The secret, unwritten pact between Israel and the Shah’s regime in Iran, when the new countries were on much warmer terms
These days, while Iran is under relentless attack from the Israeli air force, the country is also marking the passage of 46 years since the Islamic Revolution, when the ayatollahs managed to seize power and terminate the rule of the Persian Shah.
Over the years, much has been written about the State of Israel’s extensive ties with the Shah’s dictatorial regime. From time to time, snippets of information or classified documents from the relevant period have come to light as well.
As Israel’s military activities in the skies above Iran continue, we decided to take a look at a lesser-known period in history, the years between 1953 and 1979, when Israel enjoyed a very different relationship with the country of Iran. The following lines paint a picture of extensive coordination between Israel and Iran on foreign affairs and security issues, which is surprising partly because Iran was a Muslim state, but also because Israel’s relations with the Shah’s dictatorship played a critical role in the country’s defense, economy, and foreign affairs.
In the course of preparing this article, we interviewed several individuals who spent a period of time in Iran under the Shah’s rule, where they worked and lived in contentment. According to Chaim Navon, the official Israeli envoy to Iran at the time, the State of Israel purchased a significant portion of the oil produced by the Shah’s regime, sometimes even the majority of the country’s exports. Iran also used Israel as a middleman to sell oil to other countries. The pact between the countries obligated the State of Israel and the Shah’s regime to guarantee the security of the maritime routes for shipping oil. This bolstered their partnership in the struggle against President Nasser of Egypt, who was making repeated attempts to forge ideological and military alliances throughout the Middle East that would be hostile to Iran and Israel, especially in the Gulf States and the Arabian Peninsula. Many Israeli companies, both private and government-owned, engaged in extensive operations in Iran in a variety of industries including textiles, agriculture, electrical appliances, water, fertilizers, construction, aviation, shipping, gas, tires, and even dentures. In certain years, Iran was one of the main destinations for Israeli exports. Israeli academics also engaged in extensive collaboration with Iranian academia.
The Shah Never Officially Recognized Israel
According to Navon, Iran recognized Israel on a de facto level in March 1950, but due to internal pressure from elements hostile to Israel and to the pro-Western and pro-American policies of the Shah’s regime, as well as external pressure from various other countries, Iran consistently refrained from officially recognizing Israel. The Shah’s government had secret representation of sorts in Tel Aviv beginning in 1961, and Israel had representation in Tehran, which eventually became an embassy with a military attaché. In light of the sensitivity and secrecy of their work, the Israeli representatives in Iran typically did not deal with the Shah’s government through the official bureaucratic channels in the foreign ministry and other government agencies. Instead, they interacted with the Shah’s limited circle of close associates in the country’s political and defense establishments, and even sometimes dealt directly with the Shah himself and his court minister.
While Israel tried conceal its involvement with the Shah’s oppressive regime and its secret police, the Iranian public was aware of the aid that Israel was providing to those mechanisms, especially the close ties between Israel and the Iranian security agency SAVAK, which was responsible for political persecution and the torture and murders of opponents of the regime.
While the two countries enjoyed broad relations in many areas, we will focus on Israel’s aid to the Shah’s security apparatus, the mechanism for the forceful suppression of dissidence that ultimately led to his downfall. Various documents attest to the depth of Israel’s involvement in the Shah’s Iran, the strategic importance that Israel attached to those relations, and the concern within Israel about the potential repercussions of the Shah’s loss of power. During the final years of the Shah’s dictatorship, those concerns became a tangible reality.
Stability Through Oppression
Israel’s cognizance of the Shah’s repressive policies was evident in documents dating as far back as April 1955, when a communiqué was sent from the Israeli embassy in London revealing that an Iranian diplomat had told an Israeli official that his government was involved in stamping out communism and that the Americans were pleased with their activities.
