Century-old extraterritorial capitulations explain Iranian hostility the US media never mentioned
Evidence
Strangely, no one thought to view United States policy in Iran against the background of so-called capitulations in practice for a century; this policy, by which various powers beginning with England were given extraterritorial economic, diplomatic, and juridical privileges in Iran (Khomeini was able to say in 1964, “If the Shah should run over an American dog, he would be called to account, but if an American cook should run over the Shah…no one has any claim against him”7), was never mentioned in the media. Yet it clearly could have been used to interpret the peculiar intensity of Iranian feelings against all “foreign devils” particularly foreign diplomats, not just the United States. This might have muted the sanctimonious protestations of many commentators who saw America as both egregiously wronged by Iran and innocent of anything but excessive benevolence towards Iranians. — Edward W. Said, Covering Islam, 259
Categorization
- SHARE: Khomeini’s 1964 dog/cook quote about extraterritorial capitulations would land with anyone working on empire, diplomatic immunity, or Iranian foreign policy.
- QUESTION: Worth chasing: the specific history and scope of British-then-American capitulations in Iran — a throughline from Qajar concessions to oil nationalism to the 1979 crisis.
- XREF: connects to: Historical foreign interventions forged an Iranian victimhood that shapes distrust — Nadim N. Rouhana and Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian, When Politics Are Sacralized:…, 1744