From Mossadegh to Missiles: The West’s Fatal Mistakes in Iran

The current crisis in Iran—marked by tensions with the West, internal repression, and a dangerous nuclear standoff—did not emerge in a vacuum. To understand the roots of this turmoil, we must go back to 1953, when the United States, in collaboration with the United Kingdom, orchestrated a coup that removed Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister, Mohammad Mossadegh. His “crime” was asserting Iran’s sovereignty by nationalizing the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (now BP), thereby threatening the economic interests of British and American oil conglomerates.

Mossadegh was not a radical. He was a nationalist committed to parliamentary democracy. But in the Cold War climate, economic autonomy was treated as ideological rebellion. The CIA-backed Operation Ajax ousted Mossadegh and reinstalled Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi—a monarch whose autocratic rule was propped up for decades by U.S. military and financial support. In doing so, the United States and its allies undermined Iran's chance at a secular, democratic future in favor of securing oil interests and strategic control.

This betrayal planted the seeds of resentment that eventually exploded in 1979 with the Islamic Revolution. The overthrow of the Shah and the rise of the Ayatollahs marked the beginning of a deeply hostile era between Iran and the West. Ironically, by trying to prevent Iran from drifting out of their orbit, the U.S. helped create the very conditions that led to the emergence of a theocratic regime openly hostile to American interests.

The hypocrisy of U.S. foreign policy has only deepened over time. One of the most glaring contradictions is Washington’s unconditional support for Israel—a state that possesses nuclear weapons, refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and denies access to international inspectors. Yet, Iran—a signatory to the NPT—has been relentlessly pressured, sanctioned, and threatened for pursuing a civilian nuclear program, despite having accepted far more stringent inspections than Israel ever has.

The intelligent men in Washington must understand the real power lies in moral authority, not in military hardware. No amount of troops, airstrikes, or economic sanctions can propel an idea that lacks both moral standing and logical coherence. The current policy of demanding unilateral surrender from Iran, while reinforcing Israel’s unchecked nuclear monopoly, is not only illogical—it’s dangerous. It sends a clear message across the region: those who disarm or comply, like Libya or Iraq, are left defenseless and ultimately destroyed, while those who resist may survive. This breeds exactly the kind of security paranoia that leads to nuclear arms races. Iran’s motivations, and those of its neighbors, are increasingly driven not by ideology, but by a hard-learned lesson: protect your sovereignty or risk being crushed. Such a doctrine can only expand nuclear weapons programs, not curb them. You don’t need to be a genius to see that this is a recipe for proliferation, not peace.

If the goal is to prevent nuclear conflict and promote long-term stability in the Middle East, then the approach cannot be selective or self-serving. Demanding that Iran disarm while ignoring Israel’s nuclear arsenal only reinforces the narrative of Western double standards. It breeds distrust and empowers hardliners in Tehran who use this perceived injustice to rally domestic support and vilify moderates who seek engagement with the West.

True peace in the Middle East will never come from coercion, selective morality, or backroom regime changes. It requires a fundamentally different kind of policymaking—one that is intelligent, consistent, and rooted in international law and equity. The only viable long-term solution is complete denuclearization of the Middle East, including Israel. A nuclear-free zone in the region, supervised by an impartial international body, would be a powerful confidence-building measure and a foundation for broader peace negotiations.

This also requires the West—especially the United States—to admit and reckon with its historical mistakes. Supporting dictators for strategic gain, toppling democratic leaders when they challenge Western corporate interests, and applying different standards for allies and adversaries is a formula for perpetual conflict. Iran’s tragedy—and by extension, the region’s—was not inevitable. It was the result of deliberate decisions made in boardrooms and war rooms in Washington and London.

It is not too late to change course—but doing so requires courage: the courage to hold even allies accountable, to support democracy even when it is inconvenient, and to pursue peace even when war appears easier. Without that courage, the ghosts of 1953 will continue to haunt not only Iran but the entire Middle East.

Any attempt to forcibly shift power dynamics in the region will only deepen instability. The notion of restoring peace through missiles and bombs is not just misguided—it is criminal. It is reckless to gamble with the lives of millions. Lasting peace and stability can only be achieved through intelligent, honest dialogue and the complete denuclearization of both Israel and Iran. Without this, any peace initiative is destined to fail.