U.S. foreign policy: Iran Hostage Crisis - Research Paper Example

?US Foreign Policy: Iran Hostage Crisis Iran hostage crisis is the notion given to the diplomatic crisis between Iran and United s in 1979, when52 American citizens who were working as diplomats in the American Embassy in Tehran were held hostage for 444 days. The Iranian government of that time formed after the Iranian Revolution backed an effort made by Islamist armed students and militants to take over the embassy. The incident is reported as the greatest failure of diplomatic ties between two countries; Iran violated the internationally accepted and acclaimed law of diplomatic immunity, a very serious crime in International Relations, whereas United States took the option of military operation after the negotiation attempts failed. The Operation Eagle Claw initiated by American administration failed to bring any positive outcome and resulted in further deterioration of the relations between the two countries. The issue was resolved after intervention from a number of countries and peace keeping agencies and the hostages were released after the signing of Algiers Accords in Algeria on 19 January 1981, 444 days after the attack on the Embassy by the Iranian militants and students. United States ended its diplomatic relations with Iran in April 1980 and United States does not have an Embassy in Iran ever since. The various official procedures are carried out through embassies of other countries. The United States interests are carried out through the Swiss Embassy in Iran whereas the Iranian official proceedings with the United States are carried out through the Pakistani Embassy in Washington D.C. The incident marked a long lasting hatred between the people of the two countries. Many in Iran are still proud of the incidents during the hostage crisis and consider it as a revenge of the United States intervention in Iran during the coup against the democratically elected government of Prime Minister Mosaddeq to restore Shah in as the leader of Iran. A large majority of Iranians also consider it as an incident which helped the Iranian revolution in survival because they believe that the United States administration was not happy about the Islamic revolution in Iran and was planning another coup against the Supreme Leader and the revolution. International relations experts and political analyst see the whole crisis as a violation of international law by Iran but they also consider the policies adopted by President Carter a reason behind the crisis to prolong. The Iranian hostage crisis did not take place on its own; there is a long series of events associated with it. The incidents which lead to Iran Hostage Crisis can be traced in the US foreign policy towards Iran during the years before the Iranian revolution.1 Background Events United States administration had a strong alliance with the Shah of Iran and the CIA with the help of MI6 overthrew the democratically elected government of Iran in 1953 to restore Shah. Therefore, an anti-American sentiment was already present in the Iranian people. Moreover, United States continued to support Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, the Shah of Iran and failed to consider the deteriorating popularity of the Shah in Iran. Shah was involved in a number of human rights violations and his rule was called a brutally repressive regime by many human rights agencies. It was an evident fact that Shah was able to prolong his rule because of the unflinching support of the United States. That is why Iranians held United States equally responsible for the oppressive actions taken against them as the Shah. His visit to the United States in 1977 was considered as an effort by the Shah to suppress the increasing cries of revolution in the country and thousands of Iranians protested against his visit. The US administration completely ignored the Iranian demonstrations against the Shah, which further enraged the people.2 The efforts to overthrow Shah’s American backed regime gained intensity and his regime ended the next year with the Iranian Revolution. The President’s national security adviser of that time Zbignew Brzezinski was the architect of the idea that despite the growing protests against the Shah the US administration should continue supporting the Shah. He also argued that the United States army should assist Shah’s army in conducting a military crack down against the Iranian students, the activists of the Iranian revolution. On the other hand, the Secretary of State Cyrus Vance advised the President to initiate talks with Khomeini, the Supreme Leader and the motivator of the revolution. The ayatollah, the sign of God as referred by Iranians was in France at that time, thus it was the best chance for the US administration to instigate ties with him. President Carter discarded both opinions saying that he wanted to maintain a non-aligned stance towards the political situation in Iran. The President failed to realize that non-alignment was not an option at that time as the revolutionary Iranians saw the US administration as strong allies of the Shah regime. Carter had plans to continue with the Truman doctrine in which Iran and Saudi Arabia were promised security by the United States for ensuring US hold in the region.3 Carter is believed to lack the political wisdom which could tell him that the situation in Iran was not in Shah’s control anymore and it was time that United States had to decide between the two parties of the revolt. Siding with Shah was unjustified in many ways, the United States commitment to ensure the protection of human rights under the UN charter barred the President from siding with the Shah in conducting the military crackdown against the Iranian revolutionists; siding with Shah was also not feasible because if not then, Shah was destined to be thrown out in the coming years. Carter was not willing to give preference to Khomeini because he did not want to be known as the president who lost Iran as there was little hope of good relations with the future Islamist leadership of Iran. Under these circumstances, a clear cut message was conveyed to the Iranians that the United States administration was with standing with the Shah irrespective of the popular sentiment against them and the gross human rights violations committed by him. Such a stance is certainly against the aspirations of not only the Iranians but also a large majority of Americans as well and Carter’s handling of Iran’s situation was the core reason behind his defeat in the Presidential elections of 1980.4 The End of Shah By the end of 1978, Shah lost last bits of influence in Iran and imposed martial law. During martial law Shah made a desperate effort to restore