Analysis Of Shifts In The United States Of Americas Foreign Policy Towards Iran

Surname 1

Name of Author:

Professor:

Course:

Date of Submission:

Analysis of Shifts in The United States of America’s Foreign Policy towards Iran

Introduction

No country can sufficiently function on its own; continued globalization and international

networking has continued to compel countries to associate with others. While some countries

export the products they have in excess, others have to import the same. In return, they receive

those products that cannot be manufactured in their countries from other countries. The whole

scenario is that of a geopolitical organization made up of trading blocks, friendly countries,

enemy states, and emerging issues concerning trade, power, politics, drugs, war, and terrorism

among others. Foreign policy defines strategic plans and established rules that guide a country’s

relations with other states. In the United States, this policy is created with the goal of establishing

continued cooperation with other countries to achieve increased democracy, security, and

prosperity in the global arena (Ford 539). The leading elements of these objectives concern the

welfare of Americans at home and abroad. Thus, the Department of State, which is in charge of

America’s foreign policy, controls importation and exportation of all goods and services

including war equipment. It institutes measures that ensure America can achieve commercial

interaction with other states. It further proceeds to protect both American businesses and citizens

abroad. Other topics involved encompass international education, formation of cooperation

blocks, and international commodity agreements among others. This paper analyzes changes in

the United States of America’s foreign policy towards Iran because of historical events.

Surname 2

United States and Iran: 1950 to 1979

The relationship between Iran and the United States of America from 1950 to 1979 was

characterized by cooperation and mutuality in many ways. Notably, the government in place at

that time was friendly to the American government since America had assisted its ascent to

power. These governments had even cooperated earlier than this as Arthur C. Millspaugh had

been sent from the United States to Iran to issue economic advisory services in 1923 (Kramrisch

250). As at the time, the Shah government ruled Iran, then referred to as Persia. His arrival to

Iran initiated the continued advisory on economics, assessment of viability for investment, and

the perceived neutralization of increased European influence in the region. This was to end in

1928, when the advisor and the United States fell out with the Iranian government.However, in

1953, the American Central Intelligence Agency and British intelligence organized and

facilitated a coup of Mr. Mossadegh and the Shah in Iran.

The most notable elements of this was related to American and British interests in Iran’s

petroleum products. The old regime had made contacts with the soviets and had initiated the

exportation of petroleum products. Considering that USSRwas an enemy to both the United

States and Britain, it was clear that American business interests were at stake. Thus, allies

installed Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, who ruled as an authoritarian monarch and acted in favor of

the Western Powers (Kramrisch 156). This government would help protect the interest of the US

in businesses and petroleum products in Iran.

The change opened America’s foreign policy and relations with Iran to increased

cooperation in terms of business, technology, administration, and information sharing. In the

March of 1957, the US made an agreement with Iran concerning the generation and use of

Surname 3

nuclear energy for civil purposes. This was drawn from President Eisenhower’s Atoms for Peace

program. Iran signed the deal to receive enriched uranium from the United States, but had to

agree to controlled peaceful usage restricted to civil consumption alone (Seliktar 78). In 1962,

the same continued cooperation saw the shah travel to the United States on a state visit to

President John F. Kennedy. Discussing with the president, he expressed the need for

strengthening democracy to prevent communism, warning that it was a threat tothe state. On the

other hand, the United States had to increase and continue its foreign aid to Iran.

Two events were to happen in 1968 and 1975 that would further enhance the foreign ties

between Iran and the U.S. The first was the Nonproliferation Treaty, which was originally signed

by 51 countries that compelled all the nations not to distribute nuclear weapons of mass

destruction. Iran was among the states that accented to this treaty, and its parliament ratified the

same by 1970. Following this, President Gerald Ford went ahead and forged an agreement with

the Iranian government in 1975. The view of this process was for commercial and not weapon

development (Belmonte and Edward 336). Thus, U.S. allowed Iran to purchase and utilize

reprocessing plants to extract plutonium.

The cooperation between the U.S. and Iran continued for three more years, and the two

had favorable foreign policies of mutual benefit towards one another. On the New Year’s Eve of

1977, the then American President Jimmy Carter visited Iran to solidify administrative and

business ties. Him and the Shah shared toasts in which Carter proclaimed that Iran was an island

of peace and political stability because of the leadership of the Shah (Sneh 236). However, event

were to take a drastic turn to sour the relationship of the United States and Iran as the Shah got

overthrown in 1979.

United States and Iran: Post 1979

Surname 4

The build up to the events in 1979 had progressively developed with the Shah continuously

losing favor with the locals. Largely, the Shah was seen as serving Western interests more than

those of Iran. Thus, individual beliefs had transformed from the needs for democracy and human

rights protection to perceived need for nationalism. This was the reason for the progressive

buildup of the Islamic Revolution of 1979. This led to the overthrow of the Shah’s government

who travelled in exile to Egypt and would later diein the United States as President Carter stated

in a briefing after the revolution. It would be ordinary to expect a disillusioned attitude from

civilian Iranians; however, this was not the case. The return of an exiled cleric Ayotollah

Ruhollah Khomeini at this time saw the celebration of Iranians in mammoth crowds on the

streets of Tehran (Shaffer 77). Although President Jimmy Carter expressed the hope of

America’s good relationships with Iran continuing, numerous changes would twist this desire

and shape America’s foreign policy towards Iran in different ways.

Thirteen days later, the new Prime Minister of Iran Shahpur Bakhtiar cancelled a deal

with the American government on the construction of nuclear plants. Both plants were to be

constructed in the Darkhoein province and were to cost a total of $6.2 billion. As of the time of

the cancellation, the government of Iran had released $240 million as a down payment. This was

the onset of numerous changes in Iran-U.S. relations.

