tv The Fall of Heaven CSPAN October 29, 2016 11:00pm-12:16am EDT
schizophrenia in the center cannot hold. in dreaming in french, yale university professor examines the influence they had on women's rights. another pic from iowa city's prairie life bookstore is consumed in which political theorists argues that capitalism has gone awry and in overproducing global economy. military historian max hasting provides a history of world war i in catastrophe 1914. in spies and commissars, they profile some of the major players in the early days of the russian revolution. former british ambassador recalls the soviet war enough afghanistan. some of the staff picks from. life bookstore in i was city iowa. many of these authors have appeared on book tv.
you can watch them on our website, booktv.org. >> good evening. welcome to the richard nixon presidential library. just a few announcements before we introduce our special guest. please join us for the reopening of the new nixon library on october 15 and 16th. it will be spectacular. the exhibits will be a must see. they tell president nixon story in a new and exciting way. it will be an unforgiving experience for all visitors. please check that out. now to our distinguished speaker , president richard nixon
were important strategic partners during the cold war, working together together to keep the soviet union from dominating the persian gulf which was and remains a critical source for the world's energy needs. the words are timeless because they bribe why iran is so top of mind for u.s. policymakers print this is what he said but he said when we think of where iran is, this place place in history going back 2500 years, it's placed geographically and also to the middle east, when we think also of the very strategic place that iran occupies in that critical error of the world which many believe is the most asked dose of part. the whole area of the middle east and the indian ocean, i can only say that those who want these as you want to and i want
it and as all of us in this room wanted, those of us who believe in peace, we are fortunate that your majesty occupies the place of leadership that you occupy. those are the words of president nixon in 1973. our distinguished speaker today is here to discuss with us iran's strategic importance in the world, specifically during the reign. scott cooper is an adjunct professor columbia university and his research has appeared in news outlets at cross the world in the new york times and the guardian. is also the author of two important books, one is called how the u.s. and around change the balance of power in the middle east and his newest book is called. [inaudible] ladies and gentlemen, it's my honor to bring to the podium andrew scott cooper. [applause]
>> jonathan, thank you very much for your warm introduction. this is an amazing setting. it's very presidential and any historian who is standing here would be incredibly flattered to be in this wonderful room. i'm delighted to join you here this evening. thank you so much for driving such long distances to come here tonight. earlier i had an opportunity to view the magnificent new exhibition space. the nixon library, the nixon family, nixon foundation national archives and everyone associated with this wonderful project ought to be commended for their efforts to preserve our historical record while finding creative new ways to make the nation's history
assessable and relevant to a new generation of americans. in the introduction to her pulitzer prize-winning history book, the american experience in china, barbara tuchman wrote i am conscious of venturing into the realm of america's china policy. nevertheless, as china is the ultimate region for our involvement in southeast asia, the subject is worth the venture even though the ground is hot. i think it's safe to say, judging by my posterior, that the ground is as hot today as it was for tuchman 45 years ago when she wrote about china. there has been an intense
reaction to my book the fall of heaven which recounts the final days of the 1978, 79 revolution. the book had been available in stores for only three days when my amazon page was flooded of messages of personal abuse. anonymous trolls accused me of being a cia agent, a defender of right-wing fascist dictatorship and human rights abuses. when my laptop was disabled by a virus, i wasn't sure if it was coincidence or something more sinister. as a precaution against hacking, i felt compelled to close my social media accounts and i also had to cancel a scheduled trip
to iran next year. my employer briefed me on the policy columbia university has in place to deal with harassment abuse and threats. now, all these things happen before anyone had really had time to read my book or filly judge its content. indeed, some of the people trolling me admitted they had not read it. i suspect they never intended to read the book. in fact, what what they were reacting to was not my work, but instead a book review that appeared in the new york times book review. the review was written by an american journalist of iranian heritage. she decided i presented a far too sympathetic portrait and i
was too critical of the islamic republic of iran. in particular, my reviewer accused me of showing hostility toward islam which is a particularly sweeping generalization and in century to use against anyone at a time of rising sectarian and religious tensions. she did not inform her readers that in order to better understand islam, as it had been practiced before the revolution i had traveled to iran to undertake a sabbatical to study shiism. nor did my reviewer inform her readers that earlier in my
career i had worked as a human rights researcher at the united nations and then at human rights watch. in fact, my training made me more qualified than most to address the highly sensitive issue of human rights in iran in the 1970s. now you wouldn't have known it from reading the times, but my book was the product of a decade of research and scholarship that entailed travel to iran, but also to lebanon, egypt, france and several other countries. during my travels, i met with or interviewed more than 100 people. in addition, i located and analyzed thousands of new pages of newly declassified documents