his image among the Iranian people. He promised to make up for his past mistakes and told the Iranians that he will bring democracy back to the country by conducting free and fair elections. The United States government did not back Shah’s decision to impose martial law, however the promises made by Shah during the martial law received positive response from the US authorities. The Iranians however were not willing to accept Shah this time and the nation broke into protests and demonstrations. Armed students and revolutionary activists killed Shah’s army personnels and destroyed government property. Ultimately, the Shah was forced to leave Iran which was immediately followed by Ayatollah’s arrival in Tehran from Paris. Carter’s response to the situation was very astonishing and dismal. He ordered American F-16s to fly to Saudi Arabia as a gesture to ensure United States hold of the region however the decision to keep the fighter jets unarmed leaked out and greatly affected United State’s image in the global community. The revolutionists in Iran also received the notion that the United States administration does not have a positive role to play in the Iranian scenario. The revolutionary activists showed their anti- American sentiments by attacking the American embassy in Tehran days after the beginning of Ayatollah’s reign. However the new Iranian government showed respect towards America and intervened against the attackers, restoring the embassy within hours. Khomeini also apologized for the attack, a gesture which depicted that he wanted to have good relations with the United States despite the past conflicts. After fleeing from Iran Shah fell seriously ill and was diagnosed with Cancer. He again sought help from the US administration and wanted to get his disease treated in the United States. Henry Kissinger and David Rockefeller had been involved in business with the Shah thus they strongly favored Shah’s arrival in the United States and advised Carter to do so. Judging from the Islamist sentiment in Iran that an alliance with Khomeini was not possible, Vance also diverted from his stance and asked the President to allow Shah into the country. The United States ambassador to Tehran at that time was continuously reporting the incidents in Iran and had repeatedly mentioned that the public and the revolutionist had strong anti-American sentiments and any ambitious step taken by the US administration at that time could risk the lives of Americans residing in Iran. Moreover the ambassador also reported that the Shah expected that he will be returned to Iran with the help of United States following the 1953 pattern.5 The Biggest Mistake Carter was still of the opinion that Shah could be used for restoring American influence in Iran. And with all his aides supporting Shah’s arrival in the United States the President made his mind up. Despite the recurring warnings from the ambassador in Tehran, Shah was allowed to land on American soil on October 22, 1979. Threats were issued to the American citizens in Iran and on November 4, the revolutionary activists and Islamist students took over the American Embassy with the diplomatic staff held as hostage. The immediate steps which were taken by the American government included the halting of oil imports from Iran, expelling many Iranians living in the United States and freezing of Iranian government assets worldwide. Meanwhile Afghanistan, a neighboring country of Iran was attacked by the Soviet forces for suppressing the Islamic revolution against the Marxist government of Afghanistan. This put United States into more confusion and many American’s asked for military action against Iran to free the hostages. The Carter administration, particularly the president himself had already lost the support of the public. In order to counter the criticism against him, President Carter took another wrong decision and ordered a military action to be taken against Iran. The implementation of the rescue mission Operation Eagle Claw was also very ill-planned and was a big failure with the American forces suffering destroyed equipment as well as loss of life.6 The Negotiations The death of Shah in July 1980 and Iraq’s invasion of Iran led the Ayatollah to enter into negotiations with the United States. However the two countries were not ready to directly conduct talks, therefore Algeria was involved as a mediator. The negotiations were a success and the hostages were ultimately released after a captivity of 444 days. The new Iranian government received the much needed freezed 8 million dollar because it was facing immense economic crisis and also a newly waged war by Iraq. The crisis had strong implications on the domestic politics of the United States. Carter lost his presidency to California governor Ronald Reagan who immediately sought to restore the US influence all over the world. Reagan made Islamic Nationalism and its implications the central element of US Foreign Policy.7 Conclusion Critically analysing, the Iran Hostage Crisis was a big failure of the US foreign policy under the Carter administration. The US stance towards the situation in Iran should have been changed years back with the decreasing popularity of the Shah and the increasing cries of revolution. Carter continued to make wrong decisions throughout the crisis days as well. Another opportunity was provided by Khomeini when he apologized for the initial attack on the embassy. Allowing Shah to enter United States was perhaps the biggest mistake in the series of blunders that were committed by the Carter administration. The Hostage Crisis ended as soon as the US citizens were released from captivity however the whole scenario had long-lasting effects. From the very first day, Iranian government was turned against the United States and the current nuclear crisis in Iran can be attributed to the wrong decisions taken in the past. Bibliography Calvocressi, Peter. World Politics: 1945-2000. Pearson Education, 2001. Campbell, Ballard. Disasters, Accidents, and Crises in American History. InfobasePublishing, 2010. Christopher, Warren, and Paul H. Kreisberg, eds. American Hostages in Iran: the Conduct of a Crisis. New Haven: Yale Univ Pr, 1985. Farber, David. Taken Hostage: the Iran Hostage Crisis and America's First Encounter with Radical Islam. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005. Harris, David. The Crisis: the President, the Prophet, and the Shah – 1979 and the Coming of Militant Islam. New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2004. Hodge, Carl, and Cathal Nolan. US Presidents and Foreign Policy. ABC-CLIO, 2007. Houghton, David Patrick. US Foreign Policy and the Iran Hostage Crisis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Read More