**The 1953 Iranian coup d'état, known in Iran as the 28 Mordad Coup d'état (Persian: کودتای ۲۸ مرداد), represents a pivotal, yet often overlooked, moment in 20th-century history, profoundly shaping the trajectory of Iran and its relationship with Western powers. This covert operation, which saw the overthrow of Iran's democratically elected Prime Minister, Mohammad Mosaddegh, on August 19, 1953, was a joint venture led by the Iranian army, with crucial support and orchestration from the United States' Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the United Kingdom's Secret Intelligence Service (SIS, or MI6). Its primary aim was to dismantle Mosaddegh's nationalist government, particularly his efforts to nationalize Iran's oil industry, and to strengthen the autocratic rule of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.** Decades later, the echoes of this intervention continue to reverberate, fueling deep-seated mistrust and shaping the complex dynamics of current US-Iran relations. As tensions rise and discussions of "regime change" resurface, understanding the historical precedent set by the 1953 Iranian coup becomes not just an academic exercise, but a crucial lens through which to view contemporary geopolitical challenges. This article delves into the intricate details of this historical event, exploring its origins, execution, and the enduring legacy that continues to cast a long shadow over the region. --- **Table of Contents** 1. [The Dawn of Nationalism: Iran's Quest for Oil Sovereignty](#the-dawn-of-nationalism-irans-quest-for-oil-sovereignty) 2. [Mohammad Mosaddegh: A Champion of Iranian Independence](#mohammad-mosaddegh-a-champion-of-iranian-independence) 3. [The Spark of Conflict: Oil, Sanctions, and International Pressure](#the-spark-of-conflict-oil-sanctions-and-international-pressure) 4. [Operation Ajax: The US-UK Covert Collaboration](#operation-ajax-the-us-uk-covert-collaboration) * [The Genesis of the Plot](#the-genesis-of-the-plot) * [Engineering the Overthrow](#engineering-the-overthrow) 5. [The Fateful Day: August 19, 1953 (28 Mordad Coup d'état)](#the-fateful-day-august-19-1953-28-mordad-coup-detat) 6. [The Shah's Return: Cementing Autocratic Rule](#the-shahs-return-cementing-autocratic-rule) 7. [Decades of Denial: The CIA's Evolving Acknowledgment](#decades-of-denial-the-cias-evolving-acknowledgment) 8. [Echoes Through Time: The Enduring Legacy of the 1953 Coup](#echoes-through-time-the-enduring-legacy-of-the-1953-coup) * [Fueling Anti-American Sentiment](#fueling-anti-american-sentiment) * [A Precedent for Intervention](#a-precedent-for-intervention) --- ## The Dawn of Nationalism: Iran's Quest for Oil Sovereignty To truly grasp the significance of the 1953 Iranian coup, one must first understand the geopolitical landscape of post-World War II Iran. For decades, Iran's vast oil reserves had been largely controlled by the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), a British corporation that held a near-monopoly over the country's most valuable resource. This arrangement, perceived by many Iranians as a colonial exploitation, generated immense nationalistic fervor. While the AIOC reaped massive profits, Iran received only a small percentage, fueling widespread resentment and a growing demand for nationalization. The desire for self-determination and economic sovereignty was palpable across Iranian society. Figures like General Ali Razmara, who became prime minister in June 1950, faced immense pressure to address the oil issue. However, it was the charismatic and deeply popular Mohammad Mosaddegh who would ultimately galvanize this nationalistic sentiment into a concrete political movement, setting the stage for a direct confrontation with powerful Western interests and, eventually, the infamous Iran CIA coup. The nationalization of Iran's oil was not merely an economic policy; it was a powerful symbol of independence and a challenge to the existing global order. ## Mohammad Mosaddegh: A Champion of Iranian Independence Mohammad Mosaddegh was no ordinary politician. An ardent nationalist and a fierce advocate for constitutional rule, he rose to prominence on the wave of public demand for oil nationalization. Born into an aristocratic family, Mosaddegh was educated in Europe and held various ministerial and parliamentary positions throughout his long career. He was known for his unwavering integrity, his dramatic public speeches, and his deep commitment to democratic principles. His rise to the premiership in April 1951 was a direct result of his leadership in the movement to nationalize the oil industry, a move that resonated deeply with the Iranian populace who felt their national wealth was being unjustly plundered. Mosaddegh