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

institutions in-between, the religious structure would be there unless they too were
destroyed. The shah’s thinking was he could take care of the religious unrest. He would
wipe them out. What stands in the way, is the growing international and internal power of
human rights, which if applied, would limit the ability of the Shah to exterminate the
group. The transparency of the society, the growth of a free press and more open
comment, education, travel, the desire to have the respect of the West, a longing to be
regarded as a positive world force in the circles of international power, particularly at the
enthronement of the monarchy, the celebration of 3000 years of monarchy in Persepolis
in 1974.
Q: Did that happen while you were there? When was that?
MILLER: No. That was afterwards.
Q: Did you find while you were there – did you find sort of – were you up against the
Washington establishment? With the government becoming the hand-maiden of the
shah…
MILLER: Yes, that was at the core of the policy and the intellectual debate. On the desk,
at the Middle East bureau – were real policy pros, and they understood what was
happening. Kay Bracken was the desk officer, John Bowling and John Stutesman were in
the NEA Bureau as were David Newsome and Richard Parker. I’d say the issue of the
shah versus democratic opposition was a permissible debate within the Department. In
the Kennedy years, and into Johnson, the NSC was more important than State covering
Iran, but not elsewhere, because of the quality of the Arabists and their domination of the
policy debate. Iran policy was an issue in the White House. It was also an issue in
Congress. Iran policy was a big issue in the lobbying community. The Iran lobbies had a
very powerful impact in Washington. After the Israelis, I suppose, the Iranians at that
time were the most active, and spent the most, and got the most out of it. Policy debates
about Iran among the academics, was very lively. Certainly the opposition point of view
was very strongly held in universities where the students were almost without exception
part of the democratic nationalist opposition.
Q: And demonstrating from time to time.
MILLER: Repeatedly, as the end came near. The Iranian students were of course engaged
in their own politics.
Q: Who were some of the dominant figures in this Iranian connection in the NSC?
MILLER: At that time?
Q: Yes.
MILLER: There was Walt Rostow and the superb Middle East scholar, Bill Polk, who
62