891.00/2–1146: Telegram
The Vice Consul at Tabriz (Rossow) to the Secretary of State
[Received February 13—12:13 a.m.]
20. Peshavari’s consistent policy up to January 26 was to display patience, caution and forbearance vigorously protesting willingness to negotiate with Tehran, while at same time encouraging intolerable economic situation.
On above date he began new tactic of inflammatory and extravagantly belligerent pronouncements in intensity and culminating in proclamation reported mytel 19, February 9,87 announcing creation of Army and commencement of conscription, and asking religious leaders somewhat inconsistently to declare Jahat or Moslem holy war. For past 2 days frenzied demonstrations have been staged in streets vainly attempting to foment support for Army and warlike spirit. The extreme vituperation and recklessness of Peshavari’s recent statements have caused serious apprehension locally.
The apparent motive behind earlier policy of restraint was to allow Democrats and Russians to propagandize a superficial justification and attitude of innocence blaming all the evils of situation on “despotic reactionary” Tehran. It was apparent, however, that this cautious policy could not be long maintained as forecast mytel 5, January 16.88
The motive behind new policy of verbal violence would appear obviously to give Russians an excuse for remaining in occupation to prevent “bloodshed, disorder and terrors of holy war,” an idea already being voiced locally by known Russian sympathizers.
The schematic pattern appears skillful and clear, phase 1 providing propagandistic justification allowing Russians openly to render moral support and assistance to Democrat regime, and phase 2 providing excuse for practical support through continued military occupation.
It is believed that at this stage any negotiations between Tehran and Azerbaijan will not be successful unless very extreme concessions are made by former.
[Page 333]Although as reported mytel 12, January 3089 Security Council hearings caused momentary concern to Democrat leaders, withdrawal of issue from agenda, interpreted as Soviet victory, has encouraged them to prosecute with even greater vigor their increasingly belligerent policies.
Similar interpretation of withdawal of issue was made by general public. Nevertheless, lack of execution of announced internal reforms and increasingly desperate economic conditions with unemployment widespread have produced cautious but almost unanimous opposition to every aspect of Democrat regime, earlier tentative support of internal program having been entirely withdrawn.
Only support of regime is from own active members estimated at not over five percent of population excluding those under duress. But disagreement over extremist terrorism, economic situation and Kurdish problem has even shaken internal organization of [Govt] and party directorate to the reported annoyance of Soviet mentors. Also fidayis90 have been deserting for lack of pay and restraint on looting.
Peshavari’s fervent assertions that people support conscription and new national army are absolutely false. Opposition is almost unanimous and many of military age have gone into hiding, leaving draft quotas unfilled. Police have commenced summary impressment of any fit young males seen walking on streets.
If Soviets withdrew, the Army and entire Democrat regime would undoubtedly crumble instantly of own accord. But so long as Soviets remain and hope for help from outside is lacking, this opposition cannot be expected to have serious result, for though overt terrorist tactics have been played down since mid-January the general fear of Russians persists as strongly as ever.
Open contact between Soviet and local officials is limited to social and cultural affairs, but it is apparent to all observers that clandestine contact is continuous with local Soviet Consulate General and with all-powerful Soviet town commandants in interior.
There is no sign of Soviet military withdrawal. On contrary, they are reported letting 6-month contracts for local supplies and small groups of reinforcements are reliably reported continually arriving from Soviet frontier. Attention is also drawn to fact that in recent interviews (mytel 15, Feb 4) Peshavari virtually admitted remain in occupation. At same time his vehement insistence that on decision of Security Council depended future his regime, almost amounted to flagrant admission of Soviet intervention.
[Page 334]Although independence of Azerbaijan has not been proclaimed in so many words, it is believed recent words and actions may be accepted as tantamount thereto. Further secessionist indications are that wearing of imperial insignia and display of Shah’s portrait have recently been forbidden.
Sent Dept as 20; Tehran as 27; Moscow and London as 13.