By the end of the nineteenth century, the seemingly unstoppable rise of colonial power called for the modernization of Middle Eastern countries, particularly in Iran and Egypt. In their respective pursuits of building a modern nation-state, Reza Shah of Iran and Ataturk of Egypt, similarly implemented policies of political centralization, economic development, and secularization. Ultimately, modernization proved more viable in Turkey than in Reza Shah’s Iran due to the precedents characteristic of the Ottoman Empire inherited by Ataturk. Specifically, the endurance of successful westernization policies in Turkey, contrasted by their disintegration in Iran, can be equated to the different preexisting economic, social, and political conditions …show more content…
Modernization is loosely defined as the transition from a traditional society to a contemporary nation-state, often coupled with the adoption of Western values and systems (Gelvin 69). Drawing from the success of Mussolini and Hitler’s corporatist models, Mustafa Kemal, commonly known as Ataturk, chose to modernize Turkey in order to establish itself as a nation-state alongside the ever-growing European colonial powers. Consequently, Reza Shah of Iran emulated Ataturk’s paradigm for state building, and thus, when comparing the two rulers and their respective nation-states, many similarities are found. However, the implementation of modernization had vastly different consequences between Iran and Turkey, the reason for which stems from the conditions of both countries during the time of their …show more content…
In particular, Ataturk pursued a policy of nationalizing foreign-owned enterprises and revoking concessions the Ottoman Empire had previously offered to foreign governments (Gelvin 201). Due to the fact that the Ottoman Empire was never subject to widespread European colonization, Ataturk was gradually able to implement a policy of domestic development without foreign encroachment. Post-World War I Iran, on the other hand, was scarred by Russian and British intervention. Thus, the Iranian state under Reza Shah was determined to end the stranglehold of foreign control over the Iranian economy. Under the shah, the state canceled foreign concessions, established a national bank to replace the British-run “Imperial Bank,” and took control of posts, telegraph, and customs from foreigners (Gelvin 205). Total economic sovereignty, however, was ultimately not achieved. British influence was still felt in its resilient control over the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, which drove the Iranian economy. As a result, Britain continued to manipulate control over the future of the modern Iranian
17Kili, Dr. Suna. ?Islam and Secularism in Contemporary Turkey.? Voice of Ataturk: Ataturk Society of America. Web. Dec. 10 2013.
Iran was a country ruled by the Shah (King), who began his rule in the beginning of the 1950’s. He would help Iran greatly improve conditions. He began to improve relations with the United States securing oil deposits throughout Iran with American companies. However, the shah slowly became more and more dependent on the United States. He began asking the United States for advice on almost every decision he made. Although no such reports were printed in the United States (to my knowledge) there are sources, which lived in Iran and experienced a...
From the 18th century through the beginning of the 19th century, European influence was a significant force in various aspects of the Ottoman Empire, Egypt, and Iran. Although the reforms, coined primarily by Gelvin as “defensive developmentalism,” were initially intended to centralize governmental control and strengthen the military, the actual effects were much broader. Based on varying pre-existing conditions and unique approaches to governorship, this process of modernization affected each region differently. This essay will explore the manners in which European influence shaped each territory, the primary areas of civilization, politics and culture that experienced reform, and the degree to which that influence was significant, or in the case of Iran, insignificant.
the south and the east by Britain. By the end of WW I, Iran was plunged into a
According to Sullivan, in an attempt to open itself up to the rest of the world during the 1930s, Iran was developing a gradually modernized state, thus reducing the religious and social strictures that bound and estranged Iranian women (223). More schools, hospitals and higher systems of education and governm...
The catalyst to the period of modernization in Iran was the overthrow of the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in favour of strengthening the monarchical rule of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who had ruled since the end of the second world war, orchestrated by the United States and the United Kingdom under the title operation AJAX. This made Mohammad Reza Pahlavi
Sultan Mahmud II, and various other Europeanized Ottoman bureaucrats initiated what is known today as the largest reform movement in the history of the Ottoman Empire. The Tanzimat changed life in the Ottoman Empire drastically, and completely revolutionized how the Ottomans lived. Previously, the empire was home to various different, nationalities, races, religions and cultures. During the Tanzimat, a major effort was made to unite these people, which is often referred to as the policy of Ottomanism. This resulted in the creation of a national anthem, and the establishment of a national flag. In the past, Islamic law was predominant, but was replaced by secular law, so no individual groups were left out. The Tanzimat’s main focus was to replace it’s old, outdated ways, with more of a westernized approach. The reforms varied greatly, but for the most part, they were all made to help modernize the empire.