and many others that had never before. imprint. casual readers of the review could be forgiven if i had simply decided to sit down one day and write a book because i felt like it. this tells you something about the time we are living in. the book review was posted to the time site on friday. by saturday morning, the volume of abuse was such that my publisher intervened with amazon and asked them to take immediate measures. amazon agreed immediately, to their credit, and the issue was that sent to the companies special committee established to monitor and respond to abuse, harassment and threats. i don't know many of you knew
there was a committee. we do have a committee in place to help people like me. by then the review had gone viral and by sunday morning the jerusalem post had carried a report that stated my book was causing profound embarrassment to hezbollah in lebanon. as you can see, things are getting worse. what my reviewer had done was misrepresented the part of the book that dealt with the disappearance of a prominent cleric who disappeared in libya in august 1978. according to her, the book accused someone of direct personal involvement in the
disappear disappearance of him during the revolution. in fact, if you read the sections of the book carefully and closely, you will see that i lay out several plausible explanations to describe what may have happened to this man. in tehran, iranian journalists began asking family members if the accusation in the new york times was correct. the next thing i knew, i was via the deport of dubai. some people decided they could be using the book to embarrass the iranian authorities. the words historian and contraband are usually mentioned in the same sentence, but i admit, i was flattered to learn
that my book was now in the same illicit category as crates of whiskey and blue movies. without knowing it, i had in fact produced a work of controversial literature. that's what i was told by my editors, my agent and my friends they congratulated me. you have achieved something very few historians have achieved, notoriety. but i did not seek out notoriety and frankly, i was appalled to see myself reduced in the public eye to a in my work completely misrepresented.
i had spent the past decade working seven days a week, long hours and with great care to produce two books totaling over 1000 pages. during that same time period, apart from undergoing spinal surgery for spinal injury, i had completed a second masters degree and a phd in order to develop a respectable level of scholarly expertise. the whole experience of this book release initially left me feeling dispirited. yes, controversy sells was replied, but what about my reputation, my professional integrity. even as i uttered those words, i realized i sounded as though i
had stepped out of a painting from the 18th century. today, when scandal is seen as the fastest way to the top, concerns about personal reputation and integrity. several weeks ago, the novelist who wrote the slaves of new york a long time ago was asked by the guardian newspaper how she dealt with criticism and poor reviews of her work. :
millions words, thousands of articles, and hundreds of books have been written about the shaw and the revolution. what was it about e me and my book that provoked such an intense reaction? well, the simple answer, one answer is that for iranians, the revolutions never really ended. for many it remains an open wounds and very much unfinished business. what others regard are as simple history they view as deeply personal. everyone has their own opinion about why the revolution happened and how it turned out. there are iranians especially on
the intellectual lift who have never forgiven the shaw for his mistakes. and i suspect their krit criticisms can be partly explained as a response to my work. yet almost four decades later, far more iranians have grown weary of the black and white historical narrative that cast the shaw the villain and the great liberator from oppression. this narrative shaped by baby boomer generation scholar who carry over struggle and grievances of the 1960s and 70s into this work. they remain deeply invested in
this narrative and i think it is fair to say have profited from it. that's just how it works. but that narrative is now collapsing beneath the weight of its own contradictions. though, my critics would like you to have believe that i'm personally trying to rehabilitate the shaw and paul era. the fact is that scholars are are now only catching up to where many in the iranian community have been for some time. in the last decade in particular, many younger iranians have become interested this learning about what life was like before the 1979 revolution. so then the crackdown on the green movement in iran in 2009
was a water watershed event that led them to question the legitimacy of the islamic republic. stunned by the brutality of the crackdown that followed, many young people and students withdrew from active politics. in their search for answers to iran got to where it is at today, they became interested and began studying the country's history before the revolution. now, i endownered this phenomenon three years ago when i visited iran. islamic scholars -- in islamic university told me their students had so many questions about the shaw and the
polly era that they felt obliged to offer special history classes to educate them on the faults and failings of the monarchy especially the shaw and to remind them why the revolution had been necessary in the first place. the literature was bound to change. if only because it had become stagnant. the first wave of books written about the revolution appeared in the 1980s and 1990s. they were written by political scientists, diplomats, former officials, journalists, and idiologs. some were good. others not so much. most authors reflected the
orthodoxy of the cold war period and will without exception were harshly critical of the shaw's role. except for a few exceptions these books and their authors portrayed the shaw as an american puppet as a blood thirsty dictator and weak and corrupt ruling who was comploal out completely out of touch with his people. professionally intrad historian not to get involved in historical debates until we can confident we are located new materials with which to write our own investigations and reach are our own conclusions. so for a long time, most his toirns historians stood back. that started to change in 2009.
