Israeli planning in the Shah's Iran: a forgotten episode

Abstract

In the 1970s, while the rest of the world was undergoing recession, vast economic growth in Iran, leading to fast urbanization, generated a growing international building market in which Israeli construction firms and architects also participated, benefiting from the good bilateral relationships at the time. To examine the experience of Israeli architects working in Iran and how it influenced their professional practice, this paper focuses on two projects planned and built simultaneously by Israeli teams. The Navy project was comprised of three massive housing estates and public amenities for the Iranian Navy's troops and families on the coast of the Persian Gulf. The Eskan Towers in Tehran was a complex of residential luxury towers and a commercial centre catering for the Iranian elite. Review of these cases indicates that national knowledge was not always the basis for transnational planning, and that the international arena itself became the source of knowledge and flow. In the Navy project, the architect derived his ideas from professional practices acquired back home, while in the Eskan Towers project the team was confronted with the free-market economy and a globalized practice.

Keywords:

• transnational architecture
• architectural knowledge
• Israel
• Iran
• globalization
• modernist urbanism
• market-led urbanism

Acknowledgements

We are grateful for the valuable material provided by our interviewees, especially by architects Dan Eytan and Moshe Bashan who shared with us their personal memories and archives. Special thanks to the anonymous reviewers for their useful and constructive comments.

Notes on contributors

Neta Feniger is a landscape architect and a PhD candidate in the Architecture Department at the Technion – Israel Institute of Technology. Her research focuses on the work of Israeli architects in Iran from the 1950s to the late 1970s, titled ‘Building a “New Middle East”: Israeli Architects in Iran’. A first paper from this research was published in The Journal of Architecture in 2013. Her Master degree thesis in architecture history was titled ‘Theory and Planning of the Public Open Space in Kauffmann's and Geddes’ Plans for Tel Aviv’ (2009). Her paper resulting from this work will appear in an upcoming book about the architect Richard Kauffman and the Zionist Project.

Rachel Kallus is an architect and planner, an associate professor of architecture and town planning at the Technion, Head of the Social Hub for Community and Housing. Her research concentrates on the socio-political production of the built environment and the formation of urban culture, focusing on ethno-nationally contested spaces, mainly in Israel/Palestine. In her work, she considers policy measures (planning) and physical manipulations (architecture) as they construct everyday life. Rachel is the author of numerous publications on socio-cultural aspects of the built environment and its production in academic journals and books. She co-edited Architecture Culture: Place, Representation, Body (Resling, 2005). Her current book project, titled The Poetic of Place in a Global World, is based on her research, funded by the Israel Science Foundation, on the architect/planner Artur Glikson in the context of post-WWII international development. Rachel received her Doctorate from the Technion, and holds a M.Arch. from MIT.

Notes

1. Ram, Iranophobia.

2. Parsi, Treacherous Alliance.

3. Ram, Iranophobia.

4. The White Revolution was the Shah's project of agrarian and land reform and his plan to modernize Iran's rural areas starting in 1962. See: Abrahamian, Iran Between Two Revolutions, 424–5.

5. Ram, Iranophobia. Also see documentary Before the Revolution directed by Dan Shadur.

6. See in Olds, Globalization and Urban Change, 18–19.

7. Shadur, Before the Revolution.

8. Interviewees for this research have said that they still meet socially their fellow colleagues from their time in Tehran, and as most of them are in the building market, they also keep professional relationships.

9. Ram, Iranophobia.

10. As Cody shows us, referring to the work of American companies worldwide does not mean that the private firms were detached from the state or were no longer part of state agenda. See: Cody, Exporting American Architecture 1870–2000. The Israeli case was similar in this aspect.

11. The Navy Project, for example, was intended to improve the bilateral relations with Iran, apart from its financial profit: ISA/RG130/MFA/3247/4, ISA/RG130/MFA/3247/2. Eskan was approved mostly for its economic viability: SA/RG130/MFA/3247/4.

12. Term used in: Cody, Exporting American Architecture 1870–2000. Cody joins others who see the work of architects in multidisciplinary planning teams, usually in big firms such as SOM or ARUP, as integral to practices of transnational planning. Also see: Larson, Behind the Postmodern Facade; Olds, Globalization and Urban Change; McNeill, The Global Architect.

13. See: Olds, Globalization and Urban Change, 6.

14. See: Waley, “From Modernist to Market Urbanism,” 209–35.

15. Ibid.

16. Few other luxury projects were planned in 1970s in Tehran by Israelis. Israelis planned few luxury hotels: the Hilton's second and third annexes, The Intercontinental, the Hyatt, and the Vanak hotel. The hotels were in different stages of planning and construction in January 1979. Besides Eskan, other residential luxury high-rises were Tehran Taj Project: 7 towers planned in Farazahd (only 3 were actually built, today they are located in the Shahrak-e Gharb neighbourhood on Hormozan Street). For a map of this plan, see Roloff, Iran, 357. A plan for a high-rise apartment building suburb in western Tehran, called Tehran West Community, was never implemented).

