This was truly a gut-wrenching tale that transformed not only the U.S. and Middle East's geopolitics but many other countries.

Kinzer has written a book that undeniably showed that the world's most powerful government had/has nothing but obtuse self-interests. Kinzer provides a detailed account of why the coup took place, the events leading up to it, the history of the CIA, individuals involved, the actions they took and why.

With each individual who participated in the coup, Kinzer supplies specific background information about the person. This becomes very beneficial to the reader.

This book is more than a story about a coup d'etat. It is an entrenching story about Iranian history, culture, religion, and politics. Kinzer gives the history of many Iranian Shahs that ruled, an account of the Zoroastrian and Islamic faiths, and most importantly a biography of the man overthrown, Mohammad Mossadegh. It is impossible not to sympathize for Mossadegh. Kinzer describes him as a dramatic, simple, intelligent, stubborn, honest, and generous man.

I hope this book will change your current perception about Iran and the Middle East as mine was (not that I had a vehement perception towards either in the first place). This is one of the best books I have ever read. I recommend it to anyone interested in either U.S. or Middle East history or a reference to the present relationship between the East and West.

"All The Shah's Men" by Stephen Kinzer is an important piece of work for people who follow current and past American petro-warrior events in the Middle East. This book is even more important for American citizens who do *not* follow current events in the Middle East. This latter group includes but isn't exclusive to people who watch, listen, and read the mainstream media: tabloid TV, political television programs, political talk-radio, and mainstream American newspapers. These mainstream American media sources do *not* report on, nor even discuss what goes on in the Middle East, beyond a superficial level, if even that.

The events of 1953 are eerily reminiscent of current US policy and its continued *long-term presence* in the Middle East. Awareness by US and world citizens about the role of the US and UK in the Middle East past and present, is vital, as this book has proved to be so prescient. The US and UK have worked together in the Middle East long before the recent inaccurate "poodle" labels of 2003. These two cousins have worked together hand-in-hand before, helping each other in this symbiotic relationship, when it's about: oil.

Although I think information exists (somewhere), I don't recall one single article, Op-Ed piece, story, or documentary by the American Mainstream Media about the 1953 American coup in Iran because of oil. Therefore, another reason to tout this book. It seems that this historical info is just not available to the casual observer living in Americana.

Under Mossadegh, Iran was tilting towards the West and away from the Soviet Union (which it never leaned toward in the first place). However the US government and mainstream media constantly reported to the American public that "Iran was tilting towards the Soviet Union." "Gravitating towards communism." This mis-information campaign, during the height of the Cold War Red Scare period during the during the 1950s. Repetitive messages disseminated to the public.

Sound familiar?

CIA operatives falsely fed misinformation to ignorant journalists and also journalists that agreed with the US policy towards Iran. In addition, CIA operatives actually wrote articles for newspapers themselves.

Kinzer begins with the early, middle, and latter history of present-day Iran, leading up to the oil dispute that lead to the rise and fall of democratically elected Dr. Mohammed Mossadegh in the CIA sponsored coup.

Resentment of the British by the Iranians increased over many years. Much of the resentment toward the British was the result of the Britain's 19th Century colonial attitude towards the Iranian government and people. There are 3 primary reasons among many, for the dispute:

1. Constant deceit and dishonesty by the British by not following up on their promises and signed agreements they made with the Iranians. Huge profits were made by the British oil companies but they refused to open their books or let them be audited.

2. Second, was the deplorable treatment and sub-human conditions of Iranian workers in Abadan and other oil fields and refineries. These Iranian oil workers lived in shanty towns without electricity or running water.

3. The British were taking a huge profit-share ratio. The British being foreign Western colonialists, used their power to create and perpetuate these conditions. This ratio was bound to cause not only resentment and dislike, but also let to the labeling of them as the "enemy."

As the Iranian government wanted a more equitable profit sharing agreement, the British government responded by implementing sanctions, blocking exports, and freezing accounts. The British debated sending troops to Iran, but it wasn't feasible. Britain didn't have enough the muscle nor the mojo, for such a task.


ENTER THE AMERICANS:

Kermit Roosevelt Jr. (grandson of President Teddy Roosevelt) was the main point man behind this calculating operation. Norman Schwarzkopf Sr. was also heavily involved. The elites are often related and over generations these familiar family names pass the want of power and influence.


Chapters:

1. Good Evening, Mr. Roosevelt
2. Curse The Fate
3. The Last Drop of the Nation's Blood
4. A Wave of Oil
5. His Master's Orders
6. Unseen Enemies Everywhere
7. You Do Not Know How Evil They Are
8. An Immensely Shrewd Old Man
9. Block Headed British
10 Pull Up Your Socks and Get Going
11 I Knew it! They Love Me!
12 Purring Like a Giant Cat

Notes, Bibliography, and Index

A very worthy book for contemporary issues in the Middle East, and the roots of petro-coups that have carved at the Geo-political landscape of Iran, and the entire Middle Eastern region, today.

I have to say I am troubled by the many reviewers who say they loved this book, except for the idea that America's actions could have possibly contributed to the hatred anyone feels toward us. To say there is a connection is not the same as saying we deserved it, and the author by no means makes any suggestion that 9/11 was something reasonable or deserved. To deny the connection is to go blind into today's events.

Growing up in America, I was never told that the Iran hostage crisis was related to Jimmy Carter's willingness to shelter the deposed Shah after the 1979 revolution. I think it's pretty clear that the same hatred toward America that was behind that crisis played a significant part in leading up to 9/11 as well. This book helps explain how America's role in proping up the Shah contributed, however unintentionally, to the rise to power of radicalism in that region.

The book focuses on a few characters who played significant roles in the events in order to make the story more personal and interesting. To bring in all the issues of the times, or try to cover all the significant players in detail, even on the American side, would have probably made the story unreadable. The result is a highly readable and generally fascinating history.

The book also spends time explaining, briefly, the larger history of Iran and the reasons why Iran's branch of Islam is different from other branches. This serves to bring the events of 1953 into much clearer perspective. This section is inserted into the middle of the main narrative, and I was impressed by how much richness and depth the remainder seemed to acquire with the new knowledge gained.

You might also want to read "Legacy of Ashes", for a broader history of the CIA's questionable attempts to influence world events. I would also recommend "Overthrow", which has a section devoted to the events in Iran, but with more of an emphasis on the role of the Dulles brothers in guiding the CIA's decisions and policy.

fascinating read. great intro to Iranian history from ancient times to modern. Very in-depth and enlightening as well. British colonial arrogance and American tunnel vision lead to overthrow of the first democratic government in the Middle East. No analysis of today's Iran-American clash is complete without understanding the root of the friction.

