Read on Twitter
I generally don't like to nitpick, but calling Mosaddeq "democratically-elected" is problematic and inaccurate. https://twitter.com/zachjcarter/status/1296163614471192576
Mosaddeq was selected as PM by the 16th Majlis in April 1951. Only a small number of deputies were elected by democratic means. Most were landlords, tribal khans, clergy or other figures who rigged the vote to seats for themselves or their supporters (often with UK help).
By nature of his selection by the Majlis (and not, it should be noted, by popular election) in April 1951, Mosaddeq cannot lay claim to the mantle of "democratically elected." He did, however, have widespread popular support. And his seat, as well as...
...those of his fellow National Front deputies, were won through democratic means, as the 16th Majlis elections were free in Tehran and a few other major cities. Mosaddeq believed in democracy (after a fashion), but he was not democratically elected in 1951.
Many of the same caveats apply in 1952, when elections for the 17th Majlis were held. Mosaddeq presided over these elections and ensured that free voting conditions presided in the major cities, where National Front candidates went up against the communist Tudeh Party. However...
...he did not interfere with elections in the provinces, where vote-rigging occurred on a typically wide scale. Concerned that the British and his domestic opponents were trying to rig the election, Mosaddeq suspended voting once a quorum of deputies had been selected.
Thus, the 17 Majlis was split between the NF deputies, who generally represented a democratic process, and provincial deputies selected through non-democratic means. Mosaddeq successfully maintained the confidence of this body, apart from his brief time out of office in July '52.
He was returned to power at that time through wide popular protests: again, a representation of his democratic appeal (but not his democratic election, per se).
The final caveat is his August 1953 referendum, which immediately preceded the coup that removed him from power.
The final caveat is his August 1953 referendum, which immediately preceded the coup that removed him from power.
This referendum was called by Mosaddeq, in response to the obstruction he now faced from the 17th Majlis, a body which had now largely turned against him. While his supporters voted, the referendum probably did not represent a *true democratic election (tho this is debatable).
At the time of his removal, Mosaddeq probably maintained the support of a fairly large section of the Iranian population. He certainly possessed wide popular support early in his tenure and in July 1952. Yet he was never formerly elected to office by democratic means.
Democracy in Iran during this period was limited, though it did occur (and could have spread, had a constitutional government remained in power). Mosaddeq keenly felt the need for free elections, according to Iran's 1906 constitution.
Perhaps this is splitting hairs, but I have always preferred referring to Mosaddeq as a "democratic constitutionalist" and have tried to avoid labeling him as "democratically-elected." Accuracy matters, particularly when discussing such an important and nuanced topic.
