The US and Iran Conflict - Coursework Example

The US – Iran Conflict: Struggle for Power and Influence in the Middle East Brief History of the US – Iran Conflict The United s of American has not maintained any diplomatic relations with Iran since the infamous Iran Hostage crisis in 1979 when revolutionary Iranian students held hostage 52 Americans at the US Embassy in Tehran for more than a year. The incident drew widespread condemnation from the international community. After lengthy negotiations to include the intervention of the United Nations Security Council, an economic embargo against Iran, the demise of Shah Pavlavi and the declaration by many world leaders that it would not support Iran in its conflict with Iraq, the international drama was finally resolved just before the inauguration of US President Ronald W. Reagan. In 2001, George W. Bush became President of the USA. This was followed by another atrocious act of terrorism – the 9/11 attacks which resulted in an extreme shift in American international policy and the launching of the so-called “war on terror” by the Bush administration with Iran as one of the principal targets. After this dastardly deed by al-Qaeda fanatics, the US Government realized the need to strike back at the perpetrators to uphold global credibility of the US. They also saw the opportunity and the inevitability to advance their broader agenda, which required crushing anti-U.S. Islamic fundamentalism and forcefully dealing with obstacles to their global power and ambitions which included states like Iran and Iraq. In 2002, President Bush declared that Iran, along with North Korea and Iraq, made up an "axis of evil" for the reason that they sought weapons of mass destruction and supported terrorists (Shapiro, 2010). Ironically, the Iranian Government was said to have presented the United States an offer in 2003 to work together to capture terrorists, stabilize Iraq, resolve nuclear disputes, withdraw military support for Hezbollah and Hamas, and moderate its position on Israel, in exchange for the U.S. lifting of economic sanctions and warming up to Iran (Rosen, 2008). This diplomatic proposition was rejected by the Bush administration and not a few critics of the government claimed that it was a neglected chance that could have resulted into a prolonged armed confrontation between the two countries. In December of 2003, the US even sent humanitarian assistance to Iran after an earthquake killed more than 50,000 people in the city of Bam although President Bush denied that the US changed its policy towards Tehran. He insisted that the move to help Iran in the wake of that devastating earthquake did not indicate a change in its hard-line stance against the Iranians. In 2005, Bush revealed a significant change in policy towards Iran by supporting negotiations spearheaded by the European governments of France, the UK and Germany and offered economic incentives for the Islamic state to give up its alleged nuclear ambitions. He announced that the US would lift a decade-long block on Irans membership of the World Trade Organization, and objections to Tehran obtaining parts for commercial planes (BBC News, 2009). The claim made by Iran that it was successful in its uranium enhancement program has made the US even tougher and more explicit with its threats of pursuing military action against Iran. Rising Power in the Middle East One proven assumption is that the economic problems of Iran increased over the years while engaging a world power like the US in a protracted political and economic clash. Yet, it has quietly emerged as a budding power in the Middle East. For one, it occupies a strategic position in the Persian Gulf through which much of the worlds oil is shipped. Likewise, it has built up a nuclear program that Iranian leaders insist is for peaceful purposes. It supports clandestine activities of the Hamas in the Palestinian territories and Hezbollah in Lebanon through money and weaponry. The turbulent relation between the US and Iran has been highlighted by the recent Frontline account which highlighted the continuing confrontation between the two countries. In their report, Frontline scrutinized how U.S. efforts to install democracy in Iraq have served to strengthen Irans position as an emerging power in the Middle East. Frontline staffers managed to conduct interviews of Iranian hard-liners such as parliament leader Hamid Reza Hajibabaei, National Security Council member Mohammad Jafari and state newspaper editor Hossein Shariatmadari.   Indeed, this documentary gives some weight to arguments that attempts of the US to focus on their interference in Iraq have reinforced Irans capacity to fortify its foothold in the highly-contested region. The principal question now is how far has Iran gone in so far as being an upcoming threat in the Middle East? Iran along with other neighboring countries may well be on its way of filling the alleged power vacuum in the Middle East region. According to Nathan Gonzales, “Iran is poised to re-emerge as the powerhouse of the Middle East in the 21st century. Already taking on massive export and energy diversification projects and working to acquire a nuclear weapons arsenal, Iran is likely to attain the stature of regional power in the coming years, thanks in no small measure to the vacuum created by the chaos in Iraq, which for many years served as a counterweight to Iran in the region. Gonzalez illuminates the path toward a new approach to engagement with Iran. Only then can the United States reap the benefits of a new Middle East”. However, even if Iran may undeniably be the upcoming power in the Persian Gulf and the US is prepared to make an exodus, there is the likelihood that the US will not give way. The Iraqi Conflict In March of 2003, US and British forces invaded Iraq after the latter was found out to be storing weapons of mass destruction. This invasion eventually led to the capture and execution of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and the takeover by a new Iraqi government that had the support of the Bush administration. The US-led invasion of Iraq was preceded by strong lobbying by the United States and its allies to gain the mandate such as the one used during the Gulf War to ensure compliance with international law.  