The UK-US overthrow of Mossadegh was clearly one of the worst foreign policy moves in our history. It parallels the simlar Eisenhower directed overthrow of Guatemala's democratic leader Arbenz, for which we still pay.But the conclusion that the Iran move is at the "root of Middle East terror" is not IMO correct. That root stems from Palestine which most of the world views as a kind of concentration camp run by Israel with the aggressive support of the United States. Until we resolve that issue, the so called War on Terror is futile.
Discl: Viking(member American Assoc of Petroleum Geologists)

An easily read account of the U.S. and British actions to overthrow the Iranian Prime Minister in 1953 that lead to the entrenchment of the Shah in Iran and ultimately to the Iranian Revolution. This book provides a great perspective from both sides in this action and is a great warning to the hazards of unintended consequences when getting involved in the internal affairs of foreign governments.

Highly recommend to anyone who wants to understand the origins of Iranian mistrust of the U.S. government and thier actions in the Middle East.

I am deeply embarrassed; when I saw this title in my account history I had no recollection of it. It only took me a few words of reviewing it here to remember. This book should be required reading in all of our government bodies that have anything to do with policy making, especially foreign policy, it should also be in our school curriculums. I cannot testify to the veracity of anything written in this book beyond one thing, the overthrow of Mossadegh is a significant reason for anti Amrikayi sentiment in Iran. Elsewhere other author(s) have claimed that Shia Iran is the backbone of Islamic unrest region and/or worldwide. This book very clearly spells out how captalism as practiced by our "military industrialist" cabal that rules American society has destroyed any chance that the mouthings of their current "Puppet in Chief" about spreading democracy will have even the slightest credibility anywhere outside of their own boardrooms and in the minds of brainwashed Americans who are foolish enough to still believe anyone in power in this country still tells them anything resembling the truth.

Fascinating story, well-organized, told in an engaging way. This book provides a great deal of insight into the roots of the current situation in Iran.

This is one of the better books I have read in awhile. Written with the flair of a veteran journalist, `All the Shah's Men' is a serious history lesson that is a pleasure to read. Stephen Kinzer has put together a remarkable account of the American and British supported 1953 coup that overthrew Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh and installed the Shah. He also argues that `Operation Ajax,' as it was dubbed, is the root of the West's current problems with Islamic terrorism.

Kinzer starts by giving a concise history of the ancient land of Persia/Iran, it's unique legacy and culture as a Shi'ite people, and it's experiences under centuries of tyrannical Monarchs and constant foreign oppression. In the late 19th century, one of these Monarchs sold exclusive rights to Iranian natural resources to the British. What would become known as the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, which held exclusive rights to all oil underneath Iranian soil, would reap enormous profits from this enterprise, while the Iranian people rotted in poverty. This would set the stage for a major confrontation between the British and the popular Iranian politician Mossadegh. The latter publicly confronted these British interests along with the Shah, who was viewed as a mere tool of the British exploiters. Mossadegh gained power and immediately nationalized the oil industry, much to the chagrin of the British who responded by claiming this was theft of British property. There was a back and forth exchange that continued for several years, but both sides were too stubborn and the dispute failed to be resolved. The British were still ardent imperialists, and refused to deal with the Iranians on an equal basis. For his part, Mossadegh rejected anything less than complete Iranian control over the oil, it seems to me that he was too stubborn and idealistic for his own good. This is not to say he was wrong, but his failure to compromise certainly helped lead to his own demise. Kinzer is very sympathetic to Mossadegh, and it is easy to see why. He was a remarkable figure that remains an Iranian national hero to this day.

I was previously unaware of Britain's primary role in the coup and after reading all this, it was very interesting to read how the Americans actually got involved. The Truman administration was very sympathetic to the Iranians and refused British demands to back their case against Mossadegh. Truman was an anti-imperialist and had a soft spot for third world nationalist movements like Mossadegh's. The British would have handled the coup themselves, but ended up getting themselves expelled from Iran completely when rumors of their intentions made it to Mossadegh. At this time though, Iranians still admired and trusted the Americans and so the British turned to them. Truman was unmovable on the issue, but the tide turned when Eisenhower was elected. He too was initially hesitant to be the first to authorize a coup against a sovereign government, but was eventually persuaded by the argument that Iran was in danger of falling to the communists (the British knew the "stolen property" argument did not impress the Americans). The rest is history. A CIA team, led by Theodore Roosevelt's grandson Kermit, began a massive covert operation to undermine and eventually overthrow Mossadegh and reinstall the dictator Mohammed Reza Shah. They succeeded, and Iranian history, as well as US-Iranian relations, were subsequently altered indefinitely. This coup also set the stage for American involvement in this type of covert action that would become an acceptable extension of our foreign policy.

In regards to Kinzer's conclusion, that the 1953 coup is the root of all Middle Eastern terrorism against the West, I am ambivalent. My initial reaction is that he is overreaching. Although it is hard to dispute that the coup directly led to the 1979 revolution and hostage crisis, there are way too many other factors and incidents that led to the conflict between the West and the Middle East in general. What Kinzer argues though, and with some effect, is that Operation Ajax was the seminal act that started a domino effect of tension and violence between East and West, culminating in attacks like those on 9/11. I am not fully convinced on this point, but it merits strong consideration. Overall though, this is a fantastic book for anyone trying to understand relations between the US and the Middle East generally, or America and Iran specifically. 4.5 stars.

This is one of the better books I have read in awhile. Written with the flair of a veteran journalist, `All the Shah's Men' is a serious history lesson that is a pleasure to read. Stephen Kinzer has put together a remarkable account of the American and British supported 1953 coup that overthrew Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh and installed the Shah. He also argues that `Operation Ajax,' as it was dubbed, is the root of the West's current problems with Islamic terrorism.