Yoel Yaakovi was a representative of Israel who spent five consecutive years in Iran during the Shah’s tenure. He drew our attention to a document that was written eight years after that telegram, on September 9, 1963, when Netanel Lorch, the director of the Middle East Department in the Foreign Ministry, wrote that the traditional religious parades held that month had turned into mass protests against the Shah’s regime. “The government was surprised that the religious demonstrations had been used as political protests,” he wrote. “The riots spread to a number of cities, and the government reacted with great force to quash the riots. An official statement reported that there were 86 fatalities and 193 injuries in the course of these protests. The past few days have been quiet. The regime is in control of the situation in Tehran and the other cities as well.” Lorch claimed that “the anti-Israel chants used by the protestors were a small fraction of the slogans that were used. For the time being, the anti-Jewish and anti-Israeli tone of the protests has disappeared completely.” Lorch added, “Any attempt to depict the ties between Israel and Persia as a cause of these disturbances should be thwarted.”
According to a report dated January 3, 1964, which was prepared by Dr. Tzvi Duriel, the director of Israel’s representation in Tehran, “The internal stability and exclusive power of the Shah, which were achieved through oppression of the religious sector and other opponents of the government in June, and the regime’s success in the elections, are continuing without noticeable disturbance. The disintegration of the National Front is continuing.”
According to Israeli reports, the Shah relied heavily on the ruling New Iran party to cement his power, but he also made sure that an opposition party appeared to exist. According to a report drafted on November 25, 1964, by Yisroel Chaviv of the Middle East Department of the Foreign Ministry, the Shah had a vested interest in the continued operation of the People’s Party, so that there would be a fictitious opposition controlled by the government to create the illusion of a democratic character in the country’s parliament. In reality, though, the New Iran Party was the only real party.
Stifling Resistance
At a meeting held on December 19, 1964, between Israeli foreign minister Abba Eban and Abbas Aram, the foreign minister of Iran, the latter spoke highly of the relationship between the two countries, opining that there was no other country with such close ties to Iran. At the same time, the Iranians preferred to keep their relationship with Israel relatively quiet. Meir Ezri, an Israeli envoy to Iran, reported in a telegram on May 5, 1965, that the Iranian foreign minister had complained in a meeting about the scope and public nature of Israel’s activities in Iran and had expressed concern that it might harm Iran’s relations with other Arab countries. Ezri told the Iranian minister, “Israel’s general interest in the Middle East is the existence of a sovereign, strong, flourishing state of Iran headed by the Shah, whom we consider a friend of Israel…. We do not believe that the Arabs will ever be close friends of Iran, despite all the Iranian efforts. Our friendship obligates us to make Iran aware of what we know about the deliberate Arab efforts to undermine vital Iranian interests.”
Israel was well aware of the murderous suppression of the opposition in Iran. Dovid Turjeman of the Israeli mission in Iran reported on January 27, 1966, that the leaders of the communist Tudeh party had been sentenced to death in absentia, as part of a general crackdown on political opposition. A few months later, on July 21, Turjeman reported that the Shah and the upper echelon of the government were confident that they faced no internal threat from left-wing opposition figures and that the country’s security services would be able to crush any underground or opposition movement. He clearly had no illusions about the nature of the Iranian regime and its willingness to resort to violent suppression to preserve its power.
An IDF Attaché in Iran Becomes the Hero of the Day
Despite the character of the Iranian government, the Israelis had no qualms about maintaining a relationship of substance with it. Mordechai Gazit, the director of the Middle East Department in the Foreign Ministry, wrote on February 23, 1966, “In several respects, it can be said that Iran-Israel relations constitute a kind of secret, unwritten alliance that provides Israel with a range of advantages in the areas of economics, security, the military, Middle Eastern affairs, and anti-Nasserism.” Gazit added that the State of Israel was involved in “renovating Iranian air force planes and the planes of its civil aviation service at full price and for large sums…. Israeli experts are involved in Persian anti-Nasser propaganda…. There is close and extensive collaboration on intelligence, involving the direct use of Iranian territory … and close and extensive collaboration between the IDF and the Iranian army…. The attachés are in daily contact with the Iranian general staff…. An Iranian purchase from IMI [Israel Military Industries] Systems, in addition to the Uzi deals and other purchases, is in advanced stages of discussion.”
The released documents do not contain details on the nature of the collaboration between Israel and SAVAK, the Shah’s secret police, which was notorious in Iran. However, there are details about the military collaboration between the two countries. For instance, according to a telegram dated January 4, 1967, the Iranian prime minister asked Israel’s military attaché in Tehran, Colonel Yaakov Nimrodi, to oversee advanced training for the head of his bodyguard division. In a conversation that took place one month later with Meir Ezri, Israel’s representative in Tehran, the prime minister said that he had instructed the commander of the gendarmerie to purchase an Uzi submachine gun and had approved the relevant budget, in accordance with a request from the IDF attaché in Tehran.