firmly believed that Iran's sovereignty depended on its control over its own resources. His government passed legislation to nationalize the AIOC, transforming it into the National Iranian Oil Company. This bold act, while celebrated by Iranians, was seen as an existential threat by Britain, which relied heavily on Iranian oil. Mosaddegh's democratic legitimacy, stemming from popular support and parliamentary endorsement, made him a formidable figure, but also a target for those who sought to maintain the old order. His commitment to national independence would ultimately lead to the chain of events culminating in the 1953 Iranian coup. ## The Spark of Conflict: Oil, Sanctions, and International Pressure The nationalization of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company by Mosaddegh's government immediately ignited a severe international crisis. Britain, infuriated by the loss of its lucrative oil concessions, responded with a comprehensive economic blockade and an international embargo on Iranian oil. They withdrew their technicians, froze Iranian assets, and threatened legal action against any country that purchased Iranian oil. This aggressive stance crippled Iran's economy, as its primary source of revenue was cut off. Despite the severe economic hardship, Mosaddegh remained steadfast, appealing to international law and sovereignty. Initially, the United States adopted a more cautious approach, attempting to mediate the dispute. However, as the Cold War intensified, American policymakers grew increasingly concerned about Mosaddegh's government. They feared that the economic instability and political unrest in Iran could create an opening for communist influence, particularly from the Soviet Union, Iran's northern neighbor. This fear, coupled with persistent lobbying from the British, who painted Mosaddegh as unstable and potentially pro-Soviet, led to a significant shift in U.S. policy. The strategic importance of Iranian oil, combined with Cold War anxieties, gradually pushed the U.S. towards a more interventionist stance, setting the stage for the covert operation that would become known as the Iran CIA coup. ## Operation Ajax: The US-UK Covert Collaboration The decision to actively intervene and overthrow Mosaddegh was not taken lightly, but rather emerged from a convergence of British desperation and growing American strategic concerns. This covert operation, codenamed "Operation Ajax" by the CIA, marked a significant turning point in both US foreign policy and US-Iran relations. ### The Genesis of the Plot British intelligence, having failed to dislodge Mosaddegh through economic pressure and diplomatic means, began actively advocating for his removal. They found a receptive ear in the Eisenhower administration, which had recently taken office in the United States. The British argued that Mosaddegh was a dangerous nationalist who threatened Western oil interests and, more alarmingly, was paving the way for a communist takeover. While Mosaddegh was not a communist, and had in fact suppressed the communist Tudeh Party, the Cold War paranoia provided a convenient pretext for intervention. The CIA, under the leadership of Allen Dulles, embraced the plan. The primary objective of the 1953 Iranian coup was clear: remove Mosaddegh and restore the pro-Western Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi to full power. Declassified documents, including a history written in 1954 by one of the coup's chief planners, explicitly detail how United States and British officials plotted this military coup. These documents confirm that the CIA and the British Secret Intelligence Service (SIS, or MI6) collaborated extensively to engineer the plot, driven by a desire to secure oil interests and strengthen the autocratic rule of the Shah. ### Engineering the Overthrow The execution of Operation Ajax involved a complex web of covert activities designed to destabilize Mosaddegh's government and create an environment ripe for his overthrow. The CIA and British intelligence worked closely with the Shah and his loyalists within the Iranian army. Funds were secretly funneled to anti-Mosaddegh elements, and a sophisticated propaganda campaign was launched to discredit the prime minister. This campaign involved bribing newspaper editors, orchestrating negative media coverage, and spreading rumors about Mosaddegh's alleged corruption and mental instability. Protests were meticulously orchestrated, with agents paying crowds to demonstrate against Mosaddegh and incite violence. These manufactured riots were then joined by elements of the Iranian army loyal to the Shah, creating the illusion of widespread popular discontent and a breakdown of order. The aim was