since then books suggest the wave of literature on era was finally on its way. the authors of these books were less judgmental and i think more sympathetic to the challenges the shaw faced in trying modernize his country at a very difficult time. my first book the oil kings was published five years ago. its portrait of the shaw as staunch nationalist, and hard nose negotiator with u.s. officials including president nixon. shocked and intrigued iranians who were used to the conventional narrative of him as an american puppet. now, for the first time with the
help of the new we had from national archive and presidential libraries, they were able to begin a more nuance understanding was particular challenges faced by the shaw in trying to preserve iran's sovereignty and steer his country through the treacherous current of the cold war. some iranians who have lived through revolution refuse to accept the book's scholarship. they considered it such a radical departure from what they've known and read about that they it does i must be apartment of some organized conspiracy. to rehabilitate the shaw's image. for the first time, i began hearing rumors another iranian could not have written possibly such a booklet alone someone
from enologies and rumors circulating that i was a cia agent or that declassified u.s. government documents i used in my research were elaborate forgeries, produced by institutions such as this one. from writing about conspiracy theory are, i became one myself. the ultimate accolade in a way. i always wantedded to write a book about the shaw's last days in power. i was nine years old when the revolution happened and i still remember watching the crisis unfold on television in we willing new zealand where i grew up. think about what our children are watching today and how that's going to affect them later on.
as a teenager, i read hundreds of history books. that was my stick. big books bigger the better and i particularly enamored with nicholas and alexandra x i start regard as perhaps one of the best written and e voktive narrative history book of the past 50 years. the oil kings opened the door to the sequel that i hoped it would take readers behind the scenes to help them understand how the shaw lost power in 1979. i also wanted to recreate what i have loo was like in iran and tyrann on eve of the revolution. i thought younger iranians in particular would enjoy more about how their parents and grandparents had lived before
the revolution changed iran forever. like the first book, this one was also helped by timing. with the declassification of thousands of pages of new documents from the -- counterpresidency. so now for the first time we understand what u.s. officials in 1979, 78 responding to the emergency of the crisis in iran and this is important. now imagine for some iranians i know for some iranians there's something strangely compelling in spectacle of a new zealand born historian coming underfire for writing a book under uh-uh shaw. some iranians are surprised and suspicious they tell me so i know this is how they feel. that a foreigner in and special someone from as for a field as new zealand shows so much interest in the history.
