891.6363/10–347: Telegram
The Ambassador in Iran (Allen) to the Secretary of State
954. Many Iranian officials and deputies try to make the Soviet oil question appear to be a straight contest between US and USSR and to give impression that they oppose the Soviet proposals merely because they wish to avoid offending the US. By these tactics the Iranians hope to be able to refuse the Soviet proposals and at same time shift responsibility to our shoulders for their having done so.
Outstanding example of this maneuver was given in address over Tehran radio September 28 by Ibrahim Khadji-Nouri, Director of Propaganda, and assistant to the Prime Minister. While Khadji-Nouri declared in his speech that he was expressing only his personal views, he has since told me he cleared his speech with Qavam in advance.
Khadji-Nouri’s speech contained statement that many Iranians were reluctant to approve Soviet proposals because they did not wish to offend the USA. He emphasized that Iran owed a great debt of gratitude to America for support given Iran in the past. He compared Iran to a mother having to choose between two suitors (US and USSR) for her daughter’s hand (oil). He said one suitor (USSR) was insistent and quarrelsome, while the other (US) seemed indifferent towards the daughter but was very rich. He said that if two suitors were equal in other respects, any thoughtful mother would give her daughter to the one which was the greater lover of liberty, stronger, more peaceful, and richer.
I have pointed out to Khadji-Nouri and others that his comparison gives a false impression, since the US is not an applicant for Iran oil. Moreover, I have repeated many times that our interest in oil questions extends merely to the question of freedom of Iran to make its own choice, without being influenced by threats.
However, the Persians can present certain facts to justify their picture of the oil question as a US-USSR contest. Iranian Embassy in Washington has doubtless informed Iran Government that several American oil companies are in constant contact with that Embassy [Page 966] and with Department to ascertain possibility of sending representatives to Iran to negotiate oil concession. Statements that American companies were interested only in southeastern area of Iran would make little impression in the present situation.
Despite our efforts to contrary, we shall probably not be able to prevent Iranians from continuing their line that present Iranian oil question represents struggle between US and USSR.1
Sent Department 954, repeated London 126.
Department pass Moscow 111.
- Telegram 611, October 7, to Tehran, reported that in discussions with the Iranian Minister on October 6, the Department “confirmed that US had refrained from seeking concession and added we were still not interested.” (891.6363/10–347) In telegram 976, October 8, the Embassy in Tehran reported that the Propaganda Director “attempted in second radio speech to correct impression he had previously given that US was competing with USSR for Iran oil concession. He told radio audience in second speech that US had requested no oil concession or agreement of any kind in northern Iran or any other part of country since Qavam took office 19 months ago. He added that this disinterestedness by Americans was in fact regretted by all Iranians who admired the progressive and serious-minded American people.” (891.6363/10–847)↩