Ext 5001/41 'PERSIA – INTERNAL (Miscellaneous despatches).' [‎67r] (133/248)

6 . The declaration about Persia gave a fillip to the reputation of the Shah
as well as to that of M. Soheily. It is natural that the Prime Minister in power
at the time should share in the glory. The attribution to the Shah of a share in
the success is perhaps due to a communique by His Majesty’s Legation devised
in the first place to silence malicious rumours that Mr. Churchill had not called
on the Shah. It stated that “ it could now be revealed ” that Mr. Churchill had
galled on the Shah in September 1942 and had a long and friendly conversation
/ith him about the war and interests of Persia; similarly, Mr. Lden, who had
had discussions with the Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs on
his way to the Moscow Conference, had also been received in audience by the
Shah, who during the course of the conversation spoke of the expectations and
interests of his country. Let us hope that this revelation of the Shah’s influence
will not increase his determination to run the country himself. Like his talks
with parties of Deputies at the time of the Millspaugh crisis, it should rather
remind him of the considerable influence he can exert by constitutional means.
The short cut to the perfect State must, however, be very attractive to the son of
Reza Shah. A worshipper of his father, the Shah does not realise that, whatever
the people of Persia want, they do not want a dictatorship resting on the hated
j army, and if he fails to take that into account he will fall into difficulties. He
i probably feels that, like his father, he can rule the army and through the army
the country; but his practice of suspecting the honest critic and encouraging the
flatterer, however corrupt, is discouraging to the well-wishers of Persia, and he
has not yet shown the strength of character which he will need if he is to be the
master of the army and not its tool.
7. The 69th birthday of Mr. Churchill was celebrated by a dinner which
he gave in His Majesty’s Legation on the 30th November. Mr. Roosevelt and
Marshal Stalin were present with the leading members of their conference staffs—
but without the diplomatic representatives of their respective countries. The
occasion was remarkable, in particular for the geniality of Marshal Stalin and his
tributes to Mr. Roosevelt and Mr. Churchill, especially to the latter, his “ fighting
friend.” In the interests of history it is worth while to record this short
conversation which occurred before dinner :—
Voroshilov : “ Whose portrait is that ? ”
His Majesty’s Minister : “ Our King, George V.”
Voroshilov: “He’s very much like Nicholas II.”
His Majesty’s Minister: “Yes, they were cousins and much alike,
though not in character.”
Stalin : “ No, indeed. Your King even allowed us to hold our conference
in London in 1907.” (This was, of course, King Edward VII, but never
mind.)
His Majesty’s Minister : “ Were you in London in 1907 ? ”
Stalin : “ Yes, I lived in Whitechapel.”
It would be interesting to know whether this statement is true or merely part
of the Stalin legend which is being built up. The general belief is that Stalin
never left Russia before the revolution except perhaps to slip over the border into
Persian Azerbaijan when things became too hot for him in the Caucasus in 1905.
A remark which Voroshilov made at dinner may also be recorded. After the
speech in which Mr. Churchill proposed the health of Marshal Stalin, Voroshilov
said to me, pointing across the table at his chief : “ And in the civil war he was
my commissar.” This was said not enviously but thoughtfully. Perhaps
Voroshilov was thinking of the official school of Soviet historians, which is doing
its best to prove that Trotsky played an insignificant part in the civil war as
compared with the cardinal role of Stalin.
8 . Carried away by enthusiasm after the conference, the Tehran
municipality decided to give the names Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin to three
streets in the capital. The idea was good, but the choice of streets was bound to
cause trouble. “ Churchill ” Street is a main thoroughfare running between two
important avenues, the Firdausi (in front of His Majesty’s Legation) and the
Pahlevi, whereas “ Stalin ” Street is a minor thoroughfare to the north of the
Soviet Embassy, with no outlet on the Firdausi except a narrow lane. Moreover,
“ Churchill ” Street serves the two main gates of the Soviet Embassy, but only the
back door of the British Legation. His Majesty's Legation, therefore, kept quiet
awaiting developments. The Soviet Embassy have protested, and the Persian
Government are trying to fit them out with a street that will satisfy them. They
have found one which is suitable as to position and importance, but the embassy
want a longer stretch than is offered them, regardless of the fact that this would
[50—50] b 2