The Perennial 'Sovereignty is Negotiable' Doctrine
Same playbook, different decade: FIRST INSTANCE: The 1953 Iranian Coup The playbook of external powers dictating leadership choices in the Middle East is well-documented. In August 1953, the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and British Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) orchestrated a coup d'état that overthrew the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh of Iran. Mosaddegh’s
'offense' was nationalizing Iran’s oil industry, challenging British economic interests. The US and UK presented this intervention as preventing a Soviet takeover (CIA, 2013 declassification). The outcome was the reinstatement of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, a monarch amenable to Western interests, and decades of authoritarian rule. REPETITIONS: Vietnam and the Philippines This pattern of external
influence on sovereign elections is not confined to the Middle East. In 1963, the Kennedy administration indicated its displeasure with South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem, indirectly contributing to his overthrow and assassination. While not a direct rejection by Diem, it demonstrated how a lack of US backing could be fatal. More overtly, in the Philippines, US influence after the 1986 snap
elections, when President Reagan notably backed Ferdinand Marcos, only to swiftly withdraw support under significant public and congressional pressure, ultimately led to Marcos's exile. This shift highlights that US 'criticism' can often be a precursor to a complete withdrawal of support, or worse. OUTCOMES: From Stability to Proxy Conflict The outcomes of such interventions are rarely benign. The