Kinzer starts by giving a concise history of the ancient land of Persia/Iran, it's unique legacy and culture as a Shi'ite people, and it's experiences under centuries of tyrannical Monarchs and constant foreign oppression. In the late 19th century, one of these Monarchs sold exclusive rights to Iranian natural resources to the British. What would become known as the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, which held exclusive rights to all oil underneath Iranian soil, would reap enormous profits from this enterprise, while the Iranian people rotted in poverty. This would set the stage for a major confrontation between the British and the popular Iranian politician Mossadegh. The latter publicly confronted these British interests along with the Shah, who was viewed as a mere tool of the British exploiters. Mossadegh gained power and immediately nationalized the oil industry, much to the chagrin of the British who responded by claiming this was theft of British property. There was a back and forth exchange that continued for several years, but both sides were too stubborn and the dispute failed to be resolved. The British were still ardent imperialists, and refused to deal with the Iranians on an equal basis. For his part, Mossadegh rejected anything less than complete Iranian control over the oil, it seems to me that he was too stubborn and idealistic for his own good. This is not to say he was wrong, but his failure to compromise certainly helped lead to his own demise. Kinzer is very sympathetic to Mossadegh, and it is easy to see why. He was a remarkable figure that remains an Iranian national hero to this day.

I was previously unaware of Britain's primary role in the coup and after reading all this, it was very interesting to read how the Americans actually got involved. The Truman administration was very sympathetic to the Iranians and refused British demands to back their case against Mossadegh. Truman was an anti-imperialist and had a soft spot for third world nationalist movements like Mossadegh's. The British would have handled the coup themselves, but ended up getting themselves expelled from Iran completely when rumors of their intentions made it to Mossadegh. At this time though, Iranians still admired and trusted the Americans and so the British turned to them. Truman was unmovable on the issue, but the tide turned when Eisenhower was elected. He too was initially hesitant to be the first to authorize a coup against a sovereign government, but was eventually persuaded by the argument that Iran was in danger of falling to the communists (the British knew the "stolen property" argument did not impress the Americans). The rest is history. A CIA team, led by Theodore Roosevelt's grandson Kermit, began a massive covert operation to undermine and eventually overthrow Mossadegh and reinstall the dictator Mohammed Reza Shah. They succeeded, and Iranian history, as well as US-Iranian relations, were subsequently altered indefinitely. This coup also set the stage for American involvement in this type of covert action that would become an acceptable extension of our foreign policy.

In regards to Kinzer's conclusion, that the 1953 coup is the root of all Middle Eastern terrorism against the West, I am ambivalent. My initial reaction is that he is overreaching. There are way too many other factors and incidents that led to the conflict between East and West. What Kinzer argues though, and with some effect, is that Operation Ajax was the seminal act that started a domino effect of tension and violence between East and West, culminating in attacks like those on 9/11. I am not fully convinced on this point, but it merits strong consideration. Overall though, this is a fantastic book for anyone trying to understand relations between the US and the Middle East generally, or America and Iran specifically. 4.5 stars.

Went thru the first few pages, never got to finish it, I guess
is alright but nothing that grabs you where you can't put it down
until you are finished. Maybe because I know the story already.

An interesting and compelling narrative describing the history of modern day Iran, and how it has been influenced by Britain and the US. I highly recommend this one to anyone interested in learning more about international relations. This is stuff you don't learn about in grade school.

There's an insidious self-censorship in America; we've had the luxury of only hearing what we want to hear. Like a family that hides its secrets from itself until family members finally demand to understand the "senseless" behavior of others. This is the story we were not told, or hoped wouldn't matter.

Stephen Kinzer's approach in ALL THE SHAH'S MEN is simply to tell the story. The story speaks for itself: Kinzer ends with only a few paragraphs of analysis. This story is so exciting and surprising, it ought to be made into a movie--if we dare. A story whose outcome hangs on the characters--their assumptions and moral failings--as well as seeming happenstance.

Money from the CIA fueled it all: bribes and lies, and a willingness to sacrifice principle for the sake of power--and fear (though the communists really were not a significant player). Half way through the book, it's clear the bad guys are going to win. And the bad guys are US...so it stands, unless we change the ending.

This story is really about the shadow Shah, the democratic shah that would've, should've, or at least might've, been--Mossadegh--a kind of George Washington in his service toward his people and his attitude toward power. You'll want to read more about this man. Mossadegh becomes the symbol of spiritual values and truth, democracy, integrity and innocence.

Mossadegh's greatness however rested on an unwillingness to compromise. Kinzer raises the question of whether absolute principle is possible in this world. Nevertheless, the winners win in such a scenario only in the short run. The Iranians and others who know this history will not be fooled again. This story cannot be denied--no matter what your political point of view--and provides food for thought about the present. The actors determine the outcome:

**a British corporation demanding absolute control, unwilling to negotiate. And behind that, a wealthy and privileged nation not interested in the thoughts and feelings of the little people, over there.

**a nation of underdeveloped people who have had enough after 50 years of exploitation by a colonial racist elite.

Onto this stage steps the following cast of characters (and more):

**a recently victorious Superpower, the United States of America, with a wealthy elite eager to flex its muscles.

**a weak hands-off president--Eisenhower--who doesn't seem to have control over his own policy, hence is easy brainwashed into the thinking and power moves of

**the Dulles brothers: covert operations Allen (eventually director of the CIA) and overt operations John Foster (eventually Secretary of State),

**"secret" agent Kermit Roosevelt who only just died in 2000 (the Iranians knew him but who knew him in the U.S.?) Kermit followed in the footsteps of his ancestor Teddy Roosevelt (an aggressive imperialist, gung-ho to take over the Philippines at the turn of the century),

**General Norman H. Schwarzkopf (father of Desert Storm Schwarzkopf) who comes to the rescue with a suitcase of money.

Believe it or not these "characters" are real! Read all about it! You'll enjoy it.

Great History. Reads like a great spy novel. Unfortunately it's history, and we are neither the winners nor the protagonist. Good intro to the ongoing US-Iran debacle.

The insights provided in this book are masterfully presented to offer both a page turning drama and sickening clarity on the trajectories of American meddling in the Middle East. This book goes beyond serving up mundane theories and conjecture. The overall picture here illustrated is profoundly clear and evident in light of the author's supporting research. A glimpse of the future for international policy in the Middle East may well be drawn from the series of events which transpired over the latter half of the 20th century, and which are so brilliantly connected in this book. A must read for anyone keen to understand the increasingly disastrous times of America in the East.

In 1953 the United States made a momentous decision. Partially out of legitimate fear of a possible Russian takeover of the valuable Iranian Oil field, and partly as a result of incitement by British interests who sought to stubbornly maintain their imperialistic power structure, the CIA led a sinister and clandestine coup that removed the most beloved and democratic leader Iran has had in a century; Mohammend Mossadegh.

