and. >> now joining us from the hoover institution on the campus us dan for a university is a director iranian studies at stanford and a fellow at the hoover institution refuse the co-director of the iran democracy project also the author of "the shah", abbas milani. how did they shot it in power? >> 1941 and left in 1979 and willingly as a result of the

revolution that i argue in the book was hijacked and was not supposed to lead to fact it was a movement what people saw but he came to power when his father was pushed out of power when the allied forces occupied in 1941 the british and the soviets. the allied's were worried there shaw was too friendly to the not sees. depending and on who you ask the 3,000 german experts working in iran and then to suffer the defeat within to connect with the persian gulf to the caspian to move

says this young man at the tender age of 22 almost reluctantly became the king. >>host: reluctantly? >>guest: i think so because at that time was not anticipating he would descend to the throne. he was not anticipating a of a virtually occupied country and to and so it was not by inclination. he was not someone who had the drive that his father had to grab the throne and he was very weak but also

pretended to be very strong. and make bad politicians and reluctant but modernizing leader who came to power at a very crucial time with this very critical piece of real estate, i ran, fdr, eisenhower, kennedy , and nixon, of virtually all the president's had said this is one of the most important countries. remember the days of the cold war and iran head 2500 before the soviet union that was known do you try to get but trying to keep it out of the soviet bloc in their

hand is almost deserted river began to hear a. >> but but supported by the soviet union. this made it interesting and critical to seven you mentioned shakespeare and you begin each chapter with of quote from king richard. why? >> i love shakespeare. but when i read it to i found striking similarities

of when she felt carr fall and grievance in going from one extent to seek other with almost no in between and he keros from day heighth of his power that you literally threaded into president ford for pooley net. >> but very much like richard. but the whole question of divine legitimacy and whether that could be sustained phenomenon in the

modern age. but shakespeare had some brilliant minds in their you can kill me or get rid of me but god invented me and only god can take away but god took away the throne and the shop. >>host: truck his grain how many years did he have to answer to the of british or americans or another authority prior to making big decisions? >> 1941 through 1964 he is in the words of the american ambassador at the time, a ward of the united states. they really had to answer to the british and americans than there is very little he can do without the prior approval he is dependent on

their help so if you have the first you have the power to dictate. the united states told them how much to spend on military and what to do. ironically, the independence that the oil money caught him proved to be his undoing because they became arrogant and did not have to listen who kept through the entire brain and let not to feel

like he needed to listen to the man. with that many, it really changes the ran. >> but the working class i was to participate to move this force, the only force allowed to work kinase places but when we went into crisis i was the surprise as to hope to create a democracy but created a

theocracy. >>host: did this shaw have a tenuous relationship with them all the? >> interesting question he left unknown aspects of his character but on the one hand in 1963 when khomeini came into the national state and eventually was exiled from iran and then he came back to unseat him. but would iran in with the help of the clergy and the americans and the british, he was brought back to power. so he had this flawed relationship and while he despised radicals, he felt

the bodies religious were his allies in the fight. the same idea through the united states of communism is any force willing to stand up is a potential ally of the united states. exactly what the shaw thought why he had policy of everything else to allow it to continue to continue have the elementary schools schools, collecting funds to create a mosque or on the university before and after the revolution and it was remarkable the tolerance to their religious organization as compared to the policies of the moderate of anyone

else. >>host: was the ever popular with the arabian people? >> he was when he came to power thinking he was young, western educated and had the reputation of one team to have a more democratic policies so i do think he was through 52 then a very tense and relationship with the head of the nationalist movement and the fact he fled then came back i think damaged his popularity but after 62 or 63 he really began to make the reform like women

and the right to vote in the enfranchisement made him more popular in my view to 73 or 74 but then it got to his head he abolish the political system and then he began to lose both his popularity and his grip because he was diagnosed with cancer in '73 and they decided to hide this from the people of the iranian people knew that. >>host: you write the perfect storm it is hard to pinpoint a moment that the coalition that eventually overthrew issa shah began to

coalesce that human rights policies had an impact to reinvigorate the democratic movement. >> not in the book will i have written about it when jimmy carter became president and was a local prisoner and iran. but overnight the torture and did. and began to issues that the society at large that changes and it jimmy carter

but all of these purchase a patient you cannot create a middle-class or a technocratic class as the shah has done and do not demand that share and when jimmy carter came they thought the shah could not be as tough as he could have spent. >> why really a political prisoner? >> i was young. with the radicalism of age and was easy to catch and i felt i ranted that have the

government that it deserved and i thought they needed a more democratic government but 38 deal with some then if it was from that era to demand more just and democratic government but after a year and a half and i spent the year and what made it interesting was in about 18 months become the leaders of the country. the type clerical class and

now the three most important people of iran. >>host: abbas milani where did they catch up with you? what happened? >> that was literally the level of activity imagine the level of disgust but but the brightest ideas were no less valid that they came to interested and to where you at home? >> no. i was meeting the minister of education.

