To the editor: Thanks, columnist LZ Granderson, for the historical past lesson on Iran (“Reliving a colonial, exploitative history in Venezuela and Iran,” March 7), a few of which I knew, a few of which I didn’t. I knew the U.S. helped overthrow Iran’s democratically elected prime minister, Mohammad Mossadegh, in 1953. I didn’t understand it was as a result of oil firm greed; they had been unwilling to separate the earnings 50-50 with Iran (which Mossadegh needed) despite the fact that oil corporations had already agreed to a 50-50 cut up with Saudi Arabia.
The bigger level the column illustrates is the significance of historic context for understanding present occasions. The Iranians’ takeover of the American Embassy in 1979 is less complicated to grasp if that, in 1953, the U.S. eliminated their prime minister to put in a monarch subservient to the U.S. Likewise, President Trump’s withdrawal in 2018 from an settlement President Obama negotiated with Iran is what limited U.N. inspections that might have prevented harmful Iranian nuclear developments. In different phrases, if Trump had not withdrawn from that settlement eight years in the past, there won’t be any have to assault Iran now to forestall an Iranian nuclear risk.
Trump appears to imagine that his present navy assault will “clear up” the Iranian drawback. However the results of Trump’s assault will definitely not finish when he decides to cease the bombing. U.S.-Iran historical past suggests we will likely be residing with detrimental penalties of the present U.S. assault for years and even many years to come back.
Drew Davis, Redondo Seashore
