ngly apparent that Iran was being treated as an appendage of a wider diplomatic and political system (Ansari, 2006, p. 12).
             Iranian power declined in the face of the onslaught of Western powers and because of the way the West treated its agreements with the region. In the early period, American involvement was minimal beasue America did not want to be embroiled in the politics of the Old World.
             The real involvement of the U.S. in the affairs of Iran dates from 1953, as noted, and by then Iran was in dire straits, a country with an ineffective central government and a country that had been used for some time as a "battleground by competing armies" (Ansari, 2006, p. 20). The country had also faced famine and economic problems as well as a loss of population. Relations with the various European governments were largely subservient and ineffectual for Iranian interests. Efforts at Iranian nationalism were treated with contempt by the British. The American point of view shifted, often rapidly, as with reference to Mossadeq, overthrown in favor of the Shah. Mossadeq was a controversial figure with a long history in Iranian politics. He had been elected to the Majlis in 1915, but he had incurred the displeasure of the previous Shah in 1928 and had been forced to retire. That Shah offended many people, including the British and the Russians, and he was persuaded to abdicate when British and Russian forces invaded Persia in 1941. Mossadeq then returned to the Majlis in 1944, and he would soon establish himself as the leading representative of Persian nationalism. However, he evoked conflicting reactions both at home and abroad. He was described by the British Ambassador as completely unscrupulous. The Shaw saw him as an irrational person. The question seems to have been whether or not Mossadeq was open to rational argument and willing to consider a compromise when necessary. In 1951, the American government believed ...