but you have to consider where i come from. new zealanders have a reputation for curiosity about the world around them. our personal interests often become efficient. which may something to do with the fact that not much happens in new zealand. [laughter] fortunately this is not broadcast in new zealand. i hope. new zealand -- new zealand an its people tend to be very quiet especially when compared to iran and iranians. but we live vicariously through you. we're also from what had i can tell very single minded people. i don't think it's a coincidence that a new zealand mountain climber the first ever to climb
mount everest or kiwi scientist first to split adam. consider the bizarre con over the yores, egg beaters it shall hear pins, and referee whistles. where would you be without them, us, we have a role to play. [laughter] seven years ago, a new zealand teenager living on an isolated farm built the world's largest pone pone know this a wall shed with no burn help, reductions instructions on the outside. thanks to new zealander who invented zorb you can spin tun a hill coyed at 50 kilometers an
hour. why wouldn't you wanted to that? [laughter] and don't forget we invicinitied bungee jumping. [laughter] nor am i the only having investigative research. journalist david heirier ice documentary on tickling yes -- took the new zealander to think that one up has received critical acclaim. and there's even tack of an oscar nodges for best documentary. he was at his computer one day and read a story about tickling and peeked his curiosity and investigate what turned out to be a underground culture of to my tickling. his documentary also led it a violent backlash from professional tickling who were
orchedded by how he portrayed them. you can look at this stuff. i'm not making this stuff up. this is great. i feel your pain, david perhaps you and i can do an exchange. i'll tick tick leers off your hand for a weekend if you agree to host the gentleman from hezbollah. [laughter] i'm serious about that too. rather than be offended or suspicious, iranians should perhaps be grateful that somewhere down antarctica a country intoir population appear to have a serious case of ocd. seriously i believe my status as an outsider noniranian historian has been manufacture a help than a hindrance. first thought i sew thingses that iranian scholars have
overlooked or perhaps did not think were significant. the issues i am interested in and questions i ask are different. my training as an investigative researcher has also been a big help. some iranian intellectuals exirritation when i pointed out that many of my iranian u interviewe's felt more comfortable talking to a nonand did not trust them to respect their views. but rather than test me perhaps my critics should look at the way they conduct themselves and why this level of distrust exist in the tours place. i think that blaming me is a
distraction from the real issue that some have grown too comfortable with historic narrative at all costs rather than revise or reconsider. but as a result they have left the research field wide open for a new generation of scholars, younger scholars who did not accept their frameworks or their explanations at face value. and why should they when new evidence is emerging to challenge old assumptions? there is a role for the outsider and helping nudge the scholarship in different directions. it took an outsider to become interested in the shaw oil policy and to start reassessing the causal relationship between
turbulence in oil markets in the 1970s and damage to iran's economy. it took an outsider to ask questions about the shaw's relationship with aman and pursue investigation into his had disappearance. these are thoroughly iranian stories. but why was i first scholar to become interest in learning more about them. why are my books widely read by younger generation of the iranians? i don't think it's because i'm seen as prothis or anti-that to the country, what the younger once tell me when they write to me is that although they may not agree with eversion i say they appreciate my equipment to research and writing about modern iranian history from a fresh permit eve with new
enthusiasm and energy. don't worry about critics wrote you're hero in our crowd. we love what you do. there's another issue to deal with very sensitive one and that is self-censorship. i don't have family or friends back in iran. and i'm not constrained in what i say or write. some of my colleagues i know have family in iran. while others safely travel back and forth without poor of harassment or arrest. this shouldn't matter. but the regime in tehran has made a point of harassing and imprisoning jewel national scholars and accusing them of acting against the interest of the state. now, i make this observation not top offend anyone.
but mainly to point out that as a noniranian, i believe and i have been told that i have more freedom to maneuver. this is no exaggeration when we consider that researching the revolution remains a highly sensitive subject to the discussion. that is because stakes are so high for the winners and the losers. let me give you an example. i was fascinated when i discoveried documents that provided details about the money trail that will connected the anti-shaw revolution movement to courage gadhafi and we know now that in 1977 for example the libyan embassy paid iranian
general 100,000 every three months that's 1977 every three months to buy such high profiled weapons. as pearcing rival grenade and able to use iranian forces. and supplied with polish, chic, and east german weaponry. that included tungsten armor piercing ammunition. machine pistols, stunt machine guns and high profiled hunting rifles. this is 1977 before the revolution starts. presenting this evidence does not detract from the fact that there was a high level of dissatisfaction in iran in 1978. but neither can scholars overlook compelling evidence that shows the level and
presence of an organized foreign opposition to the state. one of the reasons why i believe these groups mobilized against the was in reaction to his decision to support his friend -- anww a prevail in 1978. we have two moment us events happening through this same time. two through the vantage point and first time i think safe to say that unrest in iran had international dimension that it was not purely local episode promoted against ruling of e elite. internationalizing the story of the revolution brings become a new perspective to talking about
circumstances vowpgding the sounding shaw's details and taken by terrorist groups in iran starting in late 1977. to undermine confidence in the shaw and to provoke public panic. if we're to t to gain a fuller understanding in and outside of iran in the late 1970s this critical period we must broaden horizon and embark on new field of research surely that is what scholars are supposed to do. this is an excitings time to be researching and writing about modern iranian history. i have no doubt that my work will open the door for other
psychological larceny to write their own books. it's already happening. the criticisms direct ared at me are not unique. and really were to be expected. afterall i'm not the only historian who has been severely criticized for resubsidizing popular assumptions about a revolution. in preparation for ted's address, i researched the pure that created publication many 1 8 of simon revisionist history book on the french revolution. in citizens the author made a point that they did somethings quite well and that it was less repressive, more reform and more open to change than previously thought.