Two months later, on April 13, Israel’s chief of general staff, Yitzchok Rabin, spoke with the Shah. A transcript of the conversation indicates that the Shah took interest in Israel’s planes and tanks. Regarding collaboration with Israel, he was reportedly fully aware of the collaboration between Israel and Iran at the time, especially in the military and security realm.
Dr. Tzvi Duriel, Israel’s ambassador to Iran, wrote in a report on August 29, 1967, “We have established a close and friendly partnership with significant practical benefit between the IDF and Israeli security services and their Iranian counterparts, with joint execution of projects and missions of national importance and regular mutual visits of the leaders of the security services and their senior officials. Various security problems vital to Israel have been solved through close collaboration with the Iranians and with their help. The military attaché is recognized by the Iranian general staff and foreign ministry and maintains extensive ties with the Iranian army, and has dealt with an impressive list of issues, including some of national importance, and enjoys special favor in Iranian military circles that is unmatched by any other military delegation there. Advanced negotiations were conducted concerning the purchase of Israeli products and programs with a price tag of millions of dollars…. The Israeli chiefs of staff and the head of the security services met with the Shah several times…. The Iranian army considers the IDF and the security services its allies in international dealings and professional matters…. Colonel Nimrodi, the IDF attaché, was the hero of the day in military circles.”
According to a telegram sent by Ambassador Ezri to the director-general of the Ministry of Defense in August 1972, the Shas’s government was involved in negotiations for the purchase of refueling planes from Israel. A report prepared by the Foreign Ministry on October 29 of that year about Israel’s military exports to Iran reveals that IMI Systems sold military equipment with a total value of 20.9 million to Iran between 1968 and 1972, Israel Aerospace Industry sold an additional 1.3 million dollars’ worth of equipment, Soltam sold mortars with a total value of 16.9 million dollars, Motorola’s sales totaled 12 million dollars, Tadiran made 11.3 million dollars in sales and set up a radio equipment factory in Iran, and the Ministry of Defense made $700,000 in sales.
A Unified Front Against Communism
On June 28, 1973, the deputy overseer of foreign exchanges in the Treasury wrote to the deputy director-general of the Defense Ministry’s exports division, “Manufacturing units of the IDF and Defense Ministry, the aviation industry, Tadiran, Motorola, and others who market their services and products to the Iranian public, the Iranian defense ministry, and similar government bodies have recently increased their activities in Iran. There is a broad range of activity, from the supply of military equipment and electronic communications devices manufactured in Israel to the export of systems for manufacturing and assembling these devices on the spot, as well as training, surveys, planning, and construction, and the assembly and maintenance of installations on a contractor basis. Based on the information brought to our attention, we have the impression that the spheres of activity of Israeli entities are sometimes similar and perhaps even overlapping.”
Iranian police were trained at the Motorola facility in Israel to operate communications equipment, but according to a telegram sent by A. Levin of the Israeli mission in Tehran to the Foreign Ministry on July 2, 1975, the Iranians asked for “full training in Israeli police facilities.” Levin recommended acceding to the request, and he was informed by the Foreign Ministry that “the Israel Police Force agrees to take the course for Iranian liaison officers under its responsibility and auspices,” and that the theory portion of the course would include tours of police facilities.
Relations between Israel and Iran existed at the highest levels of government. Prime Minister Golda Meir met with the Shah in 1972, and a report on May 19 stated that “the Shah feels that the relationships and partnership between the countries fighting Communism must be strengthened: Persia, Israel, Turkey, and Ethiopia.” Two years later, after Meir had resigned and was succeeded by Yitzchok Rabin, he visited Iran as well. According to a telegram dated December 8, 1974, Rabin met with the head of Iran’s security services at that time.
