuing” the Iranian people. In some Western media outlets, carefully placed opinion pieces amplify pro-monarchy talking points while smearing a significant democratic opposition movement—accusations that mirror propaganda long churned out by intelligence organs. Indeed, the campaign to rehabilitate the Pahlavi name is strikingly reminiscent of the older monarchy’s willingness to offer up Iran’s resources to foreign benefactors, so long as those powers ensured protection and support for the royal court.
The Iranian regime welcomes Reza Pahlavi’s political posturing for several reasons. As the son of the brutal and corrupt ruler Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, he carries the baggage of a deposed dictatorship, making him an easy target for ridicule and dismissal. His monarchist ideology is outdated and holds little relevance for a population that has rejected absolute rule. Lacking any real organization or grassroots support, he poses no tangible threat to the mullahs' grip on power. His political track record is marked by ineffectiveness, as evidenced by his failure to build a cohesive movement or gain significant domestic or international backing over the past four decades. Furthermore, he has long struggled to articulate a concrete plan for regime change, instead oscillating between vague calls for unity and reliance on external validation.
For their part, the Iranian people have repeatedly chanted, “Down with the Oppressor, be it the Shah or the Supreme Leader,” reflecting a deep-seated weariness toward all forms of autocracy.
International Intrigue vs. Iran’s Democratic Aspirations
Behind these shifting alliances lies a truth familiar to every generation of Iranians: from Reza Shah’s autocratic rule to the current clerical regime’s brutal repression, the people have continually struggled against rulers who prioritize their own grip on power over democracy and independence. Throughout history, opportunistic figures have sought to preserve their influence by aligning with the most repressive forces, often under the guise of reform. Today, remnants of the Pahlavi monarchy extend overtures to the clerical regime’s notorious security apparatus, hoping to carve out a role for themselves in yet another authoritarian arrangement that serves the few at the expense of the majority.
The Shah-Sheikh alliance has become all the more urgent because Iran has an independent democratic resistance movement, which has rejected both the past monarchy and the current theocracy. The National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), and its main constituent organization the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran - PMOI/ MEK, have long continued to advocate for a secular republic—one that rejects any return to monarchy or perpetuation of the mullahs’ brutal system. Their decades-long resistance stresses the necessity of genuine popular sovereignty, dismantling the culture of political terror, and finally ending the cycle of dictatorship that has plagued Iran for more than a century. The NCRI’s 10-Point Plan for Iran’s democratic future, publicized by its President-elect Maryam Rajavi, has drawn significant international support from former heads of state across the political spectrum. This global solidarity underscores a potent reality: the Iranian people’s demand for self-determination can unite the world behind their cause. The era of unelected monarchs and theocrats is over. The time for a secular, democratic, and free republic in Iran has arrived.
Toward a Truly Free Iran
The 1933 oil contract stands as a stark reminder of how personal ambition and leveraging foreign interference can converge to rob a nation of its rightful resources. Reza Shah’s betrayal was neither an isolated incident nor a phenomenon confined to a single regime. It is a template for how unchecked authoritarian power—monarchical or clerical—undermines national sovereignty and mortgaged Iran’s wealth to outsiders.
Decades later, the Iranian people have again arrived at a crossroads. Having endured the Shah’s autocracy and the theocracy that followed, they are determined to break this cycle of tyranny and manipulation once and for all. No amount of rebranding or foreign endorsements can obscure the fundamental truth: Iran’s future belongs to its citizens, not to exiled claimants, repressive paramilitaries, or distant actors seeking a new foothold. In the end, only an unwavering commitment to authentic democracy—a system governed by the rule of law and the will of the people—can ensure that the tragic legacy of oil betrayals and revolutions hijacked by authoritarian rulers becomes a relic of the past.
Sources
Brysac, Shareen Blair. "A Very British Coup – How Reza Shah Won and Lost His Throne”, World Policy Journal, Duke University Press. Hedayat, Mehdiqoli. Memoirs and Perils. Zavar Publications, 2020.
Fateh, Mostafa. 50 Years of Iranian Oil. Elm Publications, 2019.
Jami. The Past Lights the Future. Phoenix Publications, 2023.
mojahedin.org سازمان مجاهدین خلق ایران
Jalal Arani is an Iran analyst and writer whose work spans geopolitics, authoritarian systems, religious ideology, and the untold dynamics of resistance—from nuclear secrets to spiritual narratives. His essays aim to reveal the hidden forces shaping Iran and the wider Middle East.