to create chaos and provide a pretext for military intervention, ultimately leading to the 1953 Iranian coup. The CIA's role in backing this "undemocratic" overthrow, as the agency itself would later acknowledge, was central to its success. ## The Fateful Day: August 19, 1953 (28 Mordad Coup d'état) The culmination of "Operation Ajax" arrived on August 19, 1953, a day etched into Iranian memory as the 28 Mordad Coup d'état. After an initial, failed attempt a few days prior, the second, decisive push was launched. The streets of Tehran erupted in a carefully orchestrated maelstrom of pro-Shah demonstrations and violent clashes. Crowds, some genuinely supportive of the Shah, others paid and instigated by CIA operatives, poured into the streets, clashing with Mosaddegh's supporters and security forces. Crucially, the Iranian army, which had been infiltrated and influenced by pro-Shah elements and CIA contacts, played a direct and decisive role. Army units moved to secure key government buildings and strategic points. Tanks and armored vehicles rolled through the capital, confronting Mosaddegh's loyalists. The fighting was fierce, particularly around Mosaddegh's residence. The New York Times, in a timeline of events leading up to and immediately following the coup, documented the rapid escalation of violence. In a file photo from February 28, 1953, an army officer was seen rallying a crowd of supporters of Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi in front of Mosaddegh's home, foreshadowing the intensity of the confrontation. By the end of the day, Mosaddegh's government had been overthrown. He himself was arrested, along with many of his ministers and supporters. The fighting in Tehran resulted in significant casualties, with some 300 people reported to have died during the clashes. The 1953 Iranian coup d'état had succeeded, bringing an end to Iran's brief experiment with democratic self-determination and paving the way for the return of an autocratic monarch. ## The Shah's Return: Cementing Autocratic Rule With Mohammad Mosaddegh removed from power, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, who had briefly fled the country during the coup attempt, returned to Tehran triumphant. His restoration to power was swift and absolute, effectively cementing his autocratic rule for the next 25 years. The 1953 Iranian coup had not only toppled a democratically elected leader but had also fundamentally altered the power dynamics within Iran, concentrating authority firmly in the hands of the monarch. The Shah, now backed by the formidable support of the United States and the United Kingdom, systematically dismantled the democratic institutions that Mosaddegh had sought to strengthen. Political dissent was suppressed, and opposition figures were imprisoned or exiled. The oil industry, the very catalyst for the coup, was re-negotiated, though not fully returned to British control. Instead, a new consortium of American, British, Dutch, and French companies was established, with Iran receiving a larger, but still controlled, share of the profits. The CIA is said to have collaborated closely with the last Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, providing intelligence, training, and support to his security forces, further entrenching his authoritarian regime. This collaboration underscored the depth of foreign influence in Iran's internal affairs post-coup. ## Decades of Denial: The CIA's Evolving Acknowledgment For decades following the 1953 Iranian coup, the role of the United States and the United Kingdom remained shrouded in secrecy and official denial. While many historians and journalists pointed to compelling evidence of Western involvement, official government sources largely refused to confirm their role. The CIA's secrecy claims were often dismissed as "facially incredible" by critics and in lawsuits seeking declassification of documents. However, the truth slowly began to emerge. In 2000, "The Secret CIA History of the Iran Coup, 1953" was released, offering an internal account of the operation. More significantly, in recent years, a trove of declassified CIA documents on Iran, Premier Mosaddegh, oil negotiations, and the 1953 coup have shed undeniable light on the Central Intelligence Agency’s central role. These documents, including the 1954 history written by one of the coup's chief planners, confirmed beyond doubt that the US and British officials plotted the military coup that toppled Iran's elected prime minister. Most notably, the CIA now officially describes the 1953 coup it backed in Iran that overthrew its prime minister and cemented the rule of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi as "undemocratic." This