Did American foreign policy and influence lead to the Iranian revolution and spark the Iranian hostage crisis?
Part A
This investigation determines to what extent American foreign policy, within the years 1953-1982, caused the Iranian embassy siege. Furthermore, it questions the role that the Carter and Kennedy administrations had in furthering the American agenda within Iran. In order to assess the role American influence played, this investigation evaluates the relations between the Carter administration and Mohammed Raza Pahlevi during his tenure as Shah. Carter’s Middle-Eastern foreign policy is examined to gain further insight into the influence that the United States had over Pahlevi. Also, the role that the televised address from President Carter played in igniting the Iranian revolution is also considered. The events that sparked the Iranian Revolution and the subsequent coup that ousted the Shah from power are also considered. By utilizing a variety of sources such as academic journals, books, and films; this investigation will attempt to illustrate the role that American influence and foreign policy played in sparking the hostage crisis.
Part B
Prior to the downfall of the Iranian Shah, Mohammed Raza Pahlevi, Iran was a strong American ally. In 1953, the United States played a large role in the ousting of democratically elected Premier Mohammed Mossadeq. The downfall of Mossadeq brought the Shah Pahlevi back into power. Through Operation Ajax, the CIA forced Mossadeq to resign by utilizing tactics such as bribing key figures in Mossadeq’s government, placing false statements in national newspapers and instigating violence and protests. The reinstatement of the Iranian Shah was to the advantage of the United States as it ...
... middle of paper ...
...ution. It did have a large impact but the according to historians, the rising rate of modernization had a far greater role as a catalyst of the Iranian Revolution. American influence and foreign policy had large impacts on the Iranian Revolution. Furthermore, American foreign policy had a direct impact on the Iranian hostage crisis.
Works Cited
American Presidency Project. 31 December 1977. 16 May 2014.
Argo. Dir. Ben Affleck. Perf. Ben Affleck. 2012.
New York Times. 13 April 2012. 2014 4 May.
Rubin. "American Relations." Rubin. n.d. 305-3015.
Schaefer, Sandy. ScreenRant. n.d. 18 May 2014.
Sick, Gary. United States Institute of Peace. n.d. 3 May 2014.
The Robert S. Strauss Centre. August 2008. 1 May 2014.
Wise, Krysta. "Islamic Revolution of 1979: The Downfall of American- Iranian Relations." Open Southern Illinois University Carbondale (2012): 1-16. Electronic.
This completely changed the perception of the United States within Iran. Many Iranians believed that “American influence and power made a mockery of their national autonomy and desecrated their religious beliefs” (Farber, 37). The real struggle came once the Shah sought asylum in the U.S. Iran believed this to be a betrayal and demanded the Shah be released to the revolutionaries. Due to the fact that the United States did not refuse the Shah, the revolutionaries took the embassy in Tehran and all of the people that worked there hostage. One of the hostages wrote back to his parents during the crisis “‘We will not be set free until shah is released and the longer we stay here like this the better is a chance for something terrible to happen’” (Farber, 156). The siege was led by Iranian students who supported the revolution and the Ayatollah Khomeini, the leader that the revolution had selected to take the place of the
Kinzer tells us that the Iranians celebrated their nationalism in taking control of their oil, but their success was a shock to the British multinational companies in Iran. They did not like the idea of Iran nationalization, so they plan a coup to overthrow the Prime Minister Mossadegh. But this plan failed and the British were disarmed and sent back to their country closing down their embassy in Iran. The British tried to present their case to the United State in a way that the United State would intervene. So they presented a case that Mossaghe is not only nationalizing the Iranians oil, he is also leading Iran into communism. This case stirred the American action and they feared if they assassinate Mossaghe, his seat will be open and communist ...
In the novel All The Shah’s Men we are introduced to Iran, and the many struggles and hardships associated with the history of this troubled country. The Iranian coup is discussed in depth throughout the novel, and whether the Untied States made the right decision to enter into Iran and provide assistance with the British. If I were to travel back to 1952 and take a position in the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) for the sole purpose of examining the American Foreign Intelligence, I would have to conclude that the United States should have examined their options more thoroughly, and decided not to intervene with Iran and Mossadegh. I have taken this position after great analysis, which is something that Eisenhower and his staff never did. By discussing the history of Iran, the Anglo-Iranian oil company, and Document NSC-68 I will try to prove once and for all that going through with the coup in Iran was a terrible mistake made by the United States.
For decades, U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East had depended on a friendly government in Iran. The newly appointed leader, the shah of Iran, began Westernizing the country and taking away power from the Ayatollah, powerful religious leaders. The United States poured millions of dollars into Iran’s economy and the shah’s armed forces, overlooking the rampant corruption in government and well-organized opposition. By early 1979, the Ayatollah had murdered the Shah and taken back power of the government. A group of students who took the American embassy hostage on November 4th, 1979, turned the embassy over to the religious leaders. Carter knew he must take action in order to regain the American embassy and the hostages, but with all of the military cutbacks, the rescue attempt was a complete failure and embarrassment. It took the United States 444 days to rescue the hostages. This was the final straw for many Americans, and enough to push them to the “right” side of the political spectrum, Republican.
