May 20, 1951 — The Salt Lake Tribune
| The Mossadegh Project | September 2, 2025 |
Lead editorial in The Salt Lake Tribune newspaper of Salt Lake City, Utah.
Is Middle East Oil Worth Third World War?
The sizzling fuse in Iran could suddenly set off a conflagration that would make
Korea seem like a bonfire.
Trying to talk sense to the leaders of this wildly hysterical, benighted country is like trying to deal with the striking inmates of a mental hospital. Symptomatic is the state of mind of Iran’s present premier.
[Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh] He weeps and faints and, in deathly fear of assassination, he has barricaded himself in the parliament building, refusing even to see the British emissary.
[The AP reported that Mossadegh, whose predecessor was assassinated, would not accept the hand delivery of a threatening note from Sir Francis Shepherd] Expropriation of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company
is being carried out with such fury and haste that it seems almost impossible to find a way to modify the drastic program. Iran itself may lose more than Britain or other western countries, but in the wild orgy of nationalism, fanned by
Communists, the people are oblivious to their stake. After all, so few of them have anything to lose directly. As reported by Columnist Anne O’Hare McCormick, the country is now so near anarchy that a gust of passion can upset the frail
props of order and leave it an easy prey to anyone who has the will to control it. Seizing the British installations might well load to Iranian loss of control of their country to the Russians.
British Dilemma Many Sided
The British not only stand to lose oil property estimated to be worth at least $585,000,000—the British government controls more than 50 per cent of the
Anglo-Iranian Oil Company stock—but 2500 Britons in Iran are
threatened by violence. Loss of the 475,000 barrels of the 700,000 barrels of oil produced daily in Iran would slow the wheels of Britain to a stop. The king’s navy could be temporarily paralyzed. Moreover, the “nationalization” plan is
more confiscation than expropriation; that is, the private owners are not to be adequately compensated for the seized property. [False]
Britain has two alternatives. It can take the case to the international court, which London has threatened to do on grounds Iran is breaching the solemn 1933 contract. The other alternative is to land military forces to protect Abadan,
location of Britain’s largest single overseas investment, where 400,000 barrels of oil are refined daily, and British lives.
The latter is risky, since Russia could intervene under its 1921 treaty authorizing Soviet intervention if a third, power attempts to usurp authority or use Iranian territory for a base of operations against Russia.
We Have Middle East Stake, Too
Paradoxically, the British, who have been the reluctant fighters in Korea, dragging their feet almost to the point of appeasement, are seemingly reckless and aggressive in the matter of Iran. In this case, the Americans are playing the
role of “peacemakers,” trying to work out a compromise, pleading for discretion. British notes to Iran reportedly have been temporized at U.S. insistence.
What are we doing in this controversy, anyway? Is this another case of “pulling British chestnuts out of the fire”? If Britain starts a war in Iran, will we fight?
There are no simple answers. We have a stake in Iran, too. In the first place, if Britain loses its Iranian oil source, we would be obliged to make up the difference. That likely would mean gasoline rationing in the U.S. Moreover,
Britain’s military and economic strength is important to us. We are more directly involved. The Tudah (Communist) party, [sic—Tudeh] which is whipping up frenzy against the British; also stirs up
hatred of Americans; it demands withdrawal of the U.S. military mission from Iran and that the concessions on Bahrein island also be nationalized. [Bahrain]
About 10,000,000 barrels of oil were produced here in 1947. Since the whole middle east, sitting astride two continents and holding half the world’s oil reserves, is seething with nationalism and antiwestern feeling, confiscation of oil
properties might spread if the
Iran nationalization goes through as planned.
American investments are heavy in the Saudi Arabia oil fields, which produce more than 400,000 barrels of oil daily. They are substantial also in Iraq, which produces 185,000 barrels.
Democracies currently control about 90 per cent of petroleum production and about 75 per cent of the reserves. The U.S. produces about 52 per cent, the middle east 17 per cent and Venezuela 14.5 per cent. Russia and satellites produce
about 8 per cent, but being far less mechanized, their needs are far less. However, access to oil might have a profound effect on Russia's world domination plans. Possession of the middle east fields might well give Russia what it has
needed in its master military plan.
Is the middle eastern oil worth a third world war? Weighing the evidence at hand, the answer must be no. Unhappily, a yes or no answer does not quite suffice. If Russia gets the oil and the strategic superiority, how much choice would
we have? Meantime, every effort must be made to negotiate a peaceful settlement.
Related links:
U.S. Must Not Back War Risk in Iran | Philadelphia Inquirer, August 25, 1951
There’s More to Be Lost in Iran Than Oil | Riverside Daily Press, May 30, 1951
The MacArthur Doctrine and Persia | Calgary Herald, May 22, 1951
MOSSADEGH t-shirts — “If I sit silently, I have sinned”
