1 The Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training Foreign ...

Q: Okay, well let’s talk about some.
MILLER: The most important event – no, there were two important – even pivotal -
events. Ali Amini was the Prime Minister. He was a clever, extremely able experienced
politician of Qajar origins.
Q: Qajar being?
MILLER: The previous dynasty that ruled Iran from the late 18 th century until the
takeover by Reza Shah in 1921. Amini was very courtly and popular. He had been an
ambassador in the United States, had dealt with the oil nationalization issues, was
extremely bright, very funny, appealing to many, but he had been in so many battles that
he was distrusted by everyone to some degree. But he was astute and thought that the
young nationalists were the future, that we should move in that direction. The shah, of
course, distrusted them and him. The shah made that clear to Julius Holmes, and the
American government, that this issue was an indication of whether the U.S. supported the
shah or Amini. The Shah told Ambassador Holmes that Amini had to go.
The outcome of the control issue turned on a loan. This loan referred to 20 million dollars
to finance a roll over of debt to the IMF, for a loan to handle a difficult time in a
transition budgetary process. We didn’t support Amini’s request for a rollover loan, so he
fell. From that point on, the shah was absolute ruler. He would from that point on dictate
all matters in the Parliament, the budget. He ran the government, he chose the ministers,
he prescribed the elections, he made the election lists. Iran became an absolute monarchy,
and abandoned any thoughts of evolution towards a constitutional monarchy, and it was a
conscious decision on our government’s part. It was a battle that the policy makers in
NSC and Defense Department lost, and of course the people that held my point of view
lost in Tehran. That was one issue. The other was…
Q: Before we leave that, those supporting the refusal of the loan and the American
government, where were they coming from? What was the feel?
MILLER: Well, they were known as “Shahparast”. It was a term that was used for “shahlovers.”
The issue of support for the shah was partially resolved, by extremely successful
Iranian diplomacy, that is, they had ambassadors in Washington who threw the biggest,
elegant, lavish parties. They were civilized, charming and able, well-connected in
Washington circles and worked the newspapers, the CIA, and the lobbyists very
effectively. They worked hard and well. The shah, himself and his wife Farah was very
attractive too, many at that time. In Washington they did the job of persuasion very well.
The policy approached that were future oriented were viewed as too risky, too
speculative, and I suppose, the philosophy of a bird-in-the-hand is better than two in the
bush governed. The Shah seemed to have all of the trappings of power. He commanded a
modern military, he was buying new equipment, he would develop the military using our
58