The Beginning of the End: Israel Predicts the Shah’s Fall
During those years, Israeli officials began to sense that the Shah’s regime was not stable. In a report prepared by the Foreign Ministry on September 11, 1972, shortly after Prime Minister Golda Meir visited Tehran, the ministry stated, “Social unrest is evident in the turmoil among students and intellectuals. The regime’s stability is maintained through police intervention.” Four years later, in June 1976, the Israelis recognized that the Shah’s regime was in dire straits. A telegram sent by the Israeli ambassador to Tehran at the time, Uri Lubrani, stated that the Shah’s liberalization policies, which included stripping SAVAK of some of its powers, had “led opposition elements that had been dormant or underground to take advantage of the situation, to begin to lift their heads, and to express opposition to the regime in various ways and in public.” This forced the Shah to restore some of SAVAK’s powers in an effort to regain control of the situation.
Ambassador Lubrani added, “Many people in Iran today feel that a rapid process has begun that will undermine the status of the Shah, a process that is irreversible and that will ultimately lead to his downfall and to a drastic change in the nature of governance in Iran. It is very difficult to estimate how long this will take, but my personal projection, which is not based on any objective facts, is that it will be approximately five years. There is no answer to the question of who or what will take the place of the current regime. It is reasonable to assume that the monarchy will end and, at least in the initial stages, will be replaced by military rule. The big question is who will lead them and what orientation he will have.”
Regarding the ramifications for Israel, Ambassador Lubrani wrote, “The implications for Israeli-Iranian relations of the new situation that will be created in this state, in the event that the Shah is deposed, are very severe. The Shah’s current regime, under the conditions that exist today, will be viewed as the most favorable government for Israel that could possibly exist in Iran. According to our best assessment, any change in this government will be to the detriment of our relations with this country.” Lubrani noted that Israel was engaged in significant activities in Iran at the time, including “a system of relations concerning the supply of oil from Iran, both as an independent supply and to feed into the Eilat-Ashkelon pipeline, and projects related to security. In addition, security agreements that were recently signed create an Israeli commitment to Iran in sensitive areas, along with financial commitments on Iran’s part, which have significance for our national economy.”
As time went on, Israeli officials grew increasingly concerned about the fate of the Shah’s regime. Two years later, on August 14, 1978, Ambassador Lubrani sent a telegram to the Foreign Ministry in Yerushalayim expressing his grim predictions for the Shah’s future. Lubrani had met with Deputy Police Commissioner Jafari, who told him that he did not anticipate difficulties maintaining law and order in the short term, and he believed that the military regime would be able to contend with any attempt at rebellion. At the same time, he believed that the situation could not continue endlessly, and if the government did not implement far-reaching measures to change the system of governance and its priorities, the Shah’s regime would collapse. Jafari believed that the Shah was oblivious to the true threat facing his regime. He also criticized the director of SAVAK for failing to introduce changes into the system, which had become despised by the people over the years. Jafari claimed that it had been a mistake for the army to be involved in its activities and that the military’s involvement had caused significant psychological damage. Pointing out the special relations he had maintained with Israel, he promised to help whenever the need arose, as he had always done.
The Last Hope: A Military Regime
A month and a half later, on September 28, Lubrani reported to the Foreign Ministry that he had met with the Shah in the wake of the massive demonstrations against his regime. During the meeting, the Shah repeated his claims that the communists were behind those demonstrations. The Shah asked Lubrani to identify his contacts in the Iranian government, and the ambassador replied, “On political matters, I have always acted either through the head of SAVAK, through the royal court minister, or through Tufanian [the deputy minister of defense].” Lubrani concluded his report, “I have a distressing impression of the Shah. He is not the same man with whom we were familiar. He appeared distant, occasionally resorting to a vacant stare. There is no question that this man has experienced a nightmare from which he has yet to recover. He is filled with fear and is not confident about his future. What is most worrying is the sense that he seems to be making peace with his fate. I did not detect any determination to take control of the situation and to change it. Nevertheless, I will add that it is possible that I found the Shah in a temporary state of dejection.”
Israel did not want to lose its foothold in Iran under any circumstances. If the Shah were to be removed from power, the Israelis hoped that a military regime would take his place that would be interested in maintaining friendly relations with the Israelis. In a telegram dated December 30, 1978, Yael Vered, then the director of the Middle East Department of the Foreign Ministry, wrote that the best option for the State of Israel would be “extreme rigidity on the part of the army and the establishment of a genuine military regime and government, whether it comes through deliberate action of the army, a military coup, or the tacit consent of the Shah.”