Mossadegh was replaced by the Shah Pahlavi who became so hated that a Muslim fanatical mob overthrew him in 1979. The new theocracy, well remembering the American led coup, feared that the CIA would attempt it again. As insurance they attacked the US embassy and took 52 American hostages.

This act so infuriated the Americans that they supported Saddam Hussein's horrific war against Iran. This led to Russia's invasion of Afghanistan, the rise of the Muslim fanatics who created the Hezbollah and Taliban, the empowerment of Saddam, the invasion of Kuwait, the attacks on the US in Beruit, Somalia, 911, and of course our current clumsy missions in Afghanistan and Iraq.

While America's awkward foreign policy proved disastrous in hindsight, the fear of communist control of Middle Eastern oil was a driving force in the 1950's. Blame must be shared with the British Anglo-Iranian Oil Company for their greed, the British for treating the Iranians so poorly, for the Iranian Shahs who sold Iran's concessions to fund their lavish life, and for even Mossadegh himself for becoming so blind in his justified hatred for the British that he refused any compromise offered.

Yet while the Iranians despise the US for our intrusions into their affairs and the suffering it has caused, they still honor the American institutions of freedom and democracy. These values are currently suppressed by the current theocracy.

Kinzer's well researched story reads like a first class spy novel. He avoids cynicism and anti American tirades and presents the story in a balanced light. While he does not avoid detailing the disaster we unleashed he also did not avoid the context of the anti Communist fears shared by many Americans in the 1950s.

He will make you think different about the current events in the Middle East.

I think this is a book that every American should read because it explains so clearly the little known facts about the overthrow of the very first democratically elected prime minister in Iran. The seeds of democracy were there - just waiting for a little water but because Mossadegh was a nationalist and didn't want to be indebted to any foreign power including the U.S., we initiated this clandestine covert operation which brought the Shah back to power. At the time of the hostage crisis, I couldn't understand why the Iranian's hated us so much. Now I see that scenario with complete clarity. Regime change by any other name is still meddling in the affairs of foreign countries. Even if we don't care about what happens to that country, it always comes back to haunt us because it's bad foreign policy - bad for the U.S. in the worst possible ways.

I was recommended this book by a friend who is Persian. He considers himself Persian because he does not want to be identified as an Iranian due to misperceptions of the people in the United States. He also does not want to be lumped in with being the government that currently exists in Iran.

The book itself is a relatively quick read that can be done in a day or two. But the wealth of information that Kinzer has packed into what I would consider a short book is astounding. He chronicles the history of Iran dating back to the days of Darius and Cyrus albeit briefly. Then eventually focuses on several key events of the late 19th century and moves into the 20th century. The main focus of the book is the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company and their nationalization by Mohammed Mossadegh in the mid-part of the 20th century. This eventually paved the way for the British to coerce the United States Government under Dwight Eisenhower to green light covert ops against Mossaedegh to remove him from his position of Prime Minister of Iran. This led the way for the Shah to assume authoritarian control over the country, which eventually culminated in the 1979 Revolution.

It is an incredibly fascinating story and goes to show how the United States in a sense created their own problem with Iran due to the desire to have oil flowing from the country. They got 26 years worth of it only to create a bigger problem by leading the way inadvertently for the fundamentalist government that is there now. It becomes clear why Harry S. Truman is so greatly appreciated these days due to his ability to make decisions that were and would have been better for the long term. He opposed any US action against Iran. If only that advice had been followed, who knows what might have been in the Middle East.

For those wanting to know why the current regime in Iran supports terrorist groups and is so vehemently anti-Western? This is the book to read. It does an excellent job of explaining why and how we got to the this point we are at currently.

This book shows the kind of info that is not found, as usual, in the mainstream media. It shows you how the US along with other countries like the UK have tried to control the oil resources of a sovereign third country like Iran. They have used any tool for achieving their goals, even the coup de etat. At the beggining of the history, through the middle ages and until the discovery of America the main excuse for conquering and destroying countries and for genocide was the religion, like happended with the religion wars in Central Europe, in America with the Spanish Catholic Kings and with the English purintans, in France with the hugonots... Then it was the liberty, equality, etc, like with the wars of Napoleon or with Russia and the poor republics that suffered its influece after the war of the October's Revolution. Then it came the race with Hitler. And nowadays the excuse is the democracy. But, always, it is just an excuse that hides the real motivation: economic interest. Nowadays the Western countries while keeping their own population uninformed and sort of drugged with the everyday work and consumption needs, try to convince them to go to war with the excuse that the objective is to spread liberty and democracy. They do this at the same time that they incentivate and protect dictatorships and antidemocratic regimens like they do in most of the Arab countries (there is/were such regimens not only in Iraq or Iran, by the way, just look at the bunch of allies of the US and the UK in the Persian Gulf like Oman, Dubai, Soudern Arabia, Kuwait, Katar, etc.. where the lack of freedom of speach or of democracy does not take the American politicians to go these countries to give them the present of democracy by the force of war). This book is an example of the whole lie, cinism and hypocrisy that the international foreign Wester policies are about. Like alwasy, it is not about virtues but only about money and geostrategical control. For this according the report of the worldwide reputed medicine magazine The Lancet, and published by the American University of John Hopkins, about 660.000 Iraqi people have been killed in Iraq by the middle of the last year, most of them by artillery and air strikes by false called "coalition" forces. For this reason the puppet government of Iraq has announce at the beginning of this year that they will not disclosure more figures of deaths caused by the war. Obviusly the occupants are frighteened by the fact that today, one year after that report, we may have reached already one million deaths, something that if the people of the US and of the UK would be well informed and aware of it they would jump to the streets to stop their goverments spreading the democracy in Iraq. A democratic country of dead people with the second largest oil reserves of the world, a very easy country to control. Whoever that can not understand that it is not democracy or liberty should find the information that is there and that is not provided normaly by the mainstream media. I recommend everybody to read the book of John Perkins, Confessions of an Economic Hitmank, to understand what it is going on behind the nice words of our politicians.
seeConfessions of an Economic Hit Man

The history of Iran has never been documented this well. Kinzer is an excellent author and he has gained himself a loyal new fan in me. This is a most impressive book which I will read again and again and share with all my friends. The key to understanding the past and the roots of terrorism against the USA is this book. Every word in this book has been so superbly edited to convey Kinzer's specific points that every sentence or paragraph can be quite profound and meaningful. An excellent gift to anyone who has ever asked "why do they hate us so much?" - The detailed truth shall set you free.