acknowledgment, made in a podcast about the agency’s history, marked a significant shift from previous stances. While other American officials had made similar remarks in the past, the CIA’s direct admission, though coming much later, underscored the undeniable historical fact of the Iran CIA coup. This transparency, however belated, is crucial for understanding the historical context of current geopolitical realities. ## Echoes Through Time: The Enduring Legacy of the 1953 Coup The 1953 Iranian coup d'état was not merely a historical event; it was a foundational moment that continues to shape the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East, particularly the complex and often fraught relationship between Iran and the United States. Its legacy reverberates decades later, influencing everything from revolutionary movements to contemporary diplomatic stalemates. ### Fueling Anti-American Sentiment Perhaps the most profound and enduring consequence of the 1953 Iranian coup was the deep-seated anti-American sentiment it fostered among many Iranians. The overthrow of a democratically elected and popular leader by foreign powers, solely to protect their strategic and economic interests, was perceived as a betrayal of democratic ideals and a blatant act of imperialism. This resentment simmered beneath the surface throughout the Shah's reign, eventually boiling over during the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Over two decades after the 1953 coup, the memory of the CIA and British spy agency MI6 orchestrating the overthrow of Iran’s democratically elected prime minister Mohammad Mosaddegh played a significant role in fueling the revolutionary fervor and the subsequent anti-Western stance of the new Islamic Republic. The revolution, in many ways, was a rejection of the foreign intervention that had defined the Shah's rule. ### A Precedent for Intervention Beyond Iran, the 1953 coup established a troubling precedent for covert intervention in the internal affairs of sovereign nations. It demonstrated the willingness of powerful nations to prioritize their strategic interests over democratic processes, leaving a bitter taste and a legacy of mistrust. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has indeed repeatedly intervened in the internal affairs of Iran, from the Mosaddegh coup of 1953 to other covert operations over the years. Today, as Donald Trump and other Western leaders occasionally talk of "regime change" in Iran, the historical shadow of the 1953 Iran CIA coup looms large. It serves as a stark reminder of how foreign powers once overthrew Iran’s elected leader to secure oil interests, and the profound, long-lasting consequences of such actions. The current tensions between the US, Israel, and Iran are inextricably linked to this historical intervention, with the echoes of that fateful August day still shaping perceptions, policies, and the very fabric of regional stability. Understanding this history is not just about recounting past events; it's about recognizing the roots of present-day conflicts and working towards a future built on respect and mutual understanding, rather than the repetition of past mistakes. ## Conclusion The 1953 Iranian coup d'état stands as a stark and enduring testament to the complex interplay of national sovereignty, economic interests, and geopolitical power plays. It was an event where a democratically elected leader, Mohammad Mosaddegh, was overthrown by the combined covert efforts of the United States and the United Kingdom, driven primarily by concerns over oil nationalization and Cold War anxieties. This pivotal moment, officially acknowledged by the CIA decades later as an "undemocratic" intervention, not only restored an autocratic monarch to power but also sowed seeds of resentment and mistrust that continue to shape the intricate dynamics between Iran and the West. The legacy of the 1953 Iran CIA coup is profound and undeniable. It fueled anti-American sentiment in Iran, contributed to the eventual Islamic Revolution, and set a dangerous precedent for foreign intervention in the internal affairs of sovereign nations. As we navigate the complexities of contemporary international relations, particularly concerning the Middle East, it is crucial to remember and learn from such historical episodes. By understanding the past, we can better comprehend the present and strive to build a future based on mutual respect and non-interference. What are your thoughts on how historical interventions like the 1953 coup continue to influence global politics today? Share your insights in the comments below, and consider exploring other articles on our site that delve into the intricate history of international relations.