On January 4, 1979, in a final effort to restore calm, the Shah appointed Shapour Bakhtiar to the post of prime minister of Iran. However, Israel entertained no illusions about Bakhtiar’s actual ability to rule. Four days later, Vered sent a telegram to Israeli missions throughout the world, noting that Bakhtiar’s government had no support from the public and that its stability was in jeopardy. She wrote that the Shah and Bakhtiar had reached an agreement about the former leaving the country on “vacation,” but the duration of his absence and the question of who would decide when he should return were undetermined. That uncertainty, she added, might lead to crises in the future. “The Shah continues to represent Iranian unity, and the army’s loyalty to him even today, despite a number of cracks, is indisputable.” Vered projected that if Khomeini and his supporters seized power, Iran would sever its relations with Israel. However, she continued to hope that the army would take control of the situation. “Iran will be run by another form of the current government or an army that is more convenient and reasonable,” she predicted, “and Israel’s presence is likely to continue, perhaps under a lower profile.” Nevertheless, Vered’s hopes were dashed when the Shah fled Iran on January 16.
About a week after Khomeini returned from exile to Iran, on February 11, Israeli decided to evacuate its representatives who remained in Tehran, especially Ambassador Yosef Harmelin. At the same time, the Israeli government decided to look into the possibility of leaving a representative in the country, to avoid completely severing its ties with the new regime. “The foreign minister has instructed the director-general, after the Mossad gave notice for our people to evacuate, to examine the possibility of leaving a person with a diplomatic appointment behind to avoid cutting the cord,” a communiqué stated. “Similarly, there will be no official announcement of our departure. Harmelin will leave, because if he is imprisoned, he will be in mortal danger, especially since he is a former director of the Shin Bet.”
The Masses Brought Down a Regime
Israel still hadn’t lost hope for a positive relationship with the new regime in Iran. Three days later, Foreign Minister Moshe Dayan met with the Japanese ambassador to Israel. A report sent to the Israeli embassy in Tokyo stated that Dayan told the Japanese diplomat, “The current state of events in Iran is not final; it is a transition to a new period. There is concern that the influence of radicals will increase, and in addition to the religious changes, xenophobia will spread.” Nevertheless, Dayan added, Iran would still need foreign technicians to operate the sophisticated weapons it possessed, especially after the Americans departed. Dayan expressed his concern for the fate of the Jewish community in Iran and said, “There is room for worry about the effects of these events in Iran on other countries in the region, such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Sudan, and Morocco, where civil rights are likewise not respected.”
On the same day, Dayan spoke with Secretary of Defense Harold Brown of the United States. According to the protocols of their conversation, Brown told him, “The United States does not feel that it is to blame for what happened to the Shah. The Shah’s failure was that he did not develop a managerial class beneath him who would bear part of the responsibility along with him. If everything in the country was in his hands, then the mistakes were his as well. There was also a problem of corruption. The revolution in Iran reached the masses. There is a strong sense of nationalism. We must hope that the Iranians will understand the main issues in their national interests and will act accordingly.”
Beyond the concerns about the loss of Israel’s ties to Iran, there were other worries in Israel as well, which were no less severe. Of great concern was the prospect that masses elsewhere in the Middle East might choose to replicate the revolution in Iran and overthrow their own regimes. According to the protocols of a meeting of deputy directors-general held on the same day that Dayan spoke with Brown, Pinchos Eliav, the director of political research in the Foreign Ministry, opined, “The serious problem here is that the social, economic, and political character of this revolution has shown that the street and the masses have the ability to topple a regime that possesses tanks, modern weapons, and an air force. All of these things faced a street that was nothing but a street, although Khomeini may have had some agents within it and a bit of communist intervention. With incitement and ideology, they succeeded in defeating the regime. I believe that is a sign of the danger facing all the regimes in this region, including the most radical ones.”
Israel and America have never taken responsibility for their ongoing support of the Shah’s dictatorial regime and the aid they provided him in crushing the left and the progressive elements in Iran. But their actions made a decisive contribution to the establishment of the ayatollahs’ dictatorship.