This is an absolutely outstanding book describing the importance of Iranian oil to the British economy before, during, and after WW II and how the British (and later the Americans) cynically manipulated the government and people of Iran for their own benefit. When people wonder why the Muslim world distrusts motives of the US and UK in the Middle East, this is one of the many tragic tales that explains their world view. Kinzer opens the book by describing the outline and initial failure of the coup against Mossedegh in 1953. Much of the rest of the book is spent on setting the stage, describing how the situation in Iran came to such a state. The final few chapters of the book describe the coup and the aftermath, particularly how it relates to the revolution in 1979.

Several other reviewers as well as the Amazon blurb above describe the book in detail, there is no need for me to repeat. However, there are several points I would like to make about this book that may be of interest to potential readers. First, if you doubt the centrality of Iranian oil to the UK economy in the decades around WWII as argued by Kinzer, check out Sunrise at Abadan by Richard Stewart (written in the 1980s by a USMC officer). Second, the British government, the management of the oil company that ultimately became BP, and Winston Churchill all come off extremely poorly. Kinzer portrays a very unflattering picture of their arrogance, racism, and cultural superiority. The British are often portrayed in America as the most `enlightened' of the colonial powers when in fact they were probably the most rapacious (only the Russians/Soviet were worse). The manner in which the UK government and BP treated the Iranians can only be regarded as a disgrace. They took the Iranian oil and wouldn't even tell the Iranians how much it was worth. Third, the Dulles brothers come off as foolish idealogues. I think that this is really one of Kinzer's main points, to demonstrate that the rabidly anti-communist Dulles brothers have many similarities with the neo-cons who surround President Bush and led us to the Iraq fiasco. Fourth, the man who led the coup for the American govt, Kermit Roosevelt (grandson of the US President) must have been an interesting fellow with some real guts.

This book has two negatives that several other reviewers have discussed or at least alluded to. First, this is not a scholarly work, Stephen Kinzer is a journalist, not a historian or an academic. The overall tone of this book is not balanced (something that professional historians are always searching for, even if it is never truly achievable), the author clearly has an agenda (or more specifically a viewpoint) that he is pushing, and much of the language of the book is written by journalist who wants to sway opinion. I don't think this is too much of a drawback though if the reader is aware of this from the beginning. The picture that Kinzer paints is too black and white (Mossedegh was a great, democratic leader, and the British and the Dulles brothers were greedy, self-serving imperialists). Second, I think that the author overstates the effect that the overthrow of Mossedegh has on the current situation. Nobody would seriously argue that an event that occured in the US during the Eisenhower administration had a direct importance today. I agree with several of the reviewers who state that Kinzer is trying to overblow the importance of the coup in light of 9/11, the fiasco in Iraq, etc. Don't let these minor negatives discourage you from buying this book though. Definitely an informative, well-written and easy to read book.

Stephen Kinzer's book has impressed lot of uninformed people in Iran, the US and elsewhere. In reality it's a journalistic work unworthy of the name of the New York Times where the author used to be a staff writer. I have rarely seen a work riddled with so many factual errors and misstatements. It's poorly sourced and unabashedly prejudiced. Instead of basing the trust of his narrative on to the post- facto fantasizing and bravado of the likes of Kim Roosevelt, the author could have drawn upon the declassified American archives both the State Department (Foreign Relations of the United States 1952-1954 Vol.X), presidential papers (Truman Library) and the CIA's own internal account of August 1953 in Iran.
Complex stories like the overthrow of Mossadeq in August 1953 should not be allowed to be reduced to bumper-stick slogans of the kind we all are familiar with: "CIA overthrew the democratically elected government of Mossadeq and put the Shah on the throne". This however is Kinzer's point of departure on which he unscrupulously expounds using shabby and highly biased sources. "All the Shah's Men" is in effect the tale of an American Rambo (Kim Roosevelt) who goes to Tehran on assignment from the CIA and SIS. After his initial coup plan (which was genuinely drawn up by CIA/SIS) fails on the night of August 15-16,the Rambo decides on his own to carry on and overthrow the Government of Mossadeq nevertheless. He succeeds to do so within 48 hours namely by August 19. This sort of stories is fit for print yes but in the London tabloids.

The author is able to make good reading out of the history of the west's multiple errors in diplomacy reguarding the middle east and Iran in particular. Almost a road map as to the cause of their mistrust and hatred of America.
George Bush should read this. Sorry, I forgot he does not read.

I'll keep this short - if you truly want to know what lies at the root of the Islamist extremists who hate the U.S., read this very truthful book and you'll gain a better understanding of that hatred. An excellent read! - Alan Chase, Dover NH

Kinzer puts forth an interesting, yet questionable theory. The events of 1953, in the overthrow of Mossadegh was an error in American foreign policy. American concern of the always threatening Soviet Union expanding her influence, as well as Britian's urging because of their concern for the nationalization of the Anglo-Iranian oil company, was the reason for American involvement. Mossadegh is portrayed as a lover of democracy, and the overthrow of him seems like a rush to judgement.

Kinzer tries to review the great history of the Persian people, but does not go far enough in depth. His brief analysis of the Zoroastrian faith, combined with the Iranian belief of Shiism, did offer some interesting insight into the psyche of the Iranian people. However during pre-Mossadegh times many of the rulers of Iran seemed contrary to this psyche and Kinzer ignores this fact. He does however bring it into consideration after the overthrow of Mossadegh, in the Shah's brutal rule. American support of the overthrow of Mossadegh, as well as the support for the Shah's brutal rule, led to anti-American sentiment.

Overall it was a decent book, offering some insight into Iranian modern history. However, Kinzer relies way too much on the events of 1953 to link it to anti-Western sentiment and the birth of terrorism. The Israeli-Palestinian issue has agitated the Arab people, as well as slow economic progress throughout the Arab world. Kinzer simply oversimplifies the current situation.

Kinzer's work reads well and presents good scholarship on the historical background behind the current Iranian regime. It puts in light the actions of the great powers in nations after World War One and exposes the "meddling" of nation / companies and their arrogance in dealing with citizens of a nation. While you will not find the "roots" of middle eastern terrorism in this book, you will discover the origins of our present animosity with Iran.

The political bravery of Mohammed Mosedegh is particularly moving as are the various machiniations of the political parties within Iran. The present dominance fo the mullahs may not be long for this world if (as of Spring 2007) their economy continues to sputter. Pick up this book as a great adjunct to Persian history.