17. See: Olds, Globalization and Urban Change.

18. Avermaete, “Coda,” 475–7.

19. The research was confined to sources in Israel due to the current situation. The architect has saved much of his planning material, as did other engineers involved in the project. Another important source was the Israeli State Archive (ISA).

20. See, for example: Healey and Upton, Crossing Borders; King, Spaces of Global Cultures; Lu, Third World Modernism; Lu, “Travelling Urban Form,” 369–92; Nasr and Volait, “Introduction”, xi–xxxviii; Nedovic-Budic and Cavrić, “Waves of Planning,” 393–425; Stanek, “‘Second World's’ Architecture and Planning in the ‘Third World’.”

21. At the International Housing Seminar in Israel, October 1959, the planning committee agreed that Israel has specialized knowledge due to the urgent need to house immigrants (ISA/RG130/MFA/2025/18).

22. Israeli architects worked in Latin America, South-East Asia, and Africa. On the Israeli development missions in the new African nations see: Levey, Israel in Africa 1956–1976; Neuberger, Israel's Relations. On Israeli architecture in Africa, see: Ben-Asher Gitler, “Campus Architecture as Nation Building,” 113–40; Levin, “Exporting Architectural National Expertise,” 53–66; Yacobi, “The Architecture of Foreign Policy,” 35–54. On the work of Israeli architects in Latin America see: Kon, “A Menorah Etched in the Pampas.” [Hebrew].

23. Neuberger, Israel's Relations. In reality, this perception did not change the Israel situation in the UN council.

24. For example, architect Zalman Enav worked in Africa and other places; Domecrete – dome houses by architect Haim Heifetz and son, Raphael Heifetz, are found in Italy, South America, Iran, and other places.

25. Leading firms were Solel Boneh and Rassco – the two firms involved in the cases reviewed in this article.

26. e.g. the Meyer Brothers, Federman.

27. The Israeli Foreign Office created to offer technical assistance to ‘developing countries’. IPD was a government-owned firm intended for finding and maintaining planning work for Israelis worldwide.

28. At first, Israeli foreign policy was to export architectural knowledge to benefit diplomatic relations. This was proven ineffective when new nations in Africa that received such assistance joined the Arab League (mostly after 1967, but some even earlier). Israel continued to encourage professionals to work abroad, due to the shortage of work in Israel and as a way to increase the income of foreign money.

29. For example: Rabinow, “France in Morocco”; Home, “Town Planning and Garden Cities”; Wright, The Politics of Design; Celik, Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations.

30. The conference resulting in the book Urbanism: Exported or imported? represents this turn.

31. King, “Writing Transnational Planning Histories.”

32. Stanek, “‘Second World's’ Architecture and Planning in the ‘Third World’.”

33. Lu, Third World Modernism.

34. King, Spaces of Global Cultures; Nasr and Volait, “Introduction” See also: Wright, “Building Global Modernisms,” 124–34; Wharton, Building the Cold War; Cody, Exporting American Architecture.

35. Sometimes spelled Ghazvin.

36. Letter from Moshe Dayan, 6 September 1962. ISA/RG130/MFA/3435/10.

37. The plan for Qazvin was based on the Israeli plan for the Lachish region (see: Amiran, Lachish – Between Planning and Implantation [Hebrew] and Sharon, “Not Settlers but Settled” [Hebrew]) and was implemented in Iran by the same expert.

38. ISA/RG130/MFA/3435/10.

39. ISA/RG130/MFA/3435/10, ISA/RG130/MFA/1909/2, ISA/RG130/MFA/1909/14.

40. For example: Uri Even (interviewed 19 December 2011) worked as an engineer in water planning in Qazvin and created business connections that helped his new firm (ESI) receive a big residential high-rise project in Tehran in the 1970s.

41. Gilaad, “Israel-Iranian Relationship (1949–1979),” 251–6.

42. Cody, Exporting American Architecture 1870–2000.

43. The Plan Organization was a pseudo-housing and development ministry – see: Madanipour, “Urban Planning and Development,” 433–8. It encouraged Iranian partnerships with foreign companies. Sometimes it was also a way to disguise foreign involvement in projects; for instance, Iran did not want Rassco to be visible in the Gulf, especially as an Israeli company (ISA/RG130/MFA/3247/4).

44. Interview with Dan Eytan (16 March 2010).

45. According to Eytan, the staff ultimately numbered about 100 workers in teams for housing, public buildings, schools, kindergartens, etc.

46. The project in Kharg Island was much smaller and included mainly housing units.

47. Waley, “From Modernist to Market Urbanism,” 211.

48. Nitzan-Shiftan, “Seizing Locality in Jerusalem,” 231–55.

49. Eytan refers to the new towns built in the early years after the State's inauguration.

50. Interview in Haaretz, 20 July 2006 [Hebrew].

51. Interview with Dan Eytan (30 August 2010).

52. Karimi shows that government housing was not relating to the traditional way of living. See: Karimi, “Transition in Domestic Architecture,” 126–52. Eytan claims in his interview that the Navy Planning Office gave him instructions to plan for a family of four, though he knew from statistics that the average Iranian family is larger. When he asked about it, he was told that the Shah wanted to encourage smaller families like in the West.