Israel and Iran in the 1970s
As you can see, relations between Israel and Iran were very close in those days, as evidenced by the arms deals, the training of the Kurdish underground in Tehran, and the daily flights between Tehran and Tel Aviv. Former military attaches and embassy staff describe a period of fruitful collaboration with the Iranian government, long before the country was considered Israel’s foremost enemy.
Chaim Shiloach, who served as the security officer in the Israeli embassy in Tehran, was one of the last Israelis to flee Iran during the revolution 46 years ago. “In November 1978, a security advisor for the Shin Bet arrived in Tehran for a visit,” he related in a conversation with this correspondent. “I brought him to all the Israeli facilities in the city—the El Al office, the school, the embassy, and the Jewish Agency’s headquarters. At that time, there was an El Al flight from Iran to Israel every morning. He boarded a flight home on the 19th of the month. The plane took off at 10:00 in the morning, and the violence began at 11:00. We called that day Lag Ba’omer, since anyone who stood on a rooftop could see fires blazing in every place that was identified with the West. Masses of protestors broke into the offices of El Al and the Jewish Agency. They tried to break into the school as well, but they were not successful. We fled for our lives, and it was a miracle that we managed to return to Israel.”
The Hilton in Iran
Against the backdrop of Israel’s attacks on Iran today, which may well herald the end of the Islamic Republic, Shiloach turned back the clock to the days of the republic’s birth. For over 20 years, he related, from the 1950s until the late 1970s, Iran and Israel maintained strong economic, security, and diplomatic ties. Toward the end of the 1950s and the early 1960s, the relationship between the two countries began to grow closer, a relationship that Israel maintained with the monarchy of Iran, ruled by Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, under the Shah’s final days in power.
In public settings, the Shah was relatively critical of Israel, especially after the Six Day War. Nevertheless, he continued to maintain commercial, intelligence, and military relations with the Jewish state, partly due to the wide range of overlapping interests that the two countries shared. One of their common concerns was the regime of President Nasser in Egypt, who despised the Iranian Shah. The two countries also shared fears about the ambitions of the Soviet Union, which had a long, bloody history of conflict with the Persian nation.
At that time, Iran and Israel collaborated in a number of areas: oil, commerce, security, agriculture, technology, and real estate and infrastructure projects. Professor Meir Litvak, the head of the Iranian studies department at Tel Aviv University, told the Yated this week, “From Israel’s perspective, Iran played a key role in the alliance of the periphery conceived by Ben Gurion in the 1950s, which was intended to bypass the circle of hostile Arab states that surrounded Israel in those days. In accordance with this doctrine, Israel helped Iran train its army, sold it military equipment, and even helped establish the SAVAK, Iran’s secret police,” Litvak explained. “Israel also provided broad aid to Iran in the areas of agriculture and regional development, while Iran was Israel’s main oil provider since the 1950s. Iran frequently sold oil to Israel above the market price, which was possible because no one else wanted to sell to us at all.
“In those days,” Professor Litvak added, “many Israelis went to Iran to teach agricultural techniques. In addition, Israeli companies such as Rafael and Tadiran exported large quantities of goods to Iran. There were Israeli factories that sold hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of merchandise to Iran.”
One noteworthy joint project between the two countries was the Eilat-Ashkelon Pipeline, which was established in 1968 as a joint venture. To this day, there is a legal dispute between the two countries over Iran’s portion of the profits accumulated by the company in recent decades.
In the 1950s, Iran began exporting oil to Israel by tankers that traveled to Eilat. A pipeline was erected there that reached Be’er Sheva and was later expanded to Haifa. In 1965, Israel sought to expand its partnership and to make it possible for Iran to export oil through Israel via a route that bypassed the Suez Canal. After negotiations spearheaded by Golda Meir, who served as foreign minister at the time and even visited Iran, an equal partnership was established to advance the project between the Israeli government and the Israeli fuel companies Paz, Sonol, and Delek, and Iran’s national oil company. For that purpose, several shell companies were established under joint Israeli and Iranian ownership. The pipeline still operates today under an order of confidentiality that prohibits the publication of almost any information about the company’s operations. In fact, the Knesset only recently approved a new, more lenient version of the order, which makes oversight possible on matters pertaining to environmental protection, safety, planning and construction, and the company’s management practices.
