The Iranians woudn't had asked the Russians in, but Mossadegah might have - men do desperate things to hold onto power. Yes, I know about Iran and Russia, when I was in Georgia, they told me the reason they invited the Russians in three centuries ago was when the Persians invaded, they raped thousands of women then hamstring them so their shame would be public - at that point they decided Czarist Russia was the lesser of two evils.
Ho may have been a patriot, but he was also a die hard Communist, maybe if we had supported Vietnam against France after WWII he might of moderated, but I doubt it, Leninism Communism is more of a mafia cuilt than an ideology, b/c it justifies total rule by the party ("false consciousness" means the people can be ignored), and the leaders of the party are soon seduced by their total power. We also see this again and again in liberation movements, those who fight for liberation then feel entitled to rule without restrictions, see Mugabe et al. Ho was NOT Washington, who stepped away from power and respected the new Constitution.
European powers were imperialist, so were the Persians, Russians, Chinese, Mongols, Moghuls, Turks, Japanese, Zulus, any people with superior military technology or tactics for thousands of years. There is nothing unique about European imperialism, except that it was more efficient. The irony is those who criticize European Imperialism as uniquely evil do so using the intellectual tools of the European Enlightenment (so much for cultural relativity).
Zionism was about the return of a people to their ancient homes from which they were driven by Roman Imperialism (and before that Babylonian imperialism) - the closest genetic cousins to the Jews are the Palestinians - that is, the Jews are a Levant people who were displaced and chose to return to their homes, just a bit later than usual! Genetic studies have shown the East European Jews were probably the product of two streams of emigration, one out of Italy and the other out of Northern Iran. And a million Israelis are "Arab" Jews forced out of their countries after the establishment of Israel without compensation.
I don't consider North Africa to be "African", to me it's part of the Mediterranean, the Sahara was a barrier that limited genetic and cultural interaction with Africa, the Mediterranean on the other hand had thousands of years of trade routes, conquests, migrations, colonies, etc, from the Phoneticians, Greeks (and their colonies in what is now Southern Turkey), Carthaginians, Romans, Arabs, Norman Vikings, Ottomans, and so on.
History isn't a morality play where you can pick good and bad guys, it's far too complex. Britain colonized and exploited India, but India without the British would probably be an impoverished third world region with dozens of nation states constantly at war with each other - the British also brought a common language, infrastructure, ties with the world economy, but also sanitation and other measures that led to a population explosion. Was this good or bad? I'll let those living there decide. Was the East India Company better or worse than the local Caliphs and Kings in exploiting the local people? Was the partition inevitable (could Muslims live peaceably with idol worshipers? Or were fundamentalist uprisings inevitable?).