This is a great read: well constructed and nicely crafted. This story IS a precursor to the roots of American involvement in the wider Middle East. The 'hatred' felt by Iranians to America runs very deep. Read this and you will find some of the reasons why.

This book is written thru a leftist prespective and is full of resentment for the late Shah of Iran and the United States of America. The author thinks the entire terrorism thing is a result of 1953 coup against PM Mossadeq but the truth to the matter is that the hatred for the west existed hundreds of years before the events of 1953 or even 1979 for that matter. Radical Islamic terrorists hated the western way of life way before the 1953 coup. And the author fails to grab this fact. Yes, the coup was a mistake but when we put it in Iranian historical context it was a wise and important decision. Shah put PM Mossadeq in power in 1951 and when he asked Mossadeq to resign, he resisted and it resulted in the ugly events of 1953. Had Mossadeq resigned, there wouldn't be any coup and there would not be any problem at all.

I enjoyed this Book (on CD) very much. It seemed very well researched and offered surprising detail.

I recommend it.

Carefully documented book that should be essential reading for today's American high school students. We should all know the origins of the problems in Iranian-US relations, particularly given the direction our country is taking in dealing with Iran.

The law of unexpected consequences is an exercise that retropsective history studies allows us to savour and see what lessons can be learnt for the future. This book is an exceptional example of that approach since while focussing on an event in the early 1950s, it allows an overview of the major outcomes some 50 years later.

Since the case involves Iran the more recent evolution into an Islamic Republic and its strong anti-US stance is well known. What this book covers in a very well written and structured overview benefitting from recent US government documents and increased academic research on the subject,is how the post WWII US (anti-communist) and UK (retention of control of oil production and supplies) national interests became embroiled in overthrowing another country's democratic government which had challenged the basis on which their national resources were being exploited and the re-installation of the more friendly Shah as supreme ruler. The ramifications of that policy 50 years later in terms of Iran's depiction of the USA as "the great satan" and the rise of Islamic fundementalism in the void of democratic regimes in the Middle East have many of their roots in this story.

The book succeeds on many levels and weaves together many strands including:

a good short analysis of Iran's history and why incompetent and corrupt rulers had created the exploitative situation of its national oil resources by a UK company that existed post WWII layered onto a society that in its legacy was very different from many other Middle East countries and in Mohammad Reza Shah had a young ruler whose indecisiveness and strong belief in his need to wholly control the armed forces to survive, set the seal on his whole future;

the role of how that UK company (Anglo-Persian Oil Company) by being totally intransigent in negotiating with the democratically elected Iranian government and following a stubborn old style imperial mindset stood to lose everything under the subsequent Iranian nationalisation;

how that error was compounded by incompetent UK government ministers and diplomats (such as the unworldly Herbert Morrison as Foreign Minister under Atlee) or devious tactics (Churchill and Eden exploiting on the election of Eisenhower the anti-communist card to propose a coup to largely serve UK financial interests);

the USA's move from the initial Truman government's strong support post WWII for strong new national governments being the best bulwark against communism and large effort being devoted to applying pressure on the UK, which then all dramatically shifted with the election of Eisenhower on an anti-communist ticket. His letting the Dulles brothers in their CIA and Secretary of State roles move to inserting a US operative (the resourceful Kermit Roosevelt) to assume control of and finance the long running UK founded Iranian network to overthrow the Iranian government by fostering street riots, led to a precedent which was to then be used by the CIA several times in many other less developed countries over the next two decades;and,

finally the star of the book Mohammad Mossadegh, a man from a high ranking Iranian family who by being well educated and an international legal background was able to not only garner the support of his people for his policies in a way that Iran had not experienced before but on the interntational stage proved more than a match for the UK, especially before the UN Assembly. However those same visionary qualities as is well shown also held the seeds of his destruction since his lack of pragmatism in negotiating a deal with the UK or exercising of realpolitik when fed information as to the tactics being applied by Iranian royalists and the UK and USA against his government and unwillingness to make some hard calls, let others quickly undermine his authority by creating a perception of anarchy and communist involvement (even though it took two attempts over a week!).

While it is easy with the gift of retrospect to see everything panning out as it did subsequently happen, what this book demonstrates is that the Truman government policy which was pursued with great effort at the time has been vindicated and the claimed communist threat was risible even at the time based on then known facts to the US (sadly one missing area as the author admits is any release of Soviet documents from that period).

While I think the book is finally light on its criticism of Eisenhower (whose ongoing lack of interest in CIA activities was fatal to later international developments) and Eden (who when he was UK Prime Minister after Churchill attempted a similar approach over the 1956 Suez Canal crisis but failed to get US support and had to resign), these are small points.

What this great book sadly teaches us is the key lesson of the folly of major powers trying to build nations that are friendly and subservient to their sponsoring government will always have limited lives due to national interests re-asserting themselves eventually - the publishing of this book as the USA (& to a lesser extent the UK) try and build a "friendly" Iraq from the current turmoil in 2006 indicate that lesson has not yet been wholly learnt.

Both of Kinzer's books about US covert actions in the 50's (his other is Bitter Fruit, all about how the CIA engineered the downfall of the democratically elected government there that was threatening the monopolies and virtual feudal control of the United Fruit Company) cover moments in history that are coming back to haunt us. Two of today's big 'issues,' the tumult in the Middle East and Immigration, are deeply affected by these events. I highly recommend both books to anyone willing to take a warts-and-all view of American foreign policy and how the zeal to defeat Communism helped corporate interests co-op patriots and government agencies to do their dirty work.

This is a Great read, well researched, and a creditable source of what happened during Mosadegh's era. I have researched through several other sources/books about Mosadegh administration both in English and Farsi, and I have to say, this book sums it up pretty good. Had to read it twice to check some of the dates and claims, it seems to match with what I have seen before.

One thing most Americans fail to see as a result of media propaganda, is super powers such as US do not govern based on good deeds and promotion of democracy. It is all about money and US government has done hell of job keeping middle east in the most profitable shape.

Some may challenge some of Kinzer's conclusions by saying Mosadegh was only one man and overthrowing his government shouldn't have had any effect on overall democracy movement in Iran. For those, it is worth knowing that democracy movement in Iran started nearly 25-30 years prior to Mosadegh's administration. In fact, Mosadegh was able to come to power as a result of such movements. Overthrowing Mosadegh's government wasn't about one person, it kinda abolished the whole movement by giving Shah a chance to reclaim power and confront all democratic moves by using CIA trained SAVAK.