In the 1970’s Iran, under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was a very centralized military state that maintained a close relationship with the USA. The Shah was notoriously out of touch with working class Iranians as he implemented many controversial economic policies against small business owners that he suspected involved profiteering. Also unrestricted economic expansions in Iran lead to huge government expenditure that became a serious problem when oil prices dropped in the mid 1970’s. This caused many huge government construction projects to halt and the economy to stall after many years of massive profit. Following this was high rates of inflation that affected Iranians buying power and living standards. (Afary, 2012) Under the Shah, political participation was not widely available for all Iranians and it was common for political opposition to be met with harassment, illegal detention, and even torture. These measures were implemented by the Iranian secret police knows as ‘SAVAK’. This totalitarian regime combined with the increasing modernisation of the country paved the way for revolution.
Western powers and Iran have had rocky relations for a long time, both holding deeply seeded resentment for the other that dates back much farther than the reign of current rulers from either side. The bad blood between a theocratic Iran and democratic West have been cause for much turmoil for regimes in Iran as they strive to industrialize while at the same time rejecting Western democratic ideals that, in the course of history, accompany long term economic growth. The political culture of Iran is a result of many years of distrust of American and European powers and thus is very much anti-Western, political and clerical leaders have for decades used this sentiment as means to maintain power and reject democratic reforms. It is the political culture of Iran and the culture of fierce Iranian and Islamic nationalism that has slowed much of the democratic development in the country.
Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was incapable of running the country; he had no experience and was very weak politically. With this commonly known many different fractions wanted to be a part of this new government. Some of the groups were Communists; other people just wanted foreign companies to be kicked out of Iran. Great Britain completely took advantage of this situation and opened the largest oil facilities in Iran. Iranians, whom lived in poverty, regarded this injustice with growing sourness and
The introduction to Persepolis gives a great deal of background information to the unrest in Iran leading up to the Islamic revolution. Iran had been in a state of unrest for “2500 years” (page11). Iran was ruled by foreign nations and exploited by the western world for its rich expanses of oil. In 1951 the prime minister of Iran tried to take back his country’s wealth by nationalizing
While taking the class of Early Modern European History there was two states that really stuck out and peaked my interest the most. They were the Ottoman Empire and Early Modern Europe. If you compare and contrast both the Ottoman Empire and Early Modern Europe during the 16th Century through the 18th Century, you will see that there are a number of similarities as well as differences when you look at the expansion of the states. You will also see many of these contrasts as well when you look in terms of each states military and commerce. Although the Ottoman Empire existed before the 16th century and continued to exist past the 18th century and in great decline until the early 20th century, when looking at the state as a whole the time period of 1500’s through the 1700’s is a period of growth and strength. It is perhaps even known as a golden era for the state, when taking in to comparison the Early Modern Europeans where the same time period marks a change in how society thought and how people were treated.
Although the Iranian Revolution was caused by combination of political and religious motivations and ideas, the desires of the people supporting the movement were more dominantly religious ideas that were wished to be imposed in society and in a new government. The Shah, or king, of Iran at the time was Muhammad Reza Pahlavi, who had developed relations with nations in “western” world, specifically with the United States. The United States supported the White Revolution, which was a series of social reformations the Shah made to remove Islamic v...
...olutionist reforms proved permanent, and gave Turkey domestic peace and a measure of prosperity even in his lifetime. But Kemalism has also left Turkey with a divided identity - Europeanised but not quite European, alienated from the Islamic world but still a Muslim country.
Bases of the Turkish Education leans to the last years of the Ottoman Empire. The road towards modern education was charted by Selim III and Mahmud II and was followed with accelerated speed by their successors. In the 1876 constitution, educational reforms had been mentioned for the first time ‘For education continued to be regarded as the necessary foundation for the reorganization of the empire and the creation of a cadre of new leaders to maintain it’ As one contemproary writer put it ‘The solution of the ‘sick man’ was not through extemination but through education’.