
Operation Ajax: How the CIA’s first attempt at regime change nearly failed - pepys
https://www.laphamsquarterly.org/roundtable/operation-ajax
======
zakum1
Over the last 70 years, this has been the pattern of US foreign policy:
Destabilising countries in Asia, Middle East, Africa and Latin America, for
narrow economic or ideological benefits. It is all too easy to justify it as
“our meddling” is for the greater good and “others meddling” is evil and
undemocratic. There is no distinction. Eventually the US needs to come to
terms with the massively destructive impact it has had on the world since WW2.
China in many ways has exhibited a path to a more benign and progressive
foreign policy (not without its own imperfections).

~~~
yesforwhat
> China in many ways has exhibited a path to a more benign and progressive
> foreign policy

This guy is joking, right?

~~~
stephen_g
Foreign policy-wise, he’s probably accurate. That’s more of a comment on how
destructive the US has been internationally. He’s not necessarily saying
China’s is objectively good.

~~~
zakum1
was not claiming China does not have faults. Imagine if China instigated a
coup in a Middle Eastern country. The outrage would be massive. My real point
is the hypocrisy of the west, that we cannot objectively see the problems with
instigating coupe against governments that challenges our selfish economic
interests.

------
krylon
Given the long-term consequences of overthrowing the Iranian government, I
cannot help but wonder if people involved in US foreign politics secretly wish
that the operation had failed. It might have saved the world a lot of trouble
later on.

And somehow, this seems to be a recurring pattern in the foreign politics of
the USA (although I suspect one could easily find many examples for other
countries, too) - "solutions" that in the long run cause far bigger problems
than the ones they were meant to solve in the first place.

On the other hand, that pattern is hardly exclusive to politics, so maybe it
is just human nature at work.

~~~
Synaesthesia
Considering they had 25 years of the Shah being allied to them, and able to
use profits from the oil there, maybe not.

~~~
krylon
But then Khomeini came along, the Shah was overthrown, and today, Iran
supports the Syrian government, rebels in Yemen, Hezbollah, and Hamas. Plus,
the US and Israeli governments have been a making a lot of noise about
possible Iranian plans to build nuclear weapons. These days, I think, it would
be very convenient for the USA, if Iran still was a secular democracy they
could be on friendly terms with.

Certainly there are people who consider the coup against Mossadegh a
worthwhile investment. But there were some, uh, unforeseen repercussions.

------
surferbayarea
So why the outcry against Russian interference? Double standards?

------
zrav
Since WW2 the US has been involved in actual or attempted regime change on
average every two and a half years. Interestingly, or rather significantly,
the last two attempts, Syria and Turkey (confirmation pending but likely),
failed.

------
vezycash
Reading this made me finally understand one benefit/need for China's tight
information control.

------
Tsubasachan
The US has been doing regime change long before the CIA was founded. There has
been US involvement in Central and South America since Sam Houston.

------
gp7
Just a run of the mill human interest story about the _checks notes_ CIA????

