logo
US and Iran have long complicated history, far beyond Israel's strikes on Tehran

US and Iran have long complicated history, far beyond Israel's strikes on Tehran

Nahar Net14 hours ago

Jeffrey Fields USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences
Relations between the United States and Iran have been fraught for decades – at least since the U.S. helped overthrow a democracy-minded prime minister, Mohammed Mossadegh, in August 1953. The U.S. then supported the long, repressive reign of the Shah of Iran, whose security services brutalized Iranian citizens for decades.
The two countries have been particularly hostile to each other since Iranian students took over the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in November 1979, resulting in economic sanctions and the severing of formal diplomatic relations between the nations.
Since 1984, the U.S. State Department has listed Iran as a "state sponsor of terrorism," alleging the Iranian government provides terrorists with training, money and weapons.
Some of the major events in U.S.-Iran relations highlight the differences between the nations' views, but others arguably presented real opportunities for reconciliation.
1953: US overthrows Mossadegh
In 1951, the Iranian Parliament chose a new prime minister, Mossadegh, who then led lawmakers to vote in favor of taking over the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, expelling the company's British owners and saying they wanted to turn oil profits into investments in the Iranian people. The U.S. feared disruption in the global oil supply and worried about Iran falling prey to Soviet influence. The British feared the loss of cheap Iranian oil.
President Dwight Eisenhower decided it was best for the U.S. and the U.K. to get rid of Mossadegh. Operation Ajax, a joint CIA-British operation, convinced the Shah of Iran, the country's monarch, to dismiss Mossadegh and drive him from office by force. Mossadegh was replaced by a much more Western-friendly prime minister, handpicked by the CIA.
1979: Revolutionaries oust the shah, take hostages
After more than 25 years of relative stability in U.S.-Iran relations, the Iranian public had grown unhappy with the social and economic conditions that developed under the dictatorial rule of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.
Pahlavi enriched himself and used American aid to fund the military while many Iranians lived in poverty. Dissent was often violently quashed by SAVAK, the shah's security service. In January 1979, the shah left Iran, ostensibly to seek cancer treatment. Two weeks later, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini returned from exile in Iraq and led a drive to abolish the monarchy and proclaim an Islamic government.
In October 1979, President Jimmy Carter agreed to allow the shah to come to the U.S. to seek advanced medical treatment. Outraged Iranian students stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran on Nov. 4, taking 52 Americans hostage. That convinced Carter to sever U.S. diplomatic relations with Iran on April 7, 1980.
Two weeks later, the U.S. military launched a mission to rescue the hostages, but it failed, with aircraft crashes killing eight U.S. servicemembers.
The shah died in Egypt in July 1980, but the hostages weren't released until Jan. 20, 1981, after 444 days of captivity.
1980-1988: US tacitly sides with Iraq
In September 1980, Iraq invaded Iran, an escalation of the two countries' regional rivalry and religious differences: Iraq was governed by Sunni Muslims but had a Shia Muslim majority population; Iran was led and populated mostly by Shiites.
The U.S. was concerned that the conflict would limit the flow of Middle Eastern oil and wanted to ensure the conflict didn't affect its close ally, Saudi Arabia.
The U.S. supported Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein in his fight against the anti-American Iranian regime. As a result, the U.S. mostly turned a blind eye toward Iraq's use of chemical weapons against Iran.
U.S. officials moderated their usual opposition to those illegal and inhumane weapons because the U.S. State Department did not "wish to play into Iran's hands by fueling its propaganda against Iraq." In 1988, the war ended in a stalemate. More than 500,000 military and 100,000 civilians died.
1981-1986: US secretly sells weapons to Iran
The U.S. imposed an arms embargo after Iran was designated a state sponsor of terrorism in 1984. That left the Iranian military, in the middle of its war with Iraq, desperate for weapons and aircraft and vehicle parts to keep fighting.
The Reagan administration decided that the embargo would likely push Iran to seek support from the Soviet Union, the U.S.'s Cold War rival. Rather than formally end the embargo, U.S. officials agreed to secretly sell weapons to Iran starting in 1981.
The last shipment, of anti-tank missiles, was in October 1986. In November 1986, a Lebanese magazine exposed the deal. That revelation sparked the Iran-Contra scandal in the U.S., with Reagan's officials found to have collected money from Iran for the weapons and illegally sent those funds to anti-socialist rebels – the Contras – in Nicaragua.
1988: US Navy shoots down Iran Air flight 655
On the morning of July 8, 1988, the USS Vincennes, a guided missile cruiser patrolling in the international waters of the Persian Gulf, entered Iranian territorial waters while in a skirmish with Iranian gunboats.
Either during or just after that exchange of gunfire, the Vincennes crew mistook a passing civilian Airbus passenger jet for an Iranian F-14 fighter. They shot it down, killing all 290 people aboard.
The U.S. called it a "tragic and regrettable accident," but Iran believed the plane's downing was intentional. In 1996, the U.S. agreed to pay US$131.8 million in compensation to Iran.
1997-1998: The US seeks contact
In August 1997, a moderate reformer, Mohammad Khatami, won Iran's presidential election.
U.S. President Bill Clinton sensed an opportunity. He sent a message to Tehran through the Swiss ambassador there, proposing direct government-to-government talks.
Shortly thereafter, in early January 1998, Khatami gave an interview to CNN in which he expressed "respect for the great American people," denounced terrorism and recommended an "exchange of professors, writers, scholars, artists, journalists and tourists" between the United States and Iran.
However, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei didn't agree, so not much came of the mutual overtures as Clinton's time in office came to an end.
In his 2002 State of the Union address, President George W. Bush characterized Iran, Iraq and North Korea as constituting an "Axis of Evil" supporting terrorism and pursuing weapons of mass destruction, straining relations even further.
2002: Iran's nuclear program raises alarm
In August 2002, an exiled rebel group announced that Iran had been secretly working on nuclear weapons at two installations that had not previously been publicly revealed.
That was a violation of the terms of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which Iran had signed, requiring countries to disclose their nuclear-related facilities to international inspectors.
One of those formerly secret locations, Natanz, housed centrifuges for enriching uranium, which could be used in civilian nuclear reactors or enriched further for weapons.
Starting in roughly 2005, U.S. and Israeli government cyberattackers together reportedly targeted the Natanz centrifuges with a custom-made piece of malicious software that became known as Stuxnet.
That effort, which slowed down Iran's nuclear program was one of many U.S. and international attempts – mostly unsuccessful – to curtail Iran's progress toward building a nuclear bomb.
2003: Iran writes to Bush administration
In May 2003, senior Iranian officials quietly contacted the State Department through the Swiss embassy in Iran, seeking "a dialogue 'in mutual respect,'" addressing four big issues: nuclear weapons, terrorism, Palestinian resistance and stability in Iraq.
Hardliners in the Bush administration weren't interested in any major reconciliation, though Secretary of State Colin Powell favored dialogue and other officials had met with Iran about al-Qaida.
When Iranian hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected president of Iran in 2005, the opportunity died. The following year, Ahmadinejad made his own overture to Washington in an 18-page letter to President Bush. The letter was widely dismissed; a senior State Department official told me in profane terms that it amounted to nothing.
2015: Iran nuclear deal signed
After a decade of unsuccessful attempts to rein in Iran's nuclear ambitions, the Obama administration undertook a direct diplomatic approach beginning in 2013.
Two years of secret, direct negotiations initially bilaterally between the U.S. and Iran and later with other nuclear powers culminated in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, often called the Iran nuclear deal.
Two years of secret, direct negotiations conducted bilaterally at first between the U.S. and Iran and later with other nuclear powers culminated in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, often called the Iran nuclear deal.
Iran, the U.S., China, France, Germany, Russia and the United Kingdom signed the deal in 2015. It severely limited Iran's capacity to enrich uranium and mandated that international inspectors monitor and enforce Iran's compliance with the agreement.
In return, Iran was granted relief from international and U.S. economic sanctions. Though the inspectors regularly certified that Iran was abiding by the agreement's terms, President Donald Trump withdrew from the agreement in May 2018.
2020: US drones kill Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani
On Jan. 3, 2020, an American drone fired a missile that killed Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the leader of Iran's elite Quds Force. Analysts considered Soleimani the second most powerful man in Iran, after Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei.
At the time, the Trump administration asserted that Soleimani was directing an imminent attack against U.S. assets in the region, but officials have not provided clear evidence to support that claim.
Iran responded by launching ballistic missiles that hit two American bases in Iraq.
2023: The Oct. 7 attacks on Israel
Hamas' brazen attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, provoked a fearsome militarized response from Israel that continues today and served to severely weaken Iran's proxies in the region, especially Hamas – the perpetrator of the attacks – and Hezbollah in Lebanon.
2025: Trump 2.0 and Iran
Trump saw an opportunity to forge a new nuclear deal with Iran and to pursue other business deals with Tehran. Once inaugurated for his second term, Trump appointed Steve Witkoff, a real estate investor who is the president's friend, to serve as special envoy for the Middle East and to lead negotiations.
Negotiations for a nuclear deal between Washington and Tehran began in April, but the countries did not reach a deal. They were planning a new round of talks when Israel struck Iran with a series of airstrikes on June 13, forcing the White House to reconsider is position.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article here: https://theconversation.com/us-and-iran-have-a-long-complicated-history-spanning-far-beyond-israels-strikes-on-tehran-259240.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Expert to Al-Manar: Iran's Real Retaliatory Strikes Yet to Come
Expert to Al-Manar: Iran's Real Retaliatory Strikes Yet to Come

