- Amnesty International report brands Libya's militias 'out of control'
- Obama proposes bringing jobs home from overseas. Would his plan work?
- Obama's NASA budget: Mars takes a hit, but space science isn't dead
- Payroll tax deal close: Why did Republicans back down? (+video)
- Israel says Bangkok, Delhi, and Tbilisi attacks all linked – to Iran
- Rick Santorum's new machine-gun ad: Will it work? (+video)
- Honduras prison fire kills more than 300, highlights regional problem (+video)
- Angry Birds joins Facebook in bid to reach 800 million users
Rebuilding Iraq on the cheap?
The US has had nation-building successes in the past, but greater planning, too.
One of the most apt - and worrisome - warnings about the future of Iraq may be the successful CIA coup that once toppled the regime next door.
In Iran, the United States overthrew a prime minister and reinstalled Shah Reza Pahlavi, ushering in a quarter-century of dictatorship that itself was swept away by an anti-US Islamic revolution in 1979. Iran is one of several examples that today highlight the unpredictable risks of regime change and nation-building.
From the postwar occupations of Japan and Germany - which are cited by the Bush administration as models for Iraq - to the far less glowing recent examples in Somalia and Afghanistan, analysts say America has again failed to learn the lessons of its past. Nation-building is always hard - and almost never successful when done on the fly, on the cheap, or under fire, they say.
Despite ardent efforts by the US, Iraq is facing all three challenges. But with final results so uncertain the Iran case waves like a warning flag.
"It is not far-fetched to draw a line from [the Iran coup] through the Shah's repressive regime and the Islamic revolution to the fireballs that engulfed the World Trade Center in New York," says Stephen Kinzer in his book "All the Shah's Men."
First, some history: In 1953, fear of a communist takeover led the US to engineer the overthrow of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq. Historians today cite new documents that show those fears were exaggerated. The CIA coup had also been encouraged by British officials, seeking revenge against Mr. Mossadeq, for wresting control of Iran's oil industry from Britain two years earlier.
"The US went in thinking they were doing everybody a favor and thinking this was a clear way to protect American interests," says Malcolm Byrne, deputy director of the National Security Archive at George Washington University.
"In fact, within a generation all the fears [of an anti-American takeover] that motivated the move had come to pass," says Mr. Byrne, coeditor of a new volume about the coup based on newly declassified US documents. The 1979 Islamic revolution was "exactly what [US coupmakers] had tried to avoid."
While working to avoid such a stark reversal in Iraq's future, US officials don't look to Iran. They cite examples of postwar reconstruction in Germany and Japan in the 1940s. But to get it right half a century ago, US occupation authorities prepared diligently and kept control for years, historians say. They built upon political foundations that existed in prewar Germany and Japan; they committed far more troops and vast funds; and, perhaps most important, they faced no armed resistance.
Not one US soldier was killed in either occupation. By contrast in Iraq, since Baghdad fell to US troops on April 9, 2003, more than 620 uniformed Americans have died.
"The Germans recognized that they were defeated," says Charles Maier, a professor of German history at Harvard. "Even the hardcore Nazis understood that they were in no position to take on the occupying powers."
The time frame was also far more forgiving than in Iraq. The Western allies in Germany kept residual rights until 1955, even after handing political power to the Federal Republic of Germany in 1949.