During the two months before Khomeini came to power after the Iranian Revolution, Iran’s national oil company stopped selling oil under the partnership but refused to dismantle it officially, which led it to be defined as an inactive partner.
Another Israeli company that was extensively active in Iran in those years was the construction company Solel Boneh, which was responsible for building hotels—including the Hilton in Tehran—as well as residential neighborhoods for Americans in Esfahan, the city where Israel attacked an air force base last week, and hundreds of additional housing units.
Solel Boneh wasn’t the only company involved in the construction of buildings and critical infrastructure in the heart of Iran. On November 8, 2000, it was reported that Iranian representatives had contracted the Israeli Ministry of Infrastructure via a German businessman and had asked to receive the maps of Tehran’s sewer system, which was designed and constructed by an Israeli state-owned company in the 1970s.
“The Iranian government is interested in renovating the old, rundown sewer system in the city, but without the original plans, which include the details of future developments, it will have to rebuild the large, expensive system from scratch in its entirety,” the report noted, adding that the Ministry of Infrastructure had rejected the request “due to the sensitivity of the matter.”
Despite the extensive collaboration between the countries, their shared interests did not endure. As soon as the Shah’s government fell in 1979, just before Iran became the Islamic Republic of Iran under the leadership of Ayatollah Khomeini, the relations between Israel and Iran were severed instantly—and the rest is history.
*****
Looking Ahead to the Day After—The Best Places to Visit in Iran
When its tyrannical government collapses and Iran becomes open to visitors again, we can finally be exposed to one of the most beautiful countries in the world, with a rich assortment of connections to the history of the Jewish people. Iran is home to the gravesites of Mordechai and Esther, a large number of ancient shuls and cities, and breathtaking palaces, deserts, and islands.
When the first Jewish tour group arrives in Iran, a country that has been steeped in hatred for the Jews for so many years, this is what their itinerary might look like.
Iran is a land with glorious history, colorful cities, beautiful heritage sites, and breathtaking panoramas. In recent years, it has stood on the brink of historic change. The ongoing war between Israel and Iran may seem bleak, but there is also hope—that on the day after the ayatollahs’ regime collapses, when the borders open, freedom will return and Jews will once again be able to visit a country with great historic significance for us.
Persepolis: The Heart of Ancient Persia
Persepolis, the ceremonial capital of the Achaemenid Empire, is more than an archaeological site. It is a symbol of the cultural and historical power of the Persian people. The city was built by Darius I in the year 518 BCE and served as the empire’s ceremonial and administrative capital. It was sacked by Alexander the Great in the year 330 BCE, but its impressive ruins, including powerful columns, intricate engravings, and Akkadian inscriptions, still exist today.
Naqsh-e Jahan Square
Dating back to the 16th or 17th century, this massive square was built by the Shah Abbas the Great during the golden period of the Safavid dynasty. Featuring ornate buildings, an active bazaar, and the Ali Qapu palace, the square previously served as the commercial, religious, and political center of the city of Esfahan. The square represents the architectural and cultural splendor of Iran in the pre-modern period, and is a bustling tourist attraction today.
The Golestan Palace
The Golestan Palace is one of the last relics of Tehran in the classical era. Built in the 16th century, it was renovated in the 19th century and became the main palace of the Qajar dynasty. The palace combines European and Middle Eastern styles, featuring crystal mirrors, hand-painted tiles, and idyllic gardens nestled in the heart of the capital city of Iran. The palace has been the site of coronation ceremonies and momentous meetings, and it may yet be the site of peace visits from Israel in the future.
The Kaluts Desert
The Kaluts Desert is located in the southeastern section of the Lut Desert, which has been declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site. It is considered one of the hottest and driest places in the world, but it features a mesmerizing landscape of boulders, sand dunes, and natural formations created by the wind over millennia. It is a site that symbolizes the might of nature in Iran, and one can hope that the day will come soon when Jews will be able to experience it for themselves.
Badab-e Surt
One of Iran’s geological wonders is Badab-e Surt, a formation of colorful travertine terraces created by the flow of mineral-rich water over thousands of years. It has been declared a natural heritage site by Iran and is viewed as the Iranian version of Turkey’s Pamukkale. The shades of red, orange, and turquoise shift with the seasons, making it a breathtaking spot for photographers.
