USA foreign policy towards Iran

Hazar Taha Turan

USA foreign policy towards Iran

Introduction

Islamic Republic of Iran’s hostile and flagrant activities has been a serious problem for regional and global security since 1979. After the overthrew of Shah Reza, the new radical regime was founded based on an ideology that advocates to virulent actions against the United States, Israel and their respective allies. Therefore, since then Islamic regime has been conducting various operations against the western powers in the Middle East ,particularly the United States, mostly through its proxies and its Shia constellation. These activities are mainly comprise of terrorist activities, state sponsored terrorism, organized crime such as drug trafficking and destabilizing its neighbours via its instruments. At the same time, Iran regards nuclear power as a shield against the West and for this reason it has been developing a nuclear program since the revolution. Due to the fact that Iran is a nontransparent and undemocratic regime, if it reaches to its nuclear aims it will be much harder to prevent and contain it. Therefore it is vital for the US and its allies to retain Iran from acquiring nuclear technology.

Background

Enmity in the minds of the Iranian politicians goes back to the 1953 when CIA and MI6 overthrew elected prime minister Mohammad Mossaddegh who nationalized Anglo-Iranian oil company. Strong support of the United States to Shah and people’s perception of the Shah as a puppet of the West stiffened this enmity. When the Islamic revolution came into existence, a group of armed students raided the US embassy in Tehran. Their desire was the extradition of the Shah back to Iran. However the United States refused and hostages were kept for almost five hundred days. Besides, a rescue operation in 1980 failed and that meant a total humiliation for the United States. Eventually hostages were released when US lifted the ouster on Iranian assets in the US. During the Iran-Iraq War, the US supported the Iraqi regime and that also strengthened the Iranian hostility towards the US. After the war when Iran became stable, the regime began to conduct series of operations in the Middle East to reinforce its position in the region. Via its Shia constellation, Iran reached to the Mediterrenean and potentially threatened Israel. This line was interrupted when the US entered in Iraq, however after our recede Iran began to establish its ties again. Main instruments of the Iran in the region are Hezbollah and Hamas along with Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Hezbollah has an annually 100 million dolar aid from Iranian state and its training is undertaken by Qods Force of the Islamic Republic. Along with Hamas, Hezbollah has been launching various attacks to our only reliable ally Israel and therefore endangering the US interests. It is also known that Iran is behind Assad regime in the Syrian civil war and also responsible for PKK establishments on its soil. Iran operates in the Persian Gulf as well as in Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. Islamic Republic has been using Shiite communities in the Arabian Peninsula to weaken the governments of the region and to increase its influence. Iran’s strategic location in Hurmuz Strait and its closeness to Afghanistan and Pakistan as so Central Asia makes it a very important country for the United States foreign policy. Both countries has been rejecting any rapproachment since Iran never plans to abandon its nuclear program and US has not shown any sign of accepting Iranian nuclear aims. In that sense, from both perspectives, it is clear what needs to be done: weaken the enemy. Iran seems the advantageous one here since it has supports of China and Russia and Turkey is violating our sanctions through pay with gold policy. Also after our recede from Iraq, Maliki government showed signs of supporting Iranian regime overtly and also Assad regime hasn’t failed yet. Hamas and Hezbollah are still active in Gaza and Lebanon and also Shiite communities in Arabian Peninsula are still repining of their governments. Our efforts in international arena came about to be futile since Russians and Chinese don’t support us yet and also Iranians doesn’t follow the orders of the IAEA. In this regard, it is the United States again who need to take the responsibility to protect the interests of itself and its allies.

Policy Alternatives

To retain the status quo is one option. Current sanctions showed that it bears fruit in damaging the Iranian economy, however this is not enough considering that we have been sanctioning them for more than 30 years. So it is quite true to say that Iranians are accustomed to live with sanctions. If we continue to conduct the current foreign policy, in short term there will be no change. In fact, If we don’t intervene, Iranians may save the Assad regime and thwart our plans in the Levant. Also Hezbollah will continue to operate in the Lebanese politics and this is unacceptable. Moreover, if we can’t inhibit them now, it will almost be impossible once they acquire nuclear weapons. In consequence of  a nuclear Iran, a wave of nuclear programs will be triggered in the Middle East which we don’t desire to see. As a result, retaining status quo is not a healthy option for us.

First policy alternative is direct military engagement with Iran through hitting their nuclear facilities in colloboration with Israel. It is obvious that we are not able to stop Iran’s nuclear program through soft power. However, since there is a hostility towards us in International arena as a result of our operations independent of the UN, a direct military operation to Iran may not be the best option. It is also proved that Iran has a comprehensive and capable air defense system when they shot down one of our UAVs. A serious problem is also underground nuclear facilities such as Fordow. Even if we carry out an air operation, we may not destroy all of Iranian nuclear plants. Therefore, this would mean another humiliation for the United States and this is also another situation we don’t desire. Besides, after the operation all international community may be against us and this only reverses our current position which is in favour of us.

Second policy alternative is a series of implementations, economic, political and military. First of all the high inflation rate and recent expensiveness showed that economic sanctions give fruit. Putting Iran into trouble via economic sanctions will reduce Iran’s capacity to develop its nuclear and technological developments. Economic sanctions will also increase discontent among Iranians against the regime. Politically, Iran must be compelled to negotiate through active diplomacy. Active supports of other states must be taken and positions of Russia and China must be softened. Moreover, adversary groups inside Iran such as secularists and leftists must be supported against the regime. CIA and other agencies must infiltrate into the country to find future colloborators. Irans foreign policy has been conducting through its proxies and limbs such as Hezbollah and Hamas. Therefore, pressure over these groups must be increased and even military operations must be performed if necessary. A good example of hitting Iranian proxies is the Israeli attack of Sudanese weapon factories. As we know Iran was providing weapons to Hamas and Hezbollah from its factories in Sudan. For this reason, our reliable ally Israel performed a successful air operation and destroyed these facilities. This also strengthened the position of Israel in its recent operation over Gaza.

Policy Recommendation

The second policy option must be actualised. Since current state of affairs are to the detriment of the US, and first alternative is too risky and can endanger our relations with International community, it is more reasonable to choose the second alternative. By implementing a series of economic, political and military measures, we can force Iran to abandon its nuclear plans and may be by worsening their economic conditions and in addition by provoking its domestic soft spots we may succeed in overthrowing the regime. As a result a pro-American and Western regime may establish without nuclear desires.

Notes:  Policy Analysis

		Evaluative criteria
Policy Options		Political feasibility	costs	benefits
	Status quo	Feasible but In favour of Iran and jeopardize american interests	Israel’s and US’s security is in danger. Iran’s probability to achieve its nuclear goal is highly possible.	Don’t have much benefits
	1st alternative	Infeasible since it will get too reactions.	Risky. Success is not guaranteed. Can exacerbate our current position.	If achieved, Iranian nuclear program will be ended but it is highly unlikely to succeed
	2nd alternative	Feasible and in the long run will compel Iran to sit around the table.	Iran may still acquire nuclear weapons. Operations to its instruments may backfire and be unsuccessful.	International support will contine, international trade of Iran will continue to some extent but Iran won’t be benefiting from it so much because of sanctions.

Hazar Taha TURAN- Hacettepe University