Fair warning, my knowledge of this subject is fairly limited.
While the overthrow of Iranian prime minister Mohammad Mossadegh is seen primarily as an American operation, the country whose government was most invested in his demise was actually Great Britain - the main target of Mossadegh's nationalization of Iranian oil production was a British company, the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company.
From what I understand from giving this thesis a very quick read, the United States government was initially willing to help Mossadegh's government, even in the face of London's opposition, due to the fear that the economic crisis caused by the British-led boycott of Iranian oil would lead to a Communist takeover of the country. Mossadegh traveled to New York in late 1951 in an attempt to get support from the American government, but his behavior during the visit (he was erratic, alternating between favoring a compromise in one moment and being completely against it in another) alienated them instead. The result was that American aid dried up by early 1952, and, amidst worsening economic conditions and political unrest, Mossadegh's government was eventually overthrown in August 1953.
So, what if Mossadegh's visit to the US went better, ensuring at least some meaningful American aid to Tehran in 1952? Since the Iranian economy won't degrade as badly as IOTL, or at least not as quickly, could this butterfly away some of Mossadegh's more autocratic actions? IOTL he was ruling by decree by the time of the 1953 coup.
Lastly, could Mossadegh and the AIOC reach a compromise if the crisis doesn't escalate as quickly as IOTL? From what I've read he first proposed a 50/50 share of profits between the Iranian government and the British, with the latter refusing the proposal. Mossadegh had already backed himself into a corner by the time London was open to this option, and he rejected it as a result.
While the overthrow of Iranian prime minister Mohammad Mossadegh is seen primarily as an American operation, the country whose government was most invested in his demise was actually Great Britain - the main target of Mossadegh's nationalization of Iranian oil production was a British company, the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company.
From what I understand from giving this thesis a very quick read, the United States government was initially willing to help Mossadegh's government, even in the face of London's opposition, due to the fear that the economic crisis caused by the British-led boycott of Iranian oil would lead to a Communist takeover of the country. Mossadegh traveled to New York in late 1951 in an attempt to get support from the American government, but his behavior during the visit (he was erratic, alternating between favoring a compromise in one moment and being completely against it in another) alienated them instead. The result was that American aid dried up by early 1952, and, amidst worsening economic conditions and political unrest, Mossadegh's government was eventually overthrown in August 1953.
So, what if Mossadegh's visit to the US went better, ensuring at least some meaningful American aid to Tehran in 1952? Since the Iranian economy won't degrade as badly as IOTL, or at least not as quickly, could this butterfly away some of Mossadegh's more autocratic actions? IOTL he was ruling by decree by the time of the 1953 coup.
Lastly, could Mossadegh and the AIOC reach a compromise if the crisis doesn't escalate as quickly as IOTL? From what I've read he first proposed a 50/50 share of profits between the Iranian government and the British, with the latter refusing the proposal. Mossadegh had already backed himself into a corner by the time London was open to this option, and he rejected it as a result.
Last edited: