What Is History?

People In Iran & Azerbaijan Are Proud of Baba Safari
The Master Baba Safari Was A Light For Us On The Highway of Brotherhood and Unity.
This great historian and politician of Iran and Azerbeijan, succeeded in showing millions of people the highway of brotherhood. He conducted the lovers of the "Enlightenment and Prosperity" to the Holiness of learning and education.
Baba Safari was harmonious for clarifying the truth to all people. With great flexibility and will, he used all of his abilities to respond to specific situations in the history, geography, Islam, politics, pilgrimage, Waqf, and love to humans. He emphasized, we should not act mechanically, rigidly, or narrow mindedly.
Mr. Baba Safari taucht all of us that everyone in the world is different. He said, when it comes to clarifying of the truth among tye different ethnicities in Iran, people of Iran should put themselves in the other person's or the other ethnicities' shoes and think about their situation too, of course equally and on the basis of justice. Baba Safari, especially taught us, all Iranians, instead of making Jokes to other ethnicities, they should understand the healthy thoughts for their coexistence.


The great teacher of history of Iran and Azerbaijan, Baba Safari was very interested in if we ask ourseves what questions we can have about our negative attitudes in many different issues and also our lacks in respecting the rights of others.Baba Safari taught us to guide and correct if some people have warped thoughts and notions; his insterest was the elimination of all evil signs.
Baba Safari was teaching to his students, they should cultivate themselves at all times, no matter where they live, in his city, in Ardabil, in Tehran, in Isfahan, in Shiraz, in Sanadaj, in Tabriz, in Uroumia, in Zanjan, in Balouchestan, in Khouzestan; Baba Safari was advising us to go with the time and behave in acoordance with time. For example, Baba Safari wanted to know, if we understand the respect to our parents or not; he said, we must be familiar with all these facts, which are frealted to the foundation of a healthy family. When Baba was taling about the value of a healthy family, he was talking with compassion in his heart, was speaking calmly and exhibited modest behavior to his students and his audeience. As a teacher, he adviced us, we should not have the anticipation of quick results in our works and our education, which might cause anxiety for those people, who expected the results of their efforst very quickly.

For Baba Safari, the achievement of some degree of clarifying the truth must be cultivated in our schools. If we taech our students the clarification of the truth, then we our teaching them the real meaning of Islam, whereby they can eliminate the evil fabricated behaviours and conseqyantly we are preparing them for the good thoughts. Baba Safari taught us, if some teachers are seeing, at the beginning of clarifying of any truth in schools,, some students are not aware to the responsibility of the teachers for the promotion of knoweldge and are arguing with their teachers consistently, these teachers must understand that it is natural among many young students, who see the issues differently and want to discuss and reject them, these teachers should avoid arguing with them; it makes no sense to impose anything to them, when the students are not satisfied. Baba Safari, always adviced to people, even if we want to discuss the heavenly and Islamic laws in our religion for both the good and the evil, we need to prepare the students for understanding of the values of those leaning. All teachers should send forth righteous thoughts to eliminate all the barriers that have blocked the young students from accepting the truth in their schools or in their society.





Do We Know Enough About The Relationship Between The Colonial Policies From The Big Powers In Azerbaijan?

Former Soviet Union & Josef Stalin:





Marshal Josef Stalin, the leader of the former Soviet Union played a vicious game in the Iranian Azerbaijan. Why?


The British government invited the US government to play the old colonial policies in Iran while Great Britain was controlling the Iranian oil fields and also the Iranian Shah. Why?


The Story of the Independency of Iranian Azerbiajan and Russian Troops:

The deprivation of Azerbaijani people from their own language and their own culture (cultural persecution) and also the lack of sufficient budget for the administration of their own economy despite their rich mineral resources (economical persecution) and the lack of educational attention to Azerbaijani people (educational persecution) from the father and son in the Phalvai dynasty; the Reza Shah and his son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was obvious. But in realtionship to the intentions of Josef Stalin, Great Britain and the U.S.A for the polictical and economical games under the umbrealla of the sovereignty and integrity of Iran on the Azerbaijan's crisis from November 1945 to May 1946 were the new colonial game while the USA and Great Britain had full control of Iran and Iranian oil. Soviet pressures for an oil concession did not, however, end with the return of the Kavtaradze mission to Moscow.







The Truman administration forcefully challenged the expansion of Soviet power only when it appeared to surpass the demarcation line separating the two spheres of influence that had been tacitly recognized by the Allied leaders at the wartime conferences. During the years 1946 and 1947 a series of political developments along the southern rim of Eurasia was viewed by Western leaders as evidence of a coordinated Soviet effort to attain one of the traditional objectives of Russian foreign policy: expansion southward toward the Eastern Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf, a region historically under the sway of British power (Source: William R. Keylor, The Twentieth Century World: An International History, 2nd edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), pp. 261-95.)






The Russian occupation army prevented the Iranian government from suppressing the insurgency by denying its military forces access to the rebellious province. In November a provincial assembly dominated by the Tudeh party was elected in Azerbaijan and promptly declared its autonomy, a move that was widely regarded as the first step toward the absorption of the province by the Soviet Republic of Azerbaijan across the border.




The Iranian prime minister received a set of demands from Moscow which included indefinite retention of Soviet troops in northern Iran, recognition of the autonomy of Azerbaijan, and the formation of a Russian-Iranian joint stock company to develop the petroleum resources of the northern provinces.
(Source: William R. Keylor, The Twentieth Century World: An International History, 2nd edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), pp. 261-95.)


Interpreting these Soviet moves as the beginning of a campaign to obtain effective control of the entire country, including its rich petroleum reserves and its ports on the Persian Gulf, the British and American governments applied vigorous diplomatic pressure on the Kremlin to terminate its Iranian adventure.






Tough speeches by British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin on February 21 and American Secretary of State James Byrnes on February 28 signaled the intention of London and Washington to resist further Soviet advances in the region. When the Red Army, alone among the three wartime occupation forces, delayed its evacuation beyond the March 2, 1946, deadline, the resulting firestorm of criticism from the British and American governments prompted the Kremlin to withdraw its forces prior to the Iranian parliament's ratification of the agreement on Azerbaijan autonomy and the joint oil venture.

After the Red Army completed its evacuation in May 1946, the Iranian parliament, apparently emboldened by the vigorous expressions of Anglo-American support, declined to ratify the agreement that had been concluded under duress with the Kremlin. In the meantime an American military mission had arrived in Teheran and arrangements had been made for the purchase of American military equipment by the Iranian government.





The diplomatic setback suffered by the Soviet Union in the Iranian crisis of 1946 was~ a direct consequence of the Truman administration's decision to join Great Britain in protecting this historic object of Russian expansionist ambition. Washington's determination to bolster the Pahlevi regime set the stage for the establishment seven years later of an intimate security link between Washington and Teheran that was to last for a quarter of a century. In a more general sense, it heralded America's determination to resist the expansion of Soviet influence throughout the world (Source: William R. Keylor, The Twentieth Century World: An International History, 2nd edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), pp. 261-95.)




Just as Soviet activities in northern Iran during 1946 were viewed in Washington as evidence of the Kremlin's renewal of traditional Russian expansionism toward the Persian Gulf, simultaneous Soviet pressures on Iran's neighbor Turkey appeared to rekindle Russian ambitions for a geopolitical offensive into the eastern Mediterranean. On March 19, 1945, Moscow had formally denounced the Turko-Soviet treaty of friendship concluded in 1925, which had established close political and economic collaboration between these two historic enemies and included reciprocal pledges of nonaggression. On June 7, 1945, Foreign Commissar Vyacheslav Molotov presented the Turkish ambassador to Moscow with a set of demands that collectively constituted a substantial infringement on Turkish sovereignty. These included the cession of territory in the Caucasus annexed by Russia in 1878 and reacquired by Turkey after the First World War, the revision of the Montreux Convention of 1936 governing the Turkish Straits so as to establish joint Russian-Turkish jurisdiction over this vital waterway, and the leasing of Soviet bases on its shores to ensure its defense (Source: William R. Keylor, The Twentieth Century World: An International History, 2nd edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), pp. 261-95.)


Another source writes:

It soon re-surfaced in connection with negotiations over the evacuation of Soviet troops from Iran and, relatedly, Soviet support for the separatist movement in the northern province of Azerbaijan. After the fall of Bayat's Government in April 1945, the new Prime Minister, Ibrahim Hakimi, began to press for the withdrawal of Soviet troops during his brief period of office in May-June 1945.85 The matter was discussed further, but inconclusively, during the administration of the next Prime Minister, Sa'id Muhsin Sadr, whose stay in office lasted only the few months from June to October 1945. It was long enough, however, to see World War II come to an end with the surrender of the Japanese on 2 September. It was one of the provisions of the Tripartite Pact of 1942 that within six months of that date, i.e. by 2 March 1946, all Allied forces were to be withdrawn from Iran For Oil Concessions or Independecy?





The U.S. Ambassodor in Iran, Mr. George V. Allen, politically reflected the game of Azerbaijan while Great Britain had the contol of Iran and Iranian oil in the south of Iran; he said:
"It is well-known policy of the American government to favor the maintainance of Iranian sovereingty and territorial integrity..."

Source: FRUS, 1946, VII, 548

It was appropriate to ask: Mr. Ambassador Allen, which Iranian soveireingty do you mid, when the Iranian oil and Iran is under coltrol of British troops?

In 1943, Franklin Roosevelts' personal represenatative to the Middle East, General J. Hurley, had warned that Britain's record of imperialism in Iran had produced "intense bitterness" among the Iranian people, and was little to be preferred to the Soviet variety."

Source: Book: Europe Leaves The Middle East (1936-1954); by Howard M. Sachar, 1972; p:354

The Original Source: IBID, 1943, IV, 363-70

General J. Hurley,an Irish-American notably lacking an administration for the British imperial record, suggested that the time had come for the Uninted States to move forthrightly on her own in Iran.
He insisted:
" The proper results in Iran cannot be achieved by our support of British leadership."

The Original Source: IBID, 1943, IV, 363-70
also the Source in Book (1972): Europe Leaves The Middle East (1936-1954); by Howard M. Sachar, 1972; p:354

Mr.Mikhail Maximov, the Russian Ambassador in Iran warned the Shah and Ahmad Qavam, the Iranian Prime Minister that the Soviet Union would not sit idly by if the retalitatory campaign of Britsh and USA governments continued. He warnt so far as to hint of personal danger to the prime minister himself.

Source: Interview with U.S Ambassador George V. Allen, Washington, D.C, July 5, 1969
also the Source in Book (1972): Europe Leaves The Middle East (1936-1954); by Howard M. Sachar, 1972; p:358

James F. Byrnes, the Secretary of State in the Time of the Crisis in Azerbaijan of Iran

Qavam was in a difficult position, for politically he could not afford to jeopardise the prospect of a Soviet troop withdrawal; he could not undermine Iranian sovereignty in Azerbaijan by agreeing to the province's autonomy; and he could not defy the Majlis over oil concessions in the light of the law of 2 December 1944. On 29 March he told the British Chargé d'Affaires, Farquhar, that he felt he had no option but to appear to acquiesce with Soviet demands for the formation of an Irano-Soviet oil company. However, he retained some bargaining leverage by linking an oi1 agreement to the withdrawal of Soviet troops and by playing on the need for the oil agreement to be approved by the Majlis.

J.H. Bamberg, on Soviet Interest in Iranian Oil During World War II, The History of the British Petroleum Company, Volume 2, The Anglo-Iranian Years, 1928 (Cambriage: Cambridge University Press, 1994), pp. 250-257 writes:

"Although Soviet interference in Azerbaijan remained on the agenda of the Security Council, no substantive progress was made on the matter in that procedure-bound forum. Instead, Qavam and Sadchikov reached an agreement which was announced by the two sides on 4 April 1946. The main points were that Soviet forces would be withdrawn from Iran within six weeks of 24 March as previously agreed; the government of Azerbaijan was recognised as an internal Iranian matter; and it was proposed to form an Irano-Soviet oil company for a period of fifty years. For the first twenty-five years the Soviet Union would own 51 per cent of the shares and Iran 49 per cent; for the second twenty-five years each was to own 50 per cent; and profits were to be divided according to the shares held. The Iranian Government was to submit a Bill on the organisation of the company to the Majlis within seven months of 24 March."

J.H. Bamberg writes:







In compliance with the Qavam-Sadchikov Agreement of 4 April the Soviet Union completed the evacuation of its troops from Iran by 9 May. A few months later, in December 11, 1946, the movement for autonomy in Azerbaijan was crushed when Iranian troops led by General Razmara entered the province of Azerbaijan and the separatist regime collapsed."

Mr.Howard M. Sachar, who supported the Western interests in his book, wrote:
: In Tabriz, a furious anti-Communist mob seized Beria, the minister of labor, trampled him to death, then left his mutilated body in the central square to be spat upon the people in town... Pishevari, later, was announced that he had been killed in an "automobile accident."

Mr. Howard M. Sachar added:'
During the first day after the reoccupation of Azerbaijan, about 500 other minor Communists were slain by the enraged citizenry(!!), and for months afterward nearly every public sqaure in the northern provinces and Kurdistan."

The Same Source: page 360





After withdrawl of the Soviet troops and execution of hundreds of people and burning of thousands books on the streets of Azerbaijan, as early as October 12, 1946, a memorandum of American Joint Chiefs of Staff emphasized Iran's vital strategic and econmic (oil) importnace to the free world.

Source: page 360





The US key man in the Middle East favoured substatial military and econmoic aid to the Tehran government.

Source: FRUS, 1946, VII, 529-32
Also in the book of Mr. Sachar, page 360







In 1947, a bilateral agreement was initiated for the sale to Iran of surplus American military equpment and soon afterward Iran qualified for American military aid--$60 million in "non-aggressive weapons"

Source: Lenczowski, op, cit. p. 314
And also in book of Mr. Sachar; page 360

The United States military mission was dispatched to train the Iranian army and air force. Gradually, the Sha's government accepted further American promisses of technological aid, of weapons, and support in application for loans for the World Bank.

The book of Mr. Howard Sachar; page 360

Later, the former Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger and also the chief of Chasse Manhatan Bank in USA, in their books wrote: " The withdrawl of the Soviet troops from Azerbaijan and crushing the independency of Azerbaijan, was initiated from the USA."


This is very bitter for the people of Iran to experience in the difficult times in 1907; one year after the Constitutional Revolution of the 1905, the Anglo-Russian without knowing of Iran, had divided their country to the two sphares of their interests plus one sphere of neutrality, which was the southwest of Iran in the Khozestan; this vicious colonial polcies continued until the revolution of 1917 in Russia. It is good to know that after the World war I and the losses of thousands of lives in the Europe, these Western Allies, after the October Revolution in the Russia, occupied the territories of the Ottoman Empire, the Prussia, the Austria-Hungary Empire and the territory of the Russia.

They initiated the Dardanell war in Bosporous and in March 1918, the British troops occupied the Constantipole(Istanbul of Turky); and the French and Italian troos also wanted more shares; they divided Africa, Middle East and South Asia and othet parts of World.

The bankers and businessmen of USA were the biggest creditors and European countries borrowed billions of dollars from the richest country of the World, namaley, USA.

They imposed the huge debts and reparations on German's government and also the other non-Allied countries in Europe, who had lost the Wrod War-I, after July 1914-1918.






The Azerbaijan of North (Baku), which was independent since May 1918 (supported by Germans, Britain and Turkey) was occupied by over 70,000 Soviet troops on April 28, 1920 under the military leadership of the friends of Stalin in Moscow, namely Mr. Ordzhnikidze and Mr.Kirov; they executed thousands innocent people and they burned thousands books.

Alfred Noble (founder of the Noble prize) and Mr. Rotschied (arich man)worked in Azerbaijan in the 19 century and enriched themselves while people of Azerbaijan were exploited by all Western countries and Russians.
Azerbaijan was the main source of Oil in the World and was the source of enrichment of many rich people on those days.

This Is The Picture of the President of USA in August 19, 1953; General Dweight Eisenhower






The Military Coup of the USA and Great Britain in Iran, exactly 7 years after the withdrawl of the Soviet troops and crushing of the independency of the Iranian Azerbaijan, resulted to the thousands executions of innocent people and intellectuals and also the burning of thousands books of Azeri people and their heritage:










In 1953, the democratic elected prime minister of Iran, who was defending the legitime rights of people of Iran on the issue of the plundering of Iranian oil resources by Great Britain, was econmoicaly sanctioned by Great Britain and the USA; and in August 19, 1953, Mr. Kim Roosevelt directed the military coup against the democracy in Iran ( sponsered by million of dollars of CIA).

They arrested this democratic elected lawyer, who was the legitime prime minister of Iran and put him in prision; later he was exiled to his villages and in 1967, Dr. Mohammad Mossadeg died. But his name remained as the symbol of the resistance against the deception and colonial tricks of the USA and Great Britain.






After the successful military coup, the USA under the leadership of General Eisenhower and Great Britain under the leadership of Winston Churchill, they humiliated Mrashal Josef Stalin by the game of oil concession, which was implemented by Ahmad Qavam in Moscow while they themseves were contolling all the Iranian resources, which was abling the flow of Energy in the skeletons of the colonial politics. They dictated what to do in Iran or what not to do; they made Iran as their own colony and protectorat with everyday propaganda that Uran has about the 2500 years Imperial experiences in the world!! Many billion of dollars from the Iranian money were transferred to the USA and to the Europe; into accounts of those politicians, who had invested in the European Banks or in the US's Banks while many people in the impoverished Iran were suffering and were underdeveloped because of plundering of their oil and other resources by the colonial powers.

Many memebers of the national front party were executed by the officers of the military coup in 1953.






More To Know About The World:

By Anatoly Koshkin
Doctor of History - RIA Novosti

Truman personally approved the proposal of his closest adviser James F. Byrnes, who said, "… the bomb should be used against Japan as soon as possible; that it be used on a war plant surrounded by workers' homes; and that it be used without prior warning." As we know, these recommendations were followed.

Dropping the bomb on Japan was also meant to intimidate the Soviet Union and other countries and to ensure Washington's postwar global domination by means of its nuclear monopoly. By preparing to use atomic bombs, the U.S. leadership hoped that such strikes would make Russia more compliant. Truman is known to have remarked, "… if the bomb explodes, as I think it will, I will certainly have a hammer on those boys." One cannot but agree with British academic P. M. S. Blackett, who believes that atomic strikes were to a great extent spearheaded against Russia. Indeed, the dropping of the bomb was "the first major operation of the cold diplomatic war with Russia." It certainly did not amount to the final act of World War II.

There is a theory that Stalin decided to enter the war against Japan after learning about Hiroshima, so that he could have a vote during the post-war East Asian peace settlement. This may be correct. But the opposite may be true. Truman apparently tried to drop the bombs before the Soviet attack on Japan so that he could claim victory for the United States and obtain a monopoly right to occupy and administer Japan in defeat. However, Stalin did not make a single mistake. The Soviet Union entered the war against Japan on August 8, 1945, exactly three months after the defeat of Germany, thereby honoring the commitments it made in Yalta to the letter.

Taking a decision to drop a bomb on Hiroshima, the Americans were sure that Stalin would fulfill his promise to render them military assistance in the Far East. On May 28, 1945, the U.S. president's personal envoy Harry Hopkins reported to Washington that Stalin had informed him and the US Ambassador in Moscow Averell Harriman that the Soviet Army would be deployed completely along its Manchurian positions by August 8. The Allies believed that "an entry of the Soviet Union into the war would finally convince the Japanese of the inevitability of complete defeat."

Subsequent events showed they were right. Prime Minister Kantaro Suzuki of Japan addressed an emergency session of the Supreme Council for the Conduction of War on August 9, saying that the Soviet decision to declare war on Japan that morning had placed the country in a completely hopeless situation, and that it was no longer possible to continue the war. In his rescript to soldiers and sailors, Emperor Hirohito, Commander-in-Chief of the Japanese Armed Forces, announced, "Now that the Soviet Union has entered the war against us, to continue … would be only to increase needlessly the ravages of war finally to the point of endangering the very foundation of the Empire's existence."



Western historians, particularly Americans, are inclined to think that the dropping of two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki ended World War II. However, although the psychological impact was significant and brought the Japanese surrender closer, it cannot be said that the bombs decided the outcome of the war. Prominent Western politicians admitted this. For example, Winston S. Churchill said, "It would be a mistake to suppose that the fate of Japan was settled by the atomic bomb."

The facts are: the bomb did not force Japan to surrender. The Japanese government and the supreme command did not inform the nation that America had used the new weapon. They continued to prepare for a decisive battle on Japanese territory.

Nor did the Supreme Council for the Conduction of War discuss the bombing of Hiroshima at a session. On August 7, President Harry Truman warned that his country was ready to launch new atomic strikes against Japan, but the Japanese high command viewed this as Allied propaganda. The Japanese military claimed after Hiroshima that the imperial army and navy could still fight, and that they would inflict serious losses on the enemy. And that meant Japan would be able to conclude an honorable peace treaty.

U.S. military planners estimated that it would take at least nine atomic bombs to support amphibious landings on Japanese territory. It became clear after the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that the U.S. had no more atomic bombs, and that it would take considerable time to produce them. U.S. War Secretary Henry S. Stimson later said that the dropped bombs were the only ones the States had and production was proceeding extremely slowly.

The atomic strikes clearly did not seek to accomplish any important military objectives. In 1960, General Douglas MacArthur, who commanded Allied forces in the Pacific, admitted that "there was no military justification for the dropping of the bomb" in 1945. In a bid to conceal the atomic strike's genuine goals, Truman said on August 9, 1945, "The first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base … to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians." In reality, though, the U.S. leadership targeted the population of both cities. This is convincingly proved by archive documents. The U.S. supreme command's operations order No. 13 (dated August 2, 1945) set the date of the attack for August 6. The atomic bomb was to have been dropped on Hiroshima's central district and industrial area. The Kokura arsenal and that city's central district were reserve targets, while the center of Nagasaki became the third reserve target.
By hitting densely populated central districts of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the U.S. wanted to make a tremendous psychological impact by killing a great many people.(Bomb & Japan





Links:

SNAKES & Film
Ardabil
Ardabil
Ardabil
Shahrdar
Pinkfloydish
MiddleEastInfo
Tharwa