Reading “Iran Students Demand Premier’s Resignation” in your Feb. 1 issue, I recalled Abraham Lincoln’s words: “You can fool all the people some of the time, some people all of the time, but not all the people all the time.”

I think it is time to stop fooling the American people about the situation in Iran. These days thousands of university students and professors in Tehran demand “freedom or death.” I wonder if your readers get the significance of these demonstrations. These demonstrations are being held against a background of military dictatorship, and the students have experienced days when thousands of people demanding freedom were killed in the streets.

The government is intolerant of even whispered criticism, and the students face torture and exile, from a government accusing them of communism. Though the students are not Communists, this naturally provides propaganda for communism.

Since it was brought back to power by foreign factions (interested in oil) in 1953, the regime has imprisoned, tortured and killed thousands. The Shah’s security police is patterned after the Nazi Gestapo.

Ten months ago, the Shah promised to let his people enjoy a free election for the first time. It turned out to be the most rigged one yet. Three fourths of the elected deputies were among the Shah’s friends and their relations. Several others bought election from members of the royal court.

[CIA intelligence report from Jan. 18, 1961: “The Shah apparently has decided to use government influence to ensure that candidates of his choice win in nearly every constituency. The rigging cannot be concealed from the public and may cause stronger protest demonstrations than those leading to suspension of elections last August.”]

Following the election, Iranian students in the United States picketed in front of the United Nations. In Tehran, the nationalists resisted, and the Shah had to dismiss the Premier and order the deputies to resign. Now, after four months, the election has started again, and so far 90 per cent of the elected deputies are the same.

To fool foreign powers, and pretend that democracy exists in Iran, two parties were founded by the Shah two years ago. Combined they represent a total of less than 4000 members throughout the country. The nationalists (supporters of former Premier Mossadegh) did not have a chance to participate in the election, even though it would be a conservative estimate to say that 80 per cent of the people would have voted for them, if given a chance.

The problem is that America’s massive military and economic aid is associated with support of the policies of the Shah; but the political structure under the crown is shaky, and getting weaker. In spite of pressure from American officials, the Shah has been powerless to do anything about government corruption, which is rampant. Overwhelming dissatisfaction with the regime provides ideal fertilizer for the growth of communism, which has been steadily increasing during the past seven years.

The only massive counterweight against communism among the Iranian people, are the nationalists. Yet, the Iranian Embassy here says in its bulletin of Feb. 1, that Mossadegh’s supporters are Communists. The Iranian government seems to have convinced the State Department that if the Shah is removed, Iran will be in the hands of Communists. The danger of overthrow of the present regime is real and close. Many relatives of the Shah and high officials have gone outside Iran on assignments, to be safe in case of coup d’etat.

I wonder if President Kennedy’s Administration will revise the United States policy for Iran? Has the fate of Ngo’s regime in Viet-Nam, Rhee’s in Korea, and Menderes’ in Turkey, been enough of a lesson for America? Or do they need Iran also?

HUSSEIN DOOSTMOHAMEDI.
Washington.

Hussein Doostmohamedi’s letter of Feb. 6 “How Stable is Iran?” has evoked great concern among loyal, democratic Iranians studying and working in the Washington area.

Iran’s chaotic months under ex-Premier Mossadegh are still fresh in the horrified memories of Iranians, Americans, and all freedom-loving peoples throughout the world — much as Castro’s actions in Cuba today are highly disturbing to the non-Communist world. [Fidel Castro]

We all remember too clearly the constant martial law with its restrictions upon the free flow of ideas and commerce; the thousands of needlessly murdered victims and political prisoners spirited away from public contact; the economic disaster, heightened by total loss of our vital oil revenues and world markets; the countless bloody riots and lack of even the most basic personal safety; and the manipulating Communists, so influential during those dark days, leading our country into the very jaws on totalitarianism.

All intelligent Iranians, conscious of their personal and national interests, viewed the fall of Mossadegh’s government as a deliverance, and welcomed back the wise and disinterested leadership of our Shahanshah and responsible, elected officials.

Mr. Doostmohamedi’s claim that supporters of Mossadegh have been barred from participation in this new election, and his “conservative estimate” that 80 per cent of the people would have voted for nationalist candidates are both totally false. Proof of this comes, perhaps most convincingly, from objective American reporters, whose most recent dispatches report the election of several independent candidates, one of whom, Mr. Saleh, a former Mossadegh minister, is the foremost Mossadegh supporter in Iran today. [Allah Yar Saleh of the National Front, which was suppressed, and Saleh was later imprisoned.]

Even though they were given the opportunity to vote for nationalist candidates in a number of areas, the voters of Iran did not choose to send many of these candidates to represent them in the legislative assembly. The large volume of letters, telegrams, and personal delegations which has deluged government officials since announcement of election plans has, furthermore, expressed the popular sentiment that these candidates should not even be allowed to run.

That officials chose to permit an electoral test, despite these suggestions, is just one proof of the government’s firm dedication to the principles of a free election. The only individuals who are barred from seeking office are members of the Communist Party, outlawed for over a decade, well-known traitors to their country.

Although it is probably true to say that not all members of the National Front, or students who have demonstrated in favor of the National Front, are Communists, there is no doubt whatsoever that Communists have long exerted influence within this party. Sometimes unwittingly, but more often fully conscious of the increased power to be gained through association with organized communism, the supporters of Mossadegh are in close co-operation with known Iranian Communists, who exert a disruptive influence through their underground activities.

Two other points in Mr. Doostmohamedi’s letter should be mentioned, if only to point out their perfidious nature. The assertion that government corruption is rampant, and that the Shahanshah is powerless to do anything about it is belied by the facts of recent months. A vast anti-corruption campaign, resulting in thousands of arrests and convictions, has impressed all citizens with the seriousness of the anti-corruption laws themselves and of the government’s intention to enforce these laws rigorously.

The number of convictions to date show that corruption was once a problem; but, at the same time, it clearly indicates that this situation will not be tolerated. The second point, describing Iran as a military dictatorship with security police patterned after the Nazi Gestapo, can most appropriately be applied to the regime of Mossadegh, so well remembered by all of us. The intolerance of “even whispered criticism” is not sustained by the facts: that the government has tolerated demonstrations and opinions without any retaliation whatsoever.

Students in Tehran’s university were not prevented from voicing their opinions within the university grounds. They were prevented only from extending their unruly activities into the busy streets of the city. Without doubt, there is not one student who faces “torture and exile” or imprisonment because of participation in lawful criticism of his government.

To be sure, acts of sedition, public disorder, and espionage are justly punished under the constitution; but this is true of every democratic country—even the United States—which must protect itself from would-be usurpers of power and unconstitutional actions of irresponsible men.

We welcome the close and open-minded scrutiny which the new American administration should devote to Iran and American foreign policy toward Iran. Iran’s great progress—economic, social, and political—during the seven years since Mossadegh’s fall in 1953, is virtual proof of the wisdom of our present leadership. Iranian development is strengthened by our close and friendly associations with America and the free world.

SADEGH SIAHATGAR.
Hyattsville, Md.