Us-Iranian Relations
Prior to the 1979 Iranian revolution, the US was Iran’s primary economic and military partner. Many American expatriates lived and worked in Iran in a variety of industries, and the US enjoyed positive relations with Iran prior to 1979. The Prime Minister Mossadeq who had received so much US support was overthrown in the 1953 coup d’état arranged by a covert CIA operation; this followed the deterioration of Iran’s economy largely due to his attempt to nationalize the British established Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, and fears that the deterioration would lead to openings in the political arena for the well-organized Tudeh communist party. Though the US poured in billions of dollars in aid into the region, and the new, American supported Shah, who was the son of Shah in power preceding Mossadeq, remained pro-American, the anti-American sentiment had been already laid to seed, especially with the more rigid Islamic conservatives.
These sentiments increased as Iran’s oil revenues and thus economic authority grew during the 1960s and 1970s, which debilitated the influence of the US in Iranian politics. The Carter administration, operating in the latter years of the 1970s, increased these anti-American feelings by following an unclear policy on Iran. When the regime of the Shah disintegrated in 1979, and the anti-American Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini took over, Carter at first refused the Shah entrance to the US, for cancer treatment and asylum, in order to facilitate beneficent relations with the new government. However, blaming Americans and Westernization for the manifestation of troubles during the reign of the Shah, the new government was decidedly anti-American. Due to pressure from pro-Shah figures such as Rockefeller, Kissinger, and others, the Shah was allowed entry into the US. The Carter’s initial refusal to support the Shah angered Iranian supporters of the Shah, as both groups of political supporters in Iran were alienated, which further deepened negative sentiments towards the US in Iran. These anti-American sentiments led to the takeover of the US embassy in Iran by Iranian youth, deemed the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis. This event and the caustic reaction of the US soured sentiments on both sides, and reduced relations between the nations to indirect representation by other countries.
I suggest that measures be taken to reestablish diplomatic relations with Iran. At the moment, Iran relies on the Pakistani embassy to do its bidding in the states, while the US relies on the Swiss embassy to represent it in Iran. This seems to be an inefficient means of communication and a somewhat childish way in which to carry on indirect relations. I suggest mutual respect despite strong cultural, secular and belief differences. In light of the history of relations between the US and Iran, the US has had some sketchy motivations for involvement in Iran. A sincere apology and respect sans arrogance and sarcasm can go a long way.
The issues, which the US finds with Iran developing nuclear power, stem from fear that should they harness nuclear power, as well as preside over a large percent of the world’s natural resources, Iran’s economic and military potency would render the nation a powerful one. Such a thought causes fear and tension if the government is perceived unstable and inadequate, or in fact, if the government is not an ally. Recently, the current president of Iran, Ahmadinejad, has entered talks with Venezuela, and plans on continuing his Latin American tour through Cuba, Nicaragua, and Ecuador. These countries, most notably Venezuela, contain large natural resource deposits. Should close ties between the nations be formed, due to the sanctions on oil being passed by the US and the European Union, it could spell disaster for the world economy. Also, the harsher measures are not going to prevent the Iranians from continuing their nuclear program. Actually, I propose that the apparent fear demonstrated by the US that Iran, if allowed to develop nuclear power, will become a Mideast hegemony, makes continuing to develop its nuclear power even more desirable to Iran. Either tension will escalate and result in serious war measures, or agreements can be reached peacefully. It is important to respect the culture of the nation, and not appear arrogant or condescending, as that leads to power struggles. Humans innately oppose feelings of entrapment and submission; if these feelings are not introduced, the subject is often willing to cooperate much more readily, and without feelings of resentment.
The harsh measures currently being taken to subdue Iran’s nuclear program will only cause further issues between our two nations, and incur more tension in the world and more damage to the world economy. The reestablishment of respectful, direct relations is the first step to mitigating the tensions that the US feels regarding Iran’s nuclear program.
These sentiments increased as Iran’s oil revenues and thus economic authority grew during the 1960s and 1970s, which debilitated the influence of the US in Iranian politics. The Carter administration, operating in the latter years of the 1970s, increased these anti-American feelings by following an unclear policy on Iran. When the regime of the Shah disintegrated in 1979, and the anti-American Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini took over, Carter at first refused the Shah entrance to the US, for cancer treatment and asylum, in order to facilitate beneficent relations with the new government. However, blaming Americans and Westernization for the manifestation of troubles during the reign of the Shah, the new government was decidedly anti-American. Due to pressure from pro-Shah figures such as Rockefeller, Kissinger, and others, the Shah was allowed entry into the US. The Carter’s initial refusal to support the Shah angered Iranian supporters of the Shah, as both groups of political supporters in Iran were alienated, which further deepened negative sentiments towards the US in Iran. These anti-American sentiments led to the takeover of the US embassy in Iran by Iranian youth, deemed the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis. This event and the caustic reaction of the US soured sentiments on both sides, and reduced relations between the nations to indirect representation by other countries.
I suggest that measures be taken to reestablish diplomatic relations with Iran. At the moment, Iran relies on the Pakistani embassy to do its bidding in the states, while the US relies on the Swiss embassy to represent it in Iran. This seems to be an inefficient means of communication and a somewhat childish way in which to carry on indirect relations. I suggest mutual respect despite strong cultural, secular and belief differences. In light of the history of relations between the US and Iran, the US has had some sketchy motivations for involvement in Iran. A sincere apology and respect sans arrogance and sarcasm can go a long way.
The issues, which the US finds with Iran developing nuclear power, stem from fear that should they harness nuclear power, as well as preside over a large percent of the world’s natural resources, Iran’s economic and military potency would render the nation a powerful one. Such a thought causes fear and tension if the government is perceived unstable and inadequate, or in fact, if the government is not an ally. Recently, the current president of Iran, Ahmadinejad, has entered talks with Venezuela, and plans on continuing his Latin American tour through Cuba, Nicaragua, and Ecuador. These countries, most notably Venezuela, contain large natural resource deposits. Should close ties between the nations be formed, due to the sanctions on oil being passed by the US and the European Union, it could spell disaster for the world economy. Also, the harsher measures are not going to prevent the Iranians from continuing their nuclear program. Actually, I propose that the apparent fear demonstrated by the US that Iran, if allowed to develop nuclear power, will become a Mideast hegemony, makes continuing to develop its nuclear power even more desirable to Iran. Either tension will escalate and result in serious war measures, or agreements can be reached peacefully. It is important to respect the culture of the nation, and not appear arrogant or condescending, as that leads to power struggles. Humans innately oppose feelings of entrapment and submission; if these feelings are not introduced, the subject is often willing to cooperate much more readily, and without feelings of resentment.
The harsh measures currently being taken to subdue Iran’s nuclear program will only cause further issues between our two nations, and incur more tension in the world and more damage to the world economy. The reestablishment of respectful, direct relations is the first step to mitigating the tensions that the US feels regarding Iran’s nuclear program.