| چکیده انگلیسی مقاله |
A B S T R A C T Background and Aim: In the 1940s / 1960s, major changes appeared in the strategic area of the Persian Gulf, of which the withdrawal of British forces was one of the most important consequences. According to the new doctrine of England, the British bases were evacuated in the lands east of the Suez waterway, including the Persian Gulf, until 1971 AD. After the official announcement of this issue, the Western world, led by the United States, raised the issue of the power vacuum and expressed their concern about its possible unfortunate consequences. The Iranian government, which was in a superior position compared to other small emirates in the region, strongly supported the withdrawal of British forces. This issue became one of the basic principles of the foreign policy of the second Pahlavi government. The main purpose of this research is to investigate the reasons for Iran's stance against the issue of England's withdrawal from the Persian Gulf in the late 1940s/1960s. Methodology: The research method is the historical analysis using the library method, and it deals with how Iran confronts and challenges the new strategy of the London statesmen. Results: it is concluded that the second Pahlavi government was influenced by a set of internal factors and international approaches, in complete opposition to the continued presence of British military forces in the Persian Gulf and Oman Sea. Conclusion: The findings of the research show that the withdrawal of British forces from the maritime borders of the southern Persian Gulf and the acceptance of changes in these lines were forced and under the influence of regional and international factors. Extended Abstract Introduction One of the most important aspects of the regional policy of the Pahlavi II government in the 1960s was the issue of the withdrawal of British forces from the Persian Gulf after a half-century full presence, the vacuum of power caused by this event and the replacement of Iran. The evacuation of the Persian Gulf and the Oman Sea was a result of a set of political, military and economic factors that affected the weakened body of British colonialism and forced the government to accept unwanted conditions after World War II. The departure of Britain has greatly affected Iran's internal, regional and trans-regional policy and, as a result, the need to recognize the developments at this point in the history of the Persian Gulf and its sea boundaries has been a necessity for preparing this paper. In writing this research, we have tried to use the main sources, especially the documents that are very valuable in historical research And some of the data from the official centres of the Pahlavi era such as the Foreign Ministry publications and the four-volume period of the Pahlavi Dynasty calendar. To understand the analysis of the left-wing groups about Iran’s foreign and regional policy, the rare sources of these parties were examined. Methodology The method of research in this historical paper is analytical and based on the library method, to know the past and better draw the future, events have been examined with an analytical view. Resources have been used in several categories of Persian books and articles, electronic site content, and especially archival publications and documents. Results and discussion In the late 1940s / 60, England decided to withdraw its forces from the Persian Gulf region, influenced by some negative domestic and foreign developments. The policy initially faced strong opposition from US officials, but eventually, both countries agreed on it. The Iranian government welcomed the issue of leaving it from the beginning and strongly criticized the continued presence of British elements in the Persian Gulf. From the West's point of view, Iran was an undeveloped and immature country, and to fulfil its new duty, it required various economic and, in particular, military assistance following this process, Tehran's relations with the United States expanded rapidly and became a privileged ally of the United States. from the point of view of the authorities of the Imperial Government, the compulsory withdrawal of Britain. Conclusion Since the mid-40 20th century, the change in military policies has been on the agenda of the British government. Accordingly, the volume of the presence of British military elements and the number of their bases in the world, especially the eastern lands of the Suez Canal and the Persian Gulf area, was reduced. Pahlavi II's rule against the presence of British troops in the Persian Gulf region followed a very negative position, which continued to challenge the departure of England and was part of Iran's "Independent National Policy". The behavior of the Pahlavi II government on the withdrawal of British forces from the Persian Gulf should be examined in two parts the nature of the Pahlavi government itself and the behavior of the superpowers. Since the late 1940s/60s, the Pahlavi II government has been trying to change its stagnant and neutral role in the Gulf region and the Oman Sea as a result of rapid oil revenues and military purchases. Accordingly, Iran, in its interaction with the Western world, was responsible for protecting its interests which were closely related to the capitalist world. This change of behaviour was a kind of restoration of Iran's historical power in the absence of its traditional rival and intruder. From the point of view of the authorities of the Imperial Government, Iran's position against the strategy of eastern Suez in Britain was part of Tehran's comprehensive measures to secure its economic and political stability with a wise prospect for the coming decades. Accordingly, Iran's stubborn stance against the presence of Britain in the Persian Gulf was the product of the new US-UK efforts and teachings to maintain its political and military interests in the Persian Gulf region. As a result, the second Pahlavi government, which, according to Shah, was "condemned to playing the first role" on the world stage and tried to theorize this claim, assumed this duty. Funding There is no funding support. Authors’ Contribution All of the authors approved thecontent of the manuscript and agreed on all aspects of the work. Conflict of Interest Authors declared no conflict of interest. Acknowledgments We are grateful to all the scientific consultants of this paper. |