53. Interview with Dan Eytan (30 August 2010).

54. Wright, “Global Ambition and Local Knowledge,” 221–54; Grigor, Building Iran; Curtis, Modern Architecture.

55. Interview with Dan Eytan (30 August 2010).

56. Isenstadt and Rizvi, “Modern Architecture in the Middle East,” 3–38; Wright, “Global Ambition and Local Knowledge,” 221–54.

57. See Givoni's work, for example: Givoni, Climate Consideration in Building.

58. Feniger and Kallus, “Building a ‘New Middle East’,” 381–401.

59. See Yizhar and Kallus, “Splitting Discourse,” 347–60.

60. See note 43.

61. Waley, “From Modernist to Market Urbanism,” 212.

62. Hall, Cities of Tomorrow, 343.

63. Karimi, “Transition in Domestic Architecture,” 152.

64. Mandinapour, “The Limits of Scientific Planning,” 485–504.

65. On the new class of upper-middle-class Iranians in Tehran, see: Abrahamian, Iran Between Two Revolutions, 432–3.

66. Olds, Globalization and Urban Change; King, Spaces of Global Cultures.

67. Diba, “Regional Report,” 20–5.

68. Abrahamian, Iran Between Two Revolutions, 438.

69. Solel Boneh built Eskan under the name of Reynolds Co., a subsidiary registered in the USA. Working under a different name was approved by the State of Israel. It is unclear why the Foundation asked Solel Boneh to use an ‘American firm’ for this project. However, all interviewees have affirmed that it was not a secret that they were working for an Israeli firm.

70. Interviewees claim that it was probably a fixed bid, typical of how things worked in Tehran at the time.

71. Solel Boneh is now Shikun u-Binuy ('housing and building' in Hebrew), owned by the Arison family. It still operates abroad and locally, see: http://en.shikunbinui.co.il/

72. More on the planning of Abadan, see: Crinson, “Abadan: Planning and Architecture,” 237–52. On the work of Solel Boneh in Abadan: Shenhav, The Arab Jews, 49–76.

73. See: Amir, Israel's Development Cooperation. Solel Boneh also worked extensively in Latin America, mostly in the 1970s and onward. See: Kon, “A Menorah Etched in the Pampas.”

74. The first of this three-annexe hotel was planned by the Iranian architect Heydar Ghiaï (http://www.ghiai.com), constructed by a Swedish firm (interview with David Yamin, 9 May 2012).

75. Interview with Gideon Nordman, the project's managerial engineer (3 January 2012).

76. Interview with Amira Galilee (19 May 2011).

77. Nathan Frenkel, Solel Boneh manager in Iran, remembered that when he brought door locks from the second-best firm in the world, but of equal quality, the Pahlavi Foundation found them unacceptable, demanding that he use the more expensive brand (interview 16 December 2010).

78. Interview with David Yamin (9 May 2012).

79. As in many other nations at the time, architecture in Iran was influenced by vernacular and traditional planning and design ideas. See for example: Ardalan et al., “Habitat Bill of Rights.” It was initiated by the Iranian ministry of Housing and Urban Development in 1974. These ideas, however, were not part of the clients’ demands in these two projects.

80. Wright, “Global Ambition and Local Knowledge,” 221–54.

81. David Yamin, AMY's representative in the project, explained (9 May 2012) that Pahlavi representatives said they wanted a building like others around the world, and were not looking for oriental decoration. Although we cannot affirm this statement with the Iranian client, the fact that the building was built with rectangular slabs can attest that ‘oriental’ looking elements were not desired.

82. Financing was through British banks, with Solel Boneh's manger negotiating conditions.

83. Interview with David Yamin (9 May 2012).

84. Moshe Bashan, the chief architect of the project, grew up in a kibbutz and hardly left Israel before going to Iran. His family remained in Haifa even when he worked in Tehran for about a year. Unlike other Israeli architects, he did not participate in the cosmopolitan lifestyle of Tehran. (Interview 16 February 2011).

85. Karimi, “Transition in Domestic Architecture,” 126–52.

86. Scott-Brown, “Learning from Pop,” 62.

87. King, Spaces of Global Cultures.

88. Easterling, Enduring Innocence; Jacobs, “The Geography of Big Things,” 1–27; McNeill, “Skyscraper Geography,” 41–55; McNeill, The Global Architect; Olds, Globalization and Urban Change.

89. McNeill, “Skyscraper Geography,” 41–55.

90. See: Larson, Behind the Postmodern Façade, 5.

91. Interview with Dan Eytan (30 August 2010).

92. Abrahmian, Iran Between Two Revolutions, 427.

93. Some ‘big name’ architects worked in Iran in the 1970s, including Kenzo Tange, I. M. Pei, and Aalto. See: Roloff, Iran: Elements of Destiny, 328.

94. In January 1979 the Shah was overthrown and Iran's relations with Israel were abolished.

95. See: Shalev, “Have Globalization and Liberalization,”121–55.

96. For example: Allweil, "Surprising Alliances,” 41–75.