Commentators whipped both Carter's arrangements to give up control of the Panama Canal and his reaction to Soviet animosity in Afghanistan by hauling out of the Olympics and completion the offer of wheat to the Russians. His acknowledgment of socialist China, which developed Nixon's China approach, and his arrangement of new arms control concurrences with the Soviets, were both condemned by moderates in the Republican Party. Yet, the most genuine emergency of Carter's administration included Iran. At the point when the Ayatollah Khomeini seized power there, the U.S. offered haven to the sickly Shah, irritated the new Iranian government, which then urged understudy aggressors to storm the American consulate and assume control fifty Americans prisoner. Carter's inadequate treatment of the tremendously broadcast prisoner emergency, and the shocking fizzled endeavor to protect them in 1980, destined his administration, despite the fact that he arranged their discharge instantly before leaving office.
The Iran-Contra Affair involved the United States, Iran, and Lebanon. The affair coincided with the Iranian hostage crisis, which promoted the United States’ actions in sending weapons to Iran. The Reagan administration decided to trade arms for hostages in hopes of successfully retrieving American hostages from Iran. Iran was at the time under the power of Ayatollah Khomeini, who had put his full support behind the hostage crisis and believed there was nothing that the United States could do to Iran. America’s only chance of rescuing the hostages was to put their support behind Iran in the Iran-Iraq War, which involved the shipment of weapons to Iran f...
America and Iran had tricked the Soviets which left them very angry, and this inevitably led to the Cold War. But less than a decade later, America had done something which caused Iran to change their opinion of them. In 1951, Iran had recently elected a prime minister by the name, Mohammed Mosaddeq, which he nationalized the countryś petroleum industry, long the domain of the British-dominated AIOC. This move, however, pitted the two governments against each other in a bitter political fight. The Truman administration had tried to work between both sides, but Dwight Eisenhower had quickly concluded that Mosaddeq represented the problem rather than the solution to the crisis. They decided that they wanted him out and later he was kicked out and Mohammad Reza Shah took his place for the next twenty-five years. Shah not only gained access to sophisticated American weaponry, but also obtained tacit White House permission to forgo any serious effort at reform. Over the years, the internal resentment against the Shahś political and economic policies was building to a peak, but the depth of the problem escaped the notice of American
The American Revolution shaped all of these issues throughout the time period. It shows how radical our government turned out to be. These impacts came to show America that we can be independent and control our own nation. I think that the American Revolution helped turned our country around for the good. It helped America gain the responsibility it needed in order to become an independent nation. Without the independence they gained during this time, we would not stand where we are today. It shaped our country in many ways that became helpful to us later down the road.
In the 1970’s Iran, under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was a very centralized military state that maintained a close relationship with the USA. The Shah was notoriously out of touch with working class Iranians as he implemented many controversial economic policies against small business owners that he suspected involved profiteering. Also unrestricted economic expansions in Iran lead to huge government expenditure that became a serious problem when oil prices dropped in the mid 1970’s. This caused many huge government construction projects to halt and the economy to stall after many years of massive profit. Following this was high rates of inflation that affected Iranians buying power and living standards. (Afary, 2012) Under the Shah, political participation was not widely available for all Iranians and it was common for political opposition to be met with harassment, illegal detention, and even torture. These measures were implemented by the Iranian secret police knows as ‘SAVAK’. This totalitarian regime combined with the increasing modernisation of the country paved the way for revolution.
Maghen, Z. (2009, January). Eradicating the "Little Satan": Why Iran Should Be Taken at Its
Throughout the 20th century, the United States tried to control Iran to ensure the exportation of oil to America. Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi came to power in 1941 and became allies with the United States. However in the 1950s, Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh began to gain political power. Unlike the Shah, he was extremely against western influence in Iran. Mossadegh won national elections and he demanded more power. In order to retain influence in Iran, the CIA helped overthrow Mossadegh and bring Pahlavi back to power....
The French and American Revolutions were both revolutionary then and still today. There are still lasting effects from both the French and American Revolutions. The French Revolution had lasting effects such as the birth of Nationalism and making a huge move away from Monarchism. To us Americans the lasting effects are obvious from the American Revolution. We still live in freedom with the same system of government set up by our early political leaders.
Ultimately, European influence played a fundamental role in the shaping of the Ottoman Empire and Egypt during the 18th and early 19th century. It’s influence was most significant through government, economic, and military influence but its effects reverberated throughout society. Western influence was much less significant in Iran, primarily due to the fragmented nature of governorship in the region.
The American Revolution caused a drastic amount of change. While this big thing was going on there were many people that had been included. The British and the 13 colonies went to war against each other so that 13 colonies could try and win over their freedom. Abigail Adams sent a letter to her husband to try and convince the writers to include women's equal rights. There were many hopes that people had while the American Revolution was present in the 1770’s to the early 1780’s. How much change did the American Revolution cause? The American Revolution radically changed three areas of life; social, political, and economics.
Although the Iranian Revolution was caused by combination of political and religious motivations and ideas, the desires of the people supporting the movement were more dominantly religious ideas that were wished to be imposed in society and in a new government. The Shah, or king, of Iran at the time was Muhammad Reza Pahlavi, who had developed relations with nations in “western” world, specifically with the United States. The United States supported the White Revolution, which was a series of social reformations the Shah made to remove Islamic v...