Ali Sadr Cave
This subterranean water cave spans dozens of kilometers and is one of the largest such natural structures in the world. It was rediscovered in the 1960s, but it was known to the inhabitants of this area in ancient times as well. The cave can be traversed by rafts that navigate between stalactites and stalagmites, in surroundings that seem like something out of a fairy tale. It is a vibrant testament to the natural wonders hidden beneath the surface of the Iranian soil.
The Shevi Waterfall
The highest waterfall in Iran, with a height of 85 meters, is located in the heart of a mountainous region in Khuzestan Province. Fed by a natural spring, the waterfall flows throughout the year. It is considered one of the most impressive natural sites in the country, but few people outside Iran are familiar with it. After the fall of Khomeini’s regime, it may well become one of the first stops for international tour groups.
Of course, one cannot help but longingly mention the series of historic Jewish sites in the country as well:
The Tomb of Mulla Shraga in Yazd
Mulla Or Shraga was born in the early 18th century in Iran and served as a mekubal, dayan, and spiritual guide to the Jews of Persia. He learned both the revealed and the hidden portions of the Torah and served as a mohel, shochet, bodek, and dayan in Yazd. His reputation spread through both the Jewish and Muslim communities and he earned the title mullah. Both Jews and non-Jews frequently davened at his gravesite on the outskirts of the city. The Baal Shem Tov, who never met him in person, once said, “I have a close friend far away. His name is Rav Or Shraga.”
The Tomb of Doniel
Doniel Hanovi is buried in Susa (Shush), in southwestern Iran. Sefer Doniel describes a vision that he experienced in the city of Shushan: “I saw in my vision, and as I saw it, I was in Shushan the capital, which is in the province of Eilam. I saw in my vision that I was beside the river Ulai.” The pesukim do not specify the location of Doniel’s death, but later traditions identify his burial place in the city of Shushan.
The Burial Place of Chananya, Mishoel, and Azariah
Fifty kilometers west of Tehran, in Qazvin, is a site traditionally associated with the burial place of Chananya, Mishoel, and Azariah. It is considered a holy site to Muslims as well, and the kevorim are covered and obscured from view. It is a massive, magnificent complex, perhaps one of the most breathtaking in the entirety of Iran, with special inscriptions and engravings adorning the exterior walls. Beautiful water fountains are located adjacent to the building, along with breathtaking flowers. The internal walls are decorated with luxurious tiles, the floors are covered with magnificent carpets, and massive chandeliers hang from the ceiling. There is a large hall inside the building, which contains the tombstones marking the three ancient graves and is similar to Meoras Hamachpeilah. The graves are located in an underground chamber, with large, ornate tombstones above them, surrounded by green fences decorated with gold embellishments. It is a magnificent site that leaves visitors awed and amazed.
The Tombstone of the Novi Chabakuk in Tuyserkan, Iran
Chabakuk was one of the nevi’im who prophesied for the Jewish people during the era of the first Bais Hamikdosh. His nevuos can be found in Sefer Chabakuk, which is three perakim in length. In 1960, Iran produced a commemorative stamp with an image of his tomb.
The Tombs of Mordechai and Esther in Hamadan
Some believe that Mordechai and Esther are buried in a grave in Hamadan beneath a brick dome fifteen meters high. This is a pilgrimage site of great significance to the Jews of Iran and is considered one of the holiest sites for local Jews.
The Ezra Yaghoub Shul in Tehran
One of the most ancient shuls in Tehran, the Ezra Yaghoub shul was built in the years 1894 and 1895, during the Qajar Pahlavi period. Located in the old Jewish Quarter of Tehran (Oudlajan), the shul was restored and formerly served a flourishing community. Today, it is used occasionally for special events.
The Molla Hanina Shul in Tehran
Founded in the late 19th century in Oudlajan, the Molla Hanina shul was a center for communal events and served for a period of time as a hospital and medical clinic. It is one of the smallest shuls in Iran but has great historical significance.
The Haim Shul of Tehran
Built in 1913 on 30th Tir Street, the Haim Shul is open today on Shabbosos and Yomim Tovim and is located near other shuls in the Jewish quarter. Today, it preserves the memory of the community from the period before the revolution.