directly challenged 200 year narrative that depicted kill louie the 16th at adults his ministers at flops in french royal court is out to lunch. france he said had many good things going for in 1979. he argued to the great deal of revolution violent was, in fact, and i quote fired by hostility to modernization teated or proposed. and then bit will to speed it further. i think the parallels with iran in 1971 are strike in that regard. what is re louis for progress or not? what was the eventually outcome compared to what came before? for daring to challenge historic
orthodoxy by the review in norman, hanson to write a blistering essay of "the new york times" book about rv. now, it is -- getting nervous when authors write public letters to defend their works. they worry it can make us look defensive. but shaw felt compelled to write a book review. what really seems to make handsome cross is my effort to use narrative as vehicle for argument as well as story telling. i admit that this does indeed fly in the face of academic convention. and i am not at all sure u how well i have succeeded but the assumption that this can't be done seems belied by the very passages hampton sites as
instance was my hasn't of feeding the readers' attention. i had not red sharman's letter before i wrote my own at the end of the edited book review who decides who it is and who is not and who tbets it write it? i wish idea thought about shaw's line it be power. the academy does not yield easily, and sometimes on the question of narrative writing, it does not yield at all. and i suspect mine -- was to write an account of a revolution in a style that you, people in this room -- and viewers at home could engage
in and relate it. we have director work and that we prefer to write for you rather than specifically for psychological larceny and the economy. ultimately the intensity for the reaction to my book as to sharman book three decades earlier is reassuring. it is a reare miebtder that there's still an audience for what we do that not everyone has been -- of the tie of modern tab loit culture and above all people still care about the history. look at the loom we're standing in. i'm a historian and that means i am talking to you,en willing to you, and i hope i'm tell your stories with respect and intensativety.
i'm interpreter for the paths interpreter of the past for the present. as a historian general general also be a rebel and sometimes without megging to apparently i engage in a quiet act of subversion. but i'm not a people pleaser. i do not writes history books to make you or anyone else feel good about yourselves or decisions you made at some point in your life. that is not my role. libraries can be passive, try repository of book and documents to president nec son. i loved this quote. he express the hope that his lye would become, quote, a violent place of discovery an rediscovery of invest and con tell playings of study debate, and analysis.
the same can be said if the history profession as a whole -- if we don't dot job we were trained to do, if we don't remain vital, curious, contemplative, open to discovery. willing to challenge and investigation, then we will have failed in our duty to the people. the controversy over my book has in some qpghts been a welcome reminder than world of snapchat instagrandmother and twitter there's still a place for history and that we historians still have the power to start conversations that some for identification too hot top handle and would refer are to just go away. i think it proved there are
people who care about the past and still have open mind and qish to seek out new knowledge to help them make informed decisions. they are ready to be challenged and inspired through new ways an through my eyes. i want to thank you for coming out to see me tonight. it has been my great honor to stand here. to be here in the nick sob library, a museum and then talk about areas that are concerned at all and then i'm happy to attack your your question pps >> thank you andrew to answer your question first announce that he'll be available in the lobby to sign copies of the heaven are also available in the niewm story but first how iran look today if they would have stayed in power?