However, the UN Security Council did not grant said mandate and instead, it placed the responsibility on Iraq and stated that there would be serious consequences if Iraq did not comply with weapons inspections. Notwithstanding this pronouncement, the UN Security Council passéd a resolution that gave the US and its allies the authority to militarily enforce the mandate. The US-led invasion was a success, with the toppling of the Hussein regime accomplished relatively rapidly (Hodgin, 2010). Although, Iran adopted a low profile during the escalation of this armed conflict, the US military has already made several accusations that Iran has been secretly supplying arms to Iraqi militants who have been attacking American troops in Iraq. Since 2007, there has been an escalation of attacks against Americans in various parts of Iraq. What could have been Iran’s involvement in Iraq? The US has openly accused Iran of involvement in Iraq through the Quds Force, a special operations wing of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, arming Iraqi dissidents with explosively formed penetrators, or roadside bombs, as well as rocket-propelled grenades and Katyusha rockets. Iran has also reportedly sent more than two thousand religious students and scholars to the holy cities of Najaf and Karbala. One-third of them belong to Iranian intelligence and some are operatives sent to Shiite shrines to influence voters ahead of the election year. Likewise, Iran has emerged as one of Iraq’s largest trading partners, with Iranian exports to Iraq topping $1.8 billion  in 2006 (Beehner and Bruno, 2008). Some of Iran’s motives in its interference in Iraq could its desire to limit the influence and power of the US in the entire region, enhance Iran’s relationship with the present Iraqi government and perhaps to establish a formidable security buffer zone or first line of defense against a possible invasion by any external aggressor. The American Government has always endeavored to curb Iran’s meddling in the political and military affairs of Iraq but it has been very careful so as not to adversely affect the economic ties between the two countries. President Barack Obama who succeeded Bush at the White House made a landmark decision recently to end seven years of conflict and bloodshed in Iraq. He stated that there will be a gradual pullout of US troops with some troops remaining to assume support roles only until the end of 2011. This in effect is expected to pave the way for the return to normalcy in that country and can possibly reduce the tension between the US and Iran. Although, it is still too premature to make any conclusions, the nations involved can finally look forward to a semblance of peace in the years to come. Conclusion First, I agree that US efforts to install democracy in Iraq have only bolstered the interests of Iran. The pre-occupation of the US in the military occupation of Iraq gave Iran a lot of time to reconsolidate its forces, reorganize and formulate better strategies that will complement its objective of strengthening Iran’s foothold in the Middle East. Second, we all can look forward to a best-case scenario which is basically the gains that the US can make from the political point of view when President Obama declared that the war was finished. The US would be seen as a proponent of peace instead of being labeled as an instrument of war. The diplomacy factor will be highlighted as the US sets out on a new direction of working to gain economic prosperity and forge harmonious relations with its former adversaries. The worst-case scenario would be potential acts of terrorism that may be committed by hardliners and those who wish to derail the efforts of the Obama Administration to open its arms to everybody for the sake of world peace and understanding. One classic example is that despite the withdrawal of a big number of American troops in Iraq, terrorist attacks have been on the rise purportedly committed by radicals being supported by Iran. With regards to the Frontline video documentary, I find it very informative and relevant to the themes of this particular course. It provides a very detailed and unbiased report and carefully presents views of the different protagonists in this conflict. I am satisfied with the chronology of the facts presented and I would like to recommend it as a good reference material for future dissertations. Works Cited Beehner. L. & Bruno, G. Iran’s Involvement in Iraq: A Backgrounder. Council on Foreign Relations. March 3, 2008 Gonzales, N. Engaging Iran: The Rise of a Middle East Powerhouse and Americas Strategic Choice. ABC-CLIO. 2007. Hodgin, G. The UN and Iraq: Why the UN can’t do its Job. Tomorrow’s Peacekeepers Today. September 21, 2010. Frontline. Showdown with Iran. PBS. Web. October 23, 2007. Rosen, S. Did Iraq Offer a “Grand Bargain” in 2003?. American Thinker. Web. November 16, 2008. Saphiro, A. A. U.S. Iran Relations and History: Lesson: Iran and the US (Teachable Moment). Voices Education Project. Web. 2010. Timeline: US-Iran Ties. World News. BBC. January 16, 2009. Television.     Read More