Abstract

At the interface of big business and government, with whom does influence and responsibility lie? Rarely is the answer clear‐cut, yet accounts of the Anglo‐Iranian oil crisis of 1948–54 have often roundly blamed the Anglo‐Iranian Oil Company (AIOC) for British mishandling of it. This article seeks to redress the balance. Whilst no apologia for AIOC policy, it contends that HMG should shoulder much more responsibility than hitherto allowed. From clandestine partnership through to sacrificial pawn, the government used the company as an instrument of foreign policy as it sought to marry the protection of AIOC interests in Iran with wider concerns for combating communism and promoting the Anglo‐American ‘special relationship’.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.