Perhaps, the most notable event in relation to the uprising and resulting U.S. foreign

policy towards Iran was the return of Ayatollah Khomeini to Iran from exile. Besides having a

grand reception, the cleric was informally approved and viewed as the symbol of the concluded

successful revolution (Shaffer 78). Markedly, he was extremely anti-West and considered

Western occupants of Iran as intruders who had come to take away Iranian’s freedom and

resources. Hence, he felt charged with the responsibility of protecting the resources and the

Surname 5

citizens to the advantage of Iran against foreigners. This began by a declaration to expel all

foreigners to go back to their landimmediately. For American investors in civilian capacities, this

was, perhaps, the most unfortunate moment. All their resources were seized, and those who made

it out of Iran forewent their investments to escape for their lives.

In response, the American state department evacuated at least 1350 Americans on the day

the cleric returned to Tehran. The Cleric proceeded with this authority to take over the country

and install himself as the leader. It is then that he introduced the system of quasi theocracy that

has continued to remain in power to date (Seliktar 18). Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini did not just

stop at taking power. After going on exile into the United States, the Shah was diagnosed with

cancer and was undergoing treatment for the same at a hospital in New York. On the 4

November 1979, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini sponsored Iranian militants who stormed the

American Embassy in Tehran and took the employees in the building hostage. Their demands

were that the Shah be returned to Iran to face trial for crimes the new regime claimed he had

committed against their law (Kaufman 262).

President Jimmy Carter responded to these demands seven days later and made it clear

that America would not extradite the deposed Shah whatsoever. He said that the demands of the

Iranians holding embassy employees hostage were unrealistic and undemocratic. In response, he

suspended all imports of oil from Iran on the same day. After eight days, Ayatollah released ten

hostages among whom were four women and six black men. His reasoning stated that black men

were always oppressed in the American society and deserved some favor. Contrarily, he

expressed Islam’s respect for women as the reason for their release (Bowden 363).

Numerous events would follow including a foiled rescue attempt by the U.S. and the

death of the Shah in Egypt. After being held hostage for 444 days, the hostages would be

Surname 6

released after the American government agreed to various conditions from Iranian

administrators. They would avoid political and military interference in Iran. They would also

have to free all assets that had previously been frozen. Other than these, modern American

foreign policies on Iran have dwelt more on nuclear weapons and international security.

Even after all the preceding events, Iran had consistently allowed the inspection of its

nuclear projects. It emerged in 2003 that the state had participated in the enrichment of Uranium

for weapon development. Despite attempts to stop the same by the International Atomic Energy

Agency (IAEA), Ebel explains that Iran resumed the production, posing a security threat to the

United States and the rest of the world. Noting that the Iranian government may be sponsoring

terror groups like Hezbollah and others (9), the U.S. has severed its relationships with Iran and

imposed numerous sanctions including restricting goods and services like missiles, nuclear

products, shipping industry, insurance, and banking businesses.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the foreign policy of the United States towards Iran has had divergent shifts from

favorable to unfavorable. In 1953, Americans assisted in overthrowing a former regime in Iran

and installed a favorable one. The countries had friendly ties with political and business

cooperation. American investors visited Iran and vice versa. The U.S. Government even assisted

the Iranian government to initiate civil use of nuclear energy. However, the overthrow of the

Shah in 1979 and increased aggression towards American citizens made America change its

policies towards Iran. America has consistently sought all possible avenues to neutralize the

perceived security threats of nuclear in Iran through sanctions and other means.

Surname 7

Works Cited

Belmonte, Monica L, and Edward C. Keefer. Foreign Relations of the United States, 1969-1976:

Volume Xxvii. Washington: U.S. G.P.O, 2012. Print.

Bowden, Mark. Guests of the Ayatollah: The First Battle in America's War with Militant Islam.

New York: Grove Press, 2006. Print.

Ebel, Robert E. Geopolitics of the Iranian Nuclear Energy Program: But Oil and Gas Still

Matter : a Report of the Csis Energy and National Security Program. Washington, D.C:

Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2010. Print.

Ford, Lynne E. American Government and Politics Today. Belmont, California: Wadsworth,

2013. Print.

Kaufman, Burton I. The Carter Years. New York, NY: Facts On File Publications Limited, 2006.

Print.

Kramrisch, Stella. The Presence of S

iva. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 2014. Print.

Seliktar, Ofira. Navigating Iran: From Carter to Obama. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.

Print.

Shaffer, Brenda. Borders and Brethren: Iran and the Challenge of Azerbaijani Identity.

Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2002. Print.

Sneh, Itai N. The Future Almost Arrived: How Jimmy Carter Failed to Change U.s. Foreign

Policy. New York, NY: Lang, 2008. Print.

Place new order. It's free, fast and safe

Paper type

Deadline

Page count

550 words

Total price: $ 15.00

Our customers say

Jeff Curtis

USA, Student

"I'm fully satisfied with the essay I've just received. When I read it, I felt like it was exactly what I wanted to say, but couldn’t find the necessary words. Thank you!"

Ian McGregor

UK, Student

"I don’t know what I would do without your assistance! With your help, I met my deadline just in time and the work was very professional. I will be back in several days with another assignment!"

Shannon Williams

Canada, Student

"It was the perfect experience! I enjoyed working with my writer, he delivered my work on time and followed all the guidelines about the referencing and contents."

Analysis of Shifts in The United States of Americas Foreign Policy towards Iran

Place new order. It's free, fast and safe

Our customers say

Jeff Curtis

Ian McGregor

Shannon Williams