Irdc: Cyrus Vance, US foreign minister during the formation and victory of Islamic revolution, mentions the reasons of the fall of Pahlavi dynasty in his diaries: "In my opinion, the fall of Shah was the cross section of conflict between the western modernization and social, economic and religous structures. The great amont of oil income after 1973 and Shah's decision to accelerate the process of Iran's industrialization and reinforce the military power, caused a lot of pressure in the society. The effect of the pressure on Iran's conservative patterns was destroying. Furthermore, the sudden pouring of wealth, the caused corruption and deep economic disarray.
I don't believe that the conflict between moderniry and traditions lead directly to the fall of Pahlavi family and settling a religous anti-imperialist regime in power. If Shah was aware of the fact that social and econimic modernization must come along with establishing democratic political Institute, He could have changed the path of tragedy. The governments of Ford and Nickson, neglected to motivate him to develop a symmetrical modernization plan, like Johnson had done, in order to respect his recent priorities.
Carter's government had started to support political modernization in Iran again, as well as economic and industrial modernization 8 years ago and there were already huge gaps in fundamentals of the social, economic and political structures of Iran.
Shah had become aware of the growing gaps between his modernization proceedings and the intrests of Iran's conservative society since the middle of 70's. When Carter came to power, Shah had already been searching for a solution for political problems. He believed in our support in opposition to those who disagreed with his plans for developing political participation. I believe that he initiated this plan because he felt the growing isolation of the Royal regime from political forces in Iran. Undoubtedly, he wanted us to consider him as a gracious progressive reformer. He was so sensetive about the image the West had of him as dictator who had gained power by suppression. He had made it clear that he had no objection to our serious commitment to Human Rights Policy, as long as it didn't harm Iran's security and political stability. He needed confirmation from the West, especially United States.
Source: Hard choices: Critical years in America's foreign policy: Cyrus Vance
Translated by: Roya Jalali