>> iran was on the rooted western state modernization and many my research i was are also struck by something i had thought about but low close it was actually betting. iran was much closer to this modernization than i thought, that he gets -- and then in essence he's taken out just as he's getting towards end of the road and that's parts of the bigotry and fascinating was number of computers in iran in 1978 iran had one of the highest per tay rights of computer united states that's remarble when you think of the age of personal compute just getting underway but shaw welcomed u.s. corporation and u.s. businesses to come into the country with new technology. i think the big issue is it shall whole ronnel and i think
now that we would become and say that... of the policy fret from power creates power vacuum and i don't think it's been filled since then and many iranians would agree with me on that. also i might add people in the arab world agree buzz that's my conversation i have spoken with -- people from lebanon and egypt who would say, you know, to travel go back to 1979. the question in the fifth row. >> thank you. after your reaction of the book how did the shaw go into power and how did he lost his power? i thought that was crux of the speech which i came to here.
>> shocking when the father was deposed by british and bombings and young son, comes into power and 11:years old. he loses power in well i mean story how he loses power in the book that is a very importanted story leaves january in 1979 of period of unrest after 18 months. >> i won't get into dstles that because we'll get here for a long time. >> i have a answer. the father wases beginning modernization on the model. so what we're seeing now is the architect model really under enormous pressure. but two krpghts, obviously, very
different but we certainly see the counterreaction are i suppose through the mod personnization in that of their countries. question there -- would you comment on the contribution that jog paul leaded in iran and having no place to go during his sickness. >> president carter's role in the revolution, so all right. the documentation that i located had some surprises. one of the surprises is that the president does not get involved until very late in the crisis really until it's almost too late, it's over and that was that calculation blamed on complacency within u.s. academy
an i would think people would agree that this was a -- disastrous bundling and he would say biggest regret of president he did this in history. biggest regret was not firing when he had the opportunity to do so at the end of '378 but it was too late by then. far too late. the damage had been done much earlier in the relationship. as far as the shaw was concerned that is also i think some, many would say that was a shame fell episode because shaw and family were traveling around trying to find a safe sanctuary, and they couldn't -- they could not find safe sanctuary and person who allows him to come out of one reason
he's fascinates is buzz he brings in the u shaw and reaction within his own country. >> we have a question in the back row. >> yeah, i think i remember reading back in the 50s that the cia supported a kudata and overthrew democratic reelected campaign and most of vega. talk about that in context. >> so prime minister mow happened was the first of iran from 1951 to 1953 and nationalize iran's oil and again there was a long story. cia and eisenhower participates and a scholar debate right now about this different stance of these extent to which cia. u.s. role pivot it will and how much iranian role was pivotal but most is ousted. bashar during that time lifted country e briefly for three days
and then he comes back he's restored to the thrown but that critical point. it looks briefly about to overthrown but the u.s. for various reasons participates in that operation and it remains i think an open wound for many -- it is a source of great contention and fascinating story and it's one volume of state department results withheld for many years and then waiting for releaves that volume help to us understand whaptd and some spk lags they were involved too and concerned that their role would be exposed. >> a lot of people are concerned with a nuclear deal with iran and other countries in the region will be getting nuclear
weapons as saudi arabia and others. and the present government that you think of will they be -- looking to get a nuclear weapon soon? is asked to support the deal to prevent proliferation because the fear was iran that saudis will go egyptians will go. but this is a very -- this is sort of like a catch 22 situation. because how -- about one hand you to stop proliferation but you have one broken many agreements in the past and best we can say is that -- about i extent administration will say best we can say is that we have locked them in for a period of a deck kid and hope that restrains their ability. i see people in the audience who completely not agreeing with that.
and i think this was it shall this is where -- we're going to have to wait and see what happens. but events determine that the future of the deal not between the two governments. >> question in second row. >> question would be come over here. >> so the manatee and oil complex e interfering or impact their overturn to the u.s. government. the u.s. was not involved the u.s. is not supporting gorilla groupses that overthrew the shaw although documents were from the carter library so u.s. intelligence actually you know very interesting. there were people in the u.s. intelligence apparatus who were tracking this stuff. but it seemed as though it was almost like other episodes of intelligence failures with
recent by 9/11 beyond. people with material but who are they talking to and getting piecing together. what are had officials higher up the food chain and looking and reading to it. so i know many iranians believe that u.s. directly played a role in rs fog the shaw from power. but i haven't seen any documents to show that -- the carter administration wanted that to happen. now right at the end of the story you'll see in my book u.s. diplomats engage in maneuvers ill advised and on the u.s. in a big way and it's a sort of catastrophickicness indication. the question comes down through conspiracy very us incoffin my readers i put them in the judgment seat. you have to decide for
yourselves this is the official on both sides are acting with malice or whether they're acting because they're not -- not understanding that forces that were. the dynamic at work. >> question towards the back. any learning from this event that might be universal and we could apply to our own government and society? >> so sorry was what the other -- any learn frustration this event to apply to our lives -- >> well, you know, arab spring we won't have documents for a loing time but interesting to see how this affected the administration decision. so i know that all of the shaw really affected the way the reagan administration handled it in the philippines boy he went very fast. hefsz off to hawaii before, feet barely tusmed the ground.
and i think ticials from reagan administration studied what happened carter investigation how they handled and with knockouts it was we have to get him out of here fast. bleeding in iran it was a extended period and it really i think officials from my readings would say that was very destabilizing for u.s. national security. >> question right are here. >> thank you so much for what you've done. it's a breath of fresh air to some closer to the truth. i was 15 before i came out before the revolution and watching everything unfold is still depressing to see and not -- viewing world doesn't understand what exactly has happened. as a historian, i'm hoping more
and more people like yourself will capture what is happening in that region as far as human rights, rights of women, and for a country that was -- moving forward in civilization. having quality throughout country. watching it go down the drain the way it has is having a very minimal value for women or humanity in general. what can you and other historians do to help educate media and the rest of the world hoping that it will stop what is happening in the region. because they're pushing more and more of a -- registration browp in the region that will only destroy that region. >> i think his toirns as i was
saying in my remarks i think we're entering a new wave of entrepreneurism. i'm struck by how many people have said they dnt realized iran i had civil rights under. i assumed that that was known. but actually i will tell you it is wanted to cool out a fiction of the book, and we sort of within the become and forth on it. i said no you have to really understand that it shall this is important for iranians to be reof when they were free to go into the work force and divorce rights. the shaw -- essentially gave them full and free equality and i know that young iranian women in iran today are -- aware of that and very interested in that. and i think that it's just a matter of writing and talking about it and having that conversation.
but we're at a starting point. and it takes time. but as i said i think the skull is behind the curb ball and takes us time to catch up. four years to write a book like this and that was full bore intense and i had iranians who knew me say when is the book coming out? well, i have to yeah two years full on writing research anything it loaned was a year enteral, it was involved in long. >> question right here. >> thank you very much. enjoyed this immensely. me question is were there three events or painted revolution i know in your book you specifically mention the possibility of iran's father and prevent the spread from the counterbalance.
but besides his return specifically there's three events or a single event or multiple events that could have prevented revolution. >> officials i spoke to go back to the full of '77 when shaw stepped up muslim. they plan to have a myth that he lift as a dictator, in fact, the shaw had a plan to first liberalize the entire country and announced and told the iran i can people in august 78 we're going to hold, free, election one year from now, and one question is why didn't e they believe him and what happened in that year reared. so liberalization in the way liberalization was not xiewcted in iranian people there was a lot of sun cushion over what the
shaw wanted. i think other officials realize there's chance was may '78 in the bock i outline a security official for what they told me one of a blessless crack down dpeps the -- that actually what you should do is have a crack down. proceeds the government, two years maybe next -- but then all the way you would then institute constitute remple and then open up and that is what your plan and book is supposed to be controlled lessons by what happened in iran and apply to each of them. we don't know what will what in las saudi arabia but that potential crackdown in spring of 79 i'm not advocating them. i'm surprised when poem see --
[inaudible] i'm putting the evidence out there. that doesn't mean i'm punishing agenda one way or thesore. surprising things in the book and they need time to absurd. >> in the become row. >> i've noticed a lot of people that have provisions only say iran if you specifically ask them. so is that a way of divorces themselves from what is going on in iran and they want to go back -- >> iranian should be up here to answer that question. [laughter] it is the same but i think it's fair to say after the revolution when hostages were taken iranians were taken and iranian and americans and i think it was
a reaction some of them felt that -- they preferred they would say persian older runnings would they had say i'm -- you know persian i saw that today. i get lectured too when i use the word far see, no, no that's persian and other iran iranian say no, so it's within the community. and it depends on who you're talking to and i'm somewhat used to it. [inaudible] second row. >> so much of what happened was blamed on abuse and so on. can you explain role on savoyk that's what i get in the country from so many americans, and it
is established in 1957, '58 with the help of u.s. and israel internal security force. the period that is very controversial is 1971 to 76 described as a dirty war in iran versus jj. they have threats from the far let and religious right, and the security -- security forces offices decide that they are going to use harsh method including torture and i outline in the book how that process works. so this led to that decision of crossing a rubicon in a way and lessons for other countries because whats to be short-term is long-term i think having there's a normally issue that cools when you have to state using techniques like that
citizens with a problem couldn't roflt at the end. but i thinks it's also fair to say she wassed sort of a "don't ask, don't tell" poll. ultimately they say it failed because -- they're now living here and they're not in iran so supposed to take out the country. what happened? what went wrong? question towards the back. >> what influenced you to most write the book? >> what? >> a secret to the oil king but i didn't tell my agent. >> so oil kings is deliberately ends on a note where you then want to start reading on and that was procedure i thought. but i also wanted to do something digit and go inside especially inside the blast. i wanted to find out more about the thinking and talk about people who knew him.
and then i also wanted so this is really book with -- the stag, you have the palace, you have the white house, u.s. embassy and then you have the revolution so i planned it that way to move from one to the other and then see people moving. i'm decision making and that's what i teach at columbia and field policy and decision they make based on informs they have at hand, and as see see what books may do crazy they thinks in hindsight are we don't agree with a lot. fool rn herb but you have to have whatever they have at the time. >> lecture you mentioned that the shaw was folded from iraq
but must have had governments that were friendly to him or didn't want to see the change. why did he not act? >> he -- acts in 1976 when he invites red cross to come in. the was reading reports in the foreign press about abuses, and says this is krez. why are we attacked and criticized should have taken action earlier whereby and instead he gets very sense i have and very proud and he cities we're noirly criticizeed but in '76 a turning point and then sets off internal investigation and that's when red cross gets back to him and then he tbets and back. we have to transcript of the meetingses with human rights research where he understands boyfriend a problem here, and he goes the full --
that's when he opens up the prison to the red cross. >> this one yore are. >> the gentleman referred to which was bail. u.s. or could say that iran in 1963 since this statute of limitation pass documentations all google say you google you can see everything anybody wants to google if you'll see everything as far as what is in iran. however, cia not as much to blame because many believe that u.s. government goes beyond philosophy of it and for oil from the british government because bish government was in iran at a general contractor building a refinery. but then they start getting money and channeling it to england. so when -- had like independents of the oil from the british government,
british government actually inspired cia to do the kiewd, so did you have a chance to research any of documentation because it is available now before you wrote your book? >> well, cia yeah, in fact i quote from the one that was declassified in 2013 battle for iran, and that you can read all of the stuff on the website for national security archive they have a great resources middle age. but state department vol i mean is not released yet that is still underwraps and this is a great sort of struggle that's been going on with in story and offings of the hitiontorian at the state department, and on the national security archive home one, homesite where you go into resources page to read a column why they think this may be the british government because as you say this plan was inspiration.
and it's a long story. but that story there's more to be told. >> question in the second row. thank you for being here today the queen or family members collaborate ared with you on this project. >> i interviewed the queen on a number of occasions actually. i interviewed razor. i interviewed the shaw surviving brother. prince scalla and lake chief of ballet and security counsel because iptsed my readers to understand the shaw as a person apart from the public figure. reduced from cartoon figure and
interesting to see how he spent first chapter that was toughest in the book to write because i'm trying to recapture tim as an individual. so i talked to -- many people and i had to weigh up everything they said. and i look for anecdotes that explain his personality and i think i came up with pretty good good ones, and revolution too. so it was also i wanted to have a different side of the equation but this essentially is a book about the shaw and queen and king during that last smul -- year . >> thank you, please give him a round of applause. [applause] andrew will be available in the lobby, and coy of the fall of 7 will be available for purchase.