It took years before a backlash wiped Shah out of the scene, but big emotional movements have never resulted in good endings.

Nobody ever mentions the motive behind take over of the US embassy in Tehran and hostage crises. The embassy was referred to as "US house of espionage" and motive was to recover documents of CIA involvement in Shah's regime. Wrong or right, the motive that is being never talked about.

Kinzer's book opens the door to such questions and makes you rethink about stuff you thought you knew.

This book was an excellent summation of American foreign policy that was completely misguided. Very well written and well researched it details Kermit Roosevelt's efforts to over through Mossadegh and put the Shah of Iran on the throne. We can see the determination of the CIA and really see the CIA at its peak performance. While this coup was almost a failure it was pulled off and led to one of the greatest tragedies in American foreign policy turning a friendly nation against the United States. The author does not go into the British policy which was the true crux behind the overthrow but nonetheless this really was an excellent book and deserve six stars!

For years the people were oppressed by arrogant, oblivious, exploitative colonial masters. The wealth beneath their feet was sucked out and shipped away while they eked out a pitiful existence in the hovels of polluted slums. Their rulers were selfish and stupid - eager for whatever scraps the master gave them.

This was Iran in the 1950s. A country in need of a savior. A bit like the 13 colonies trembling under the fist of the same master that was running Iran. In Iran, the savior was a Swiss educated, doctor of law. A frail, enigmatic, articulate, brilliant hero. A true believer in democracy - a giant in a country bedeviled by petty tyrants and wretched dictators.

All the Shah's Men is the story of Mohammad Mossadegh - democratically prime minister of Iran from 1950 to 1953. For a short period in its violent, turbulent history, Iran was a fragile, vibrant member of the free countries of the world. Mossadegh, the triumphant father of a nation reborn traveled the world. He was mobbed by well wishers wherever he stopped. At the United Nations he battled the best and most eloquent the British could put forward and crushed him under the weight of a just cause and a well crafted speech.

Iran could have been a vibrant democracy. With proper support in the 1950s, it could today be a valued member of the family of democratic nations instead of a feared supporter of terrorism and perhaps soon to be a rogue buyer and distributor of nuclear technology.

All the Shah's Men shows how the CIA made it all happen. The CIA replaced a fledgling democracy with a crushing dictatorship, laying the seeds for today's Islamic Republic. To "maintain stability" and to keep the cheap oil flowing the United States engineered a coup, snatching power from a committed democrat and handing it to a ruthless dictator. It worked for 25 years until the revolution, which brought about the current Iranian system. Was it worth it?

Sometimes I hear people ask - why do they hate us? Imagine if the story of George Washington involved another country stepping in and stopping him from crossing the Delaware. Wouldn't we hate them?

For years the people were oppressed by arrogant, oblivious, exploitative colonial masters. The wealth beneath their feet was sucked out and shipped away while they eked out a pitiful existence in the hovels of polluted slums. Their rulers were selfish and stupid - eager for whatever scraps the master gave them.

This was Iran in the 1950s. A country in need of a savior. A bit the 13 colonies trembling under the fist of the same master that was running Iran. In Iran, the savior was a Swiss educated, doctor of law. A frail, enigmatic, articulate, brilliant hero. A true believer in democracy in a country bedeviled by corrupt kings and wretched dictators.

All the Shah's Men is the story of Mohammad Mossadegh - democratically prime minister of Iran from 1950 to 1953. For a short period in its violent, turbulent history, Iran was a fragile, vibrant member of the free countries of the world. Mossadegh, the triumphant father of a nation reborn traveled the world. He was mobbed by well wishers wherever he stopped. At the United Nations he battled the best and most eloquent the British could put forward and crushed him under the weight of a just cause and a well crafted speech.

Iran could have been a vibrant democracy. With proper support in the 1950s, it could today be a valued member of the family of democratic nations instead of a feared supporter of terrorism and perhaps soon to be a rogue buyer and distributor of nuclear technology.

All the Shah's Men shows how the CIA made it all happen. The CIA replaced a fledgling democracy with a crushing dictatorship, laying the seeds for today's Islamic Republic. To "maintain stability" and to keep the cheap oil flowing the United States engineered a coup, snatchuing power from a committed democrat and handing it to a ruthless dictator. It worked for 25 years until the revolution, which brought about the current Iranian system. Was it worth it?

Sometimes I hear people ask - why do they hate us? Imagine if the story of George Washington involved another country stepping in and stopping him from crossing the Delaware. Wouldn't we hate them?

Imagine the U.S. was occupied by another country. Then, a third country, one that purports to value democracy and freedom, comes along to liberate us. We back them up and tolerate the installation of political cronies and corporate hacks in exchange for some kind of freedom. Then, this country, instead of installing a true democracy, installs a ruthless dictator and, if it is a democracy, is only a shadow one. And then the country continues this policy for 50 years, all the while claiming it supports freedom and democracy.

That is exactly what the U.S. has done for years, particularly in the MIddle East. Wouldn't Americans be angry if a country did that to us, particularly one that claimed to value freedom? I am surprised they're not angrier.

That's what this book is about. Despite our policies, we still had credibility as a country that valued freedom and democracy (which the U.S. clearly does not), but as this book demonstrates the Iraq War was the final nail on the coffin. The problem isn't that the U.S. is a bad or terrible country, the problem is that there is a large gap between what the U.S. says it values (freedom) and its actions, including the installation and continued support of ruthless dictators like in Saudi Arabia (unless those dictators countries have oil, then they have to be our friends or deposed).

This is a fine read; well written and quite enlightening. It should be required reading for high school history/economics students. Also, the subject leads to dynamic discussions for book clubs.
SBA

More than a interesting report of specifics of the doings of the English and American governments and corporations, this book shows that there are lessons in 1953 to be learned today about messing with other countries businesses.
In fact there are many connections and similarities with the other middle east English/American endeavor: Palestine/1947. Put both together and you have 90% of the source of all the problems that we call the "middle east crisis".
To find a solution you have to go to the roots of the problem: Stop alien interference! Let the locals work their differences out. It will not be smooth but is the only way out! Yankees go and keep home!

An interesting and informative account of Iranian history in the twentieth century. Gives the reader a good understanding of how modern day Iran and its people were shaped. However, reader needs to be interested in political history as well because much of the history recounts political struggle. These in depth political sections tend to drag a bit if the reader is not very politically minded.

