2008 Woodie Awards
Peace for the U.S. and Iran
Ismail Ayad '10
Issue date: 2/7/07 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 1
Why has the U.S. been so afraid of Iran for over two decades? That is the question perplexing many in the Middle East and maybe even in the U.S. So far the current situation is that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons and is under the rule of a crazy president. But even before Ahmadinejad was elected to power, the U.S. did not have favorable relations with the Islamic Republic. Although it is true that the U.S. supported the Shah, before he was deposed, the U.S. as not acknowledged the Iranian regime as a legitimate government. The U.S. has done so with other relatively new states, but hasn't formed favorable relations with Iran. One possible reason for this is because of an incident that occurred during the Islamic Revolution.
Americans tend only to remember 1979 -1980 as the period of the famous Tehran hostage situation, where 52 Americans were held captive in the U.S. Embassy in Iran. It was this singular event that has influenced American foreign policy towards Iran for the past few decades. Since then, the U.S. gave Saddam Hussein the green light to invade the Shatt El Arab, the oil rich region of Iran's western border and also Iraq's only close access to the sea. The U.S. also supported Saddam in various operations, including a failed coup d'etat known as the Nojeh Coup. The end result of America embedding itself with Iraq resulted in an eight-year war that cost Iran one million casualties, $350 billion in war debts, and halved oil production capacity. Needless to say, Iran paid for taking 70 Americans hostage. Although it was not the only cause of the war, U.S backing certainly prolonged the war and also enticed Iraq to consider attacking its neighbor.
This is the Iran that the U.S. saw in the late '70's and the '80's; however, there was a side the U.S. did not see. By 1979, Iran had developed a constitution that was similar to the Western model, with the exception of having powers placed upon Islamic jurists. In this document, there were concepts of political freedom and democratic liberalization with a slight Islamic twist. As proof, you may look at the recent parliamentary elections in Iran, where Ahmedinejad's party lost its position. Furthermore, multiple parties have actually been in control of the country; before Ahmedinejad was elected, the reformists were in control, and by democratic elections, the presidency was granted to the hardliner we now know and love. Iran is the only real functioning Muslim democracy within the Middle East. Isn't that what the U.S. wants?
Even during 9/11, Iran's citizens were the one of the few in the Muslim world that staged pro-U.S protests. Since then they have not sent suicide bombers to Iraq and many within and outside the government disagree with Ahmedinejad's rhetoric and policies, as shown in the recent election.
Even Thomas Friedman contends that Iran is a natural ally of the U.S. in his on Jan. 31 article in the NY Times. So the question is, why doesn't the U.S. get along with Iran? Is it due to ideological differences? Or is it just because of the Tehran hostage situation, and America is still sore about it? Those are questions that people want answered.
Americans tend only to remember 1979 -1980 as the period of the famous Tehran hostage situation, where 52 Americans were held captive in the U.S. Embassy in Iran. It was this singular event that has influenced American foreign policy towards Iran for the past few decades. Since then, the U.S. gave Saddam Hussein the green light to invade the Shatt El Arab, the oil rich region of Iran's western border and also Iraq's only close access to the sea. The U.S. also supported Saddam in various operations, including a failed coup d'etat known as the Nojeh Coup. The end result of America embedding itself with Iraq resulted in an eight-year war that cost Iran one million casualties, $350 billion in war debts, and halved oil production capacity. Needless to say, Iran paid for taking 70 Americans hostage. Although it was not the only cause of the war, U.S backing certainly prolonged the war and also enticed Iraq to consider attacking its neighbor.
This is the Iran that the U.S. saw in the late '70's and the '80's; however, there was a side the U.S. did not see. By 1979, Iran had developed a constitution that was similar to the Western model, with the exception of having powers placed upon Islamic jurists. In this document, there were concepts of political freedom and democratic liberalization with a slight Islamic twist. As proof, you may look at the recent parliamentary elections in Iran, where Ahmedinejad's party lost its position. Furthermore, multiple parties have actually been in control of the country; before Ahmedinejad was elected, the reformists were in control, and by democratic elections, the presidency was granted to the hardliner we now know and love. Iran is the only real functioning Muslim democracy within the Middle East. Isn't that what the U.S. wants?
Even during 9/11, Iran's citizens were the one of the few in the Muslim world that staged pro-U.S protests. Since then they have not sent suicide bombers to Iraq and many within and outside the government disagree with Ahmedinejad's rhetoric and policies, as shown in the recent election.
Even Thomas Friedman contends that Iran is a natural ally of the U.S. in his on Jan. 31 article in the NY Times. So the question is, why doesn't the U.S. get along with Iran? Is it due to ideological differences? Or is it just because of the Tehran hostage situation, and America is still sore about it? Those are questions that people want answered.
Be the first to comment on this story