Another Look

Amazon Book Review of: All the Shah's Men

Review:

All the Shah’s Men attempts something seen but rarely accomplished in such an insightfully brilliant composition. Covering the events of the Anglo-Iranian oil embroilment, Stephen Kinzer attempts to take a neutral position on the ordeal but careful juxtaposition of events and seemingly minor inadvertent details hints otherwise. It must be realized that there is nothing in this text that is thrown casually together or without cause; the subject material is intrinsically complex: the very thought of organizing a tale as historically convoluted as this one seems a near incomprehensible act. It leaves only the conclusion, then, that every clause is carefully chosen and every concept lent an overarching purpose. Stephen Kinzer has taken to the high hills of neutrality while also subtly imparting his own thoughts from its grounds.

However that is not to say that he implants a wholly biased view. No, in fact there is a masterful genius in the way that he presents both sides of the issue without asking the audience outright to make judgement on either side. It should be noted that this is hard not to: one would find it difficult to read on the roots of what has amounted to a country’s centuries old struggle for stable government and national unity. But, fortunately, it is not required of the reader to take any such stance. Indeed, it is not until the very end that any sort of analysis is even attempted. Then, too, Kinzer remains aloof behind the analysis of other historians of which he quotes extensively and interjects only to raise possible quandaries that they - not he - expose.

It is difficult to describe just who Kinzer is trying to reach here but it stands apparent that the man is passionate about his subject and wishes to get word out. At its core, All the Shah’s Men is a tale of misunderstandings, stubborn actions, and lost opportunities. The novel details the U.S.’s involvement in a coup overthrowing Iran’s revolutionary, progressive leader at the time Mohammad Mossadegh. While popular in his home country for nationalizing the oil industry, he ran afoul British (and consequently American) interests with his actions. Replacing him was Reza Shah who was seen mostly as the U.S.’s puppet government. Needless to say, this has caused what can only be understated as constant strife in the region and involved countries’ relations. Kinzer ties this tale into coherency with an air of moralistic impassivity. What passes in his book is intriguing, disheartening, and as he is quick to remind - above all historically accurate. One feels that, upon closing the final chapters they have uncovered a great virtuosity and reached a profound understanding of often muddy governmental policies. If anything, one knows that they have definitely been handed a guide on how not to run foreign policy.

There is the implied concession on the advantages of hindsight, but then again, there is too that implied (however not always limited to such subtlety) concept that pigheadedness - easily identifiable during the run of its course - was, too, a large contributing factor.

All the Shah’s Men succeeds not only because of its well accomplished attempts to organize often baffling quandries of political events, but also because of its effective use of what can best be described as stratification. While it would have been easy to cop to dividing the social castes inherent in the Anglo-Iranian crisis (and a major fuel to the lasting bitterness) Kinzer instead identifies the many overlaying sociological strata of the issue. We are given an overview of the issues highly charged history rife with symbols of religious martyrdom and political tension. The apparent psychological epidermis of the crisis is tilled handily before delving more into the heart of the issue in an effort of attaining an all-encompassing understanding. Without pandering to superficial conclusions or extraneous events, he gives us the breadth of the situation with a vision of multi-layered depth often gone unseen with such wells of temperance.

The ball is missed in a few spots, though. His straight-line recount of events feels empty at times as the mechanical linkage of occurrences leads to a concise - however dry - tale. As aforementioned, the balance of fact and opinion however much implied by Kinzer or falsely placed by the reader, is an unbalanced mix that somewhat detracts from the ruminative insights that he is oft to make.

However these moments stand of a minor importance in the larger, venturous message of Shah’s Men. Nor do they slow down the rather fast-paced events of international spy intrigue permeating the Anglo-Iranian crisis. To this effect, Kinzer has drafted a book that will appeal not only to history buffs and political enthusiasts, but to those who would most usually find such subjects to be rather a boring and stuffy read. Kinzer is sure to make the matter of the past an engrossing issue of the now and foreign policy not only a matter of moralistic integrity of government but also one of personal responsibility. As indicated by All the Shah’s Men’s bestseller status, the people - people of the government - are clearly willing to listen. And, perhaps, that is all Kinzer really wants.