a colleague at university and invited me to his office >> he was the shah minister that many people thought would become the prime minister aspiring in that position and halfway through my a meeting week at a call from the man in charge of internal security and said my name has come up to have associations with these groups and as i was about to leave the ministry they grabbed me the way they grab the political prisoner. they grab your hand is you cannot bite the cyanide pill for the thing that was popular in those days.

although more unpopular today but and then they went to an six months? >> in prison the clergy. >> were you tortured? >> i was in solitary confinement for about a month that is the worst torture. i was beaten up a couple of times but when we arrived jimmy carter was elected in when i was arrested jimmy carter was elected. overnight you could see the borders had come down but there certainly was tortured and i have seen sides but

then they take you to the prison hospital and you could see the band-aids piled but i do still have friends from prison who were badly tortured. but in my case said a couple of the teams and a solitary confinement. and they rested my wife knowing she was not involved but afterwards and the kind

of the regime to be engaged in but when the rest of those people. >>host: how well did you get to know a the mullah? >> some of them fairly well. i used to spend probably one hour per day with them and i used to teach english on vacation and my friend was elected to become the next peter and when he found out the torture that people had

been killed with various trials, he spoke out and he lost his job and put in prison the rest of his life and one of the most courageous acts of 20th-century politics of someone within a breath to be the leader but said i cannot watch people being tortured and executed and if i lose my job, and they lose my job. he did. i got to know him and rosten johnnie l. little bit. to play volleyball occasionally but all of that and think most people who have viewed the book -- review the books like "the wall street journal" say that i more or less exceeded

to keep my personal view of prejudices' sore preferences out this is to be a scholarly look at the shah instead of a settling account. >>host: at the end who is still loyal to the shah? >> at the end, a lot of people remain loyal unfortunately he did and remain loyal to most of them and allowed many to stay and get executed by the regime. the military remained loyal literally to the event. and again, what is less known and i describe this in the book, that the carter administration to forge a round to november 1978 as

the british but it is no longer capable to stay in power so it becomes active to create a rapprochement around the military in the clergy who they picked as the most likely successor. so they didn't realize the american government was no longer supporting the shah and remained loyal. in the streets almost a year and a half only to the and was the defection so what the shah decided to do was very interesting in retrospect, he rested some of his most loyal because he thought this way he could stay ahead of the curve of the revolution but i think

anybody who studies revolutions know that if you feed the appetitive only increases the appetite and did you see weakness when you put your own prime minister in prison they want your head rather than reform >>host: we have been talking with but the "l.a. times" says it is splendidly detailed biography and here it is published by macmillan , the shah is the name of the book. booktv on location at the hoover institution at stanford university.

>> i am the author of what's the matter with white people that just cannot and paperback but i don't think

i will read that for a while. my three big books is the unwinding. i am almost through with that i can actually recommended and it is a gripping tale of the unwinding of the middle-class almost novelistic george packer is not in the book himself but the unwinding of america but also specifically of the middle class and you meet people who lost jobs, downsize, have seen the decline instead of rising away expected them to do in this country. it is really a provocative and important book so that i recommend highly. and the flame thrower i have not read that yet it is a story of a woman in the 1970's and what intrigues me

besides the story is that laura miller talks about of the authority and the boys in the book is intriguing but also rattling male reviewers who are not used to a woman to take the liberties she takes in the block and i cannot wait to see what that means and what liberties do we not take? and i am getting ready to read fear itself intellectual and political history of the new deal and also woven in with the coming and the prosecution of world war ii with said domestic and international together the way most scholars cannot do. and also treating the unraveling of the new deal back to its roots when it

excluded african-americans into can search and legislation and passed so then right and things you can get into a coalition but then could take them apart. . .