I took a long time finishing this book primarily because I find the story of how two imperialistic, self-styled 'democracies' plotted to crush a very proud people's experiment in launching a democratic country very depressing. Kinzer isn't an Iranian sympathizer or closet communistic as some right wingers suspect. He strives to point out the mistakes Mossadegh made as well in trying to navigate what were very dangerous political waters, made more so by Churchill and Kermit Roosevelt.

All the Shah's Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror, Stephen Kinzer, Wiley; 1st edition (July 18, 2003), 272 Pages, ISBN: 0471265179


With all the tension in the Middle East, could there be a potential military threat facing the United States? In trying to unravel the current Middle East Crisis, it's necessary to examine the past. There's little debate that the majority of the Arab world has considerable contempt for the U.S. But how exactly did we earn such hatred among these oil baring countries? How deep is this animosity and could this lead to an eventual war with a nation like Iran? If so, how are the allegiances divided and what are the military capabilities of the major players?

All the Shah's Men probes into the history of Iran, concentrating on the negative involvement of the United States. The book focuses on the details leading up to and including the history of Operation Ajax; a 1953 covert operation by the United States and Great Britain to remove Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh from power in support of the western friendly Shah Mohammed Pahlavi.

According to the book, the roots of hatred towards the United States in Iran have long been buried in oil. From the 1930's until the early 1950's the oil in Iran was controlled by Great Britain. But in 1951, the first democratically elected parliament took control of Iran and cut Great Britain off from their oil supplies.

In 1953, Great Britain convinced the United States to assist in overthrowing this new democracy and put the ruthless Shah back into power to protect their oil interests. The Shah, with his western friendly policies, allowed the U.S. to control 40% of Iranian oil assets for over two decades following the take-over. It wasn't until 1979 that the Shah was run out of office by Khomeini in favor of an Islamic controlled nation.

Between the hostage crisis of 1979 and the U.S. support for Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war, the relationship between the U.S. and Iran began a steep decline in the late 70's. The tensions perhaps reached an all-time high when President Bush added Iran to the "Axis of Evil" list in 2002. Still today, many Iranians believe that their country would be a fully established democracy if it were not for the US involvement overthrowing their nationally elected government in 1953.

Although written at about an 11th grade level, All the Shah's Men is a very good book. It makes it easy to understand how the hatred has grown between the US and Iran and would make an excellent reference book on Middle East history. The book certainly paints a vivid picture on Iran's desire to harm the United States, but it doesn't probe enough into the "how" of the problem. The book does not go into enough details on Iran's involvement with current terrorist organizations. There is also little discussion on Iran's current weapons inventory, capabilities, and research. To fully understand the problem, we need to know quite a bit more than just "why".

A must read for anyone genuinely interested in the current world climate. Within "genuinely" read not mentally mummified by coverage of current events by commercial news agencies, nor paralyzed into a specefic viewpoint by special interest mongers on all sides.

Mr. Kinzer is an exceptional conveyor of history and thought. His story is straight and matter of fact. Mr. Kinzer does not rely on heavy speculation or personal judgements in presenting history. The clear voice of fact, speeches, published comments, and countless historical documents speak for themselves. The main historical players, presidents, ambassadors, spies, generals, and others, in their own words, tell the story and reveal their motives

Reading this history may change your thought about the true purpose and motivation for todays US foreign policy. You just might conclude what they tell us is not what they tell each other. You might conclude that the current Bush policy of bringing democracy to Iraq is not a democracy intended for the people of Iraq, but mostly for the Oil and Gas Industry and the Military Industrial complex. US Foreign policy has not changed in
over eighty year only the explanation of it changes to suit the needs of the speakers.

Read and grow. Very refreshing in this era of excessive propaganda and unbridled corporate dominace.

Stephen Kinzer writes a great history book that reads like a spy thriller. He details the rise of oil and the importance it has for the west in the two World Wars and the fact that the British were unwilling to give up control of the Iranian Oil Fields.
Eventually, American policy formulated by the Dulles brothers, leads the American CIA into overthrowing Mossadegh's government in 1953 and putting the Shah into power. For about 26 years the Shah runs Iran, but the inner frustration and anger towards American involvement into Iranian politics results in the 1979 hostages taken in Tehran.
Kinzer does an excellent job with the details of the CIA and British intelligence as he clearly describes what was going on with the Iranians, the British and the Americans throughout the overthrow of Mossadegh.
If you want to find out why Iran views the British and the United States governments with such disdain, this book will open your eyes to what occurred 50 years ago and why terrorism today has its roots in our involvement in Iranian political affairs of that time.

I had no idea that any democracy had even taken hold in Iran. Sadly, it was short lived, but it gives me hope that it might take root again. I was amazed by the story of the first prime miniser of Iran. I was pleased to learn of the policy of President Truman. I was not surprised to learn about Presiend Eisenhour's policy. I guess I can sort of understand it, but I sure wish the United States had followed a policy of promoting democracy through out the world. I think the world would be a safer place today, if that had been the case.

For me, the great thing about this book was that it gave me a tremendous amount of understanding (biased or not) of the modern day history of Iran. Here in Los Angeles, it also helped me understand the political background many of my Persian friends are coming from.

EVERY historical/journalistic account needs to be critically evaluated---but that is the reader's responsibility. What use is it to disregard a text for its bias, when every text is? Personally, I thought it worked well in shedding light on different sentiments in Iran as well as giving me a condensed history of the country. Take it in context.

Kinzer has provided a short and definitely insightful overview of what went down in 1953, the players and the surmized cause and effects. I recommend it to anyone who is curious about Iran and its historical relations with the U.S. in the 20th century.

All the Shah's Men was Very well written and informative!

This is a well research book, the book illustrated how British and U.S.A had great interest in Iran's politics due to Iran's oil. The book lacked in two areas. First, the book title is "...the roots of Middel East Terror", the Author did not illustrated how 1953 coup would lead to terror in Middle East. Last, the author was censuring the King oif kings Mohammad Reza PAHLAVI sought to advance Iranian army. Author mentioned, in 1970, the British naval left Persian Gulf, the British no longer was interested to invade oil region of Iran. Consequerntly, the King needed to have a strong army to confront invader force. The histroical fact was Iran and Iraq war, as Saddam HUSSIAN luanched an attack on Iran's oil region.

Last note, the other good book is "Musaddiq and The Struggle for Power in Iran", by Homa KATOUZIAN.

This book read almost like a fictional thriller novel (as in readable and fast-paced; a page-turner). But it was filled with facts and real people and real events. I loved it, and usually history is not my forte.