Al Manar

time11 hours ago

  • Al Manar

Expert to Al-Manar: Iran's Real Retaliatory Strikes Yet to Come

The Iranian missiles imposed a qualitative change on the dynamics of the battle against the Zionist entity, an expert told Al-Manar. In an interview on Tuesday, Mokhtar Haddad, Editor-in-Chief of the Iranian newspaper Al-Wefaq, said that the real retaliatory strikes by the Islamic Republic are yet to come. 'Incoming news as well as indicators in the course of the ongoing confrontation between Iran and the Zionist entity point to a qualitative shift in the battlefield dynamics.' Haddad noted that the continuation of the missile strikes by Iran 'exposes falsity of Zionist claims regarding air control and intelligence superiority.' He said that despite the Israeli claims regarding the destruction of Iran's missile launchers and production facilities, the launch of new missiles, some of which were used for the first time, and from multiple sources continues. Such development 'indicates a qualitative development in Iran's defensive capabilities as it points to a clear intelligence failure on the part of the enemy, the Iranian expert added. Haddad argued that the Zionist entity boasts of targeting civilian facilities, as happened in a public street north of Tehran, or in Al-Quds Square in the center of the capital a few days ago, where civilian students were targeted. 'On the other hand, Iran responds with precise strikes targeting sensitive intelligence centers, such as the Mossad headquarters in Herzliya. This indicates a remarkable intelligence achievment that has confused the Zionist regime,' he told Al-Manar. Meanwhile, Haddad said that the Iranian operations we are seeing today remain within the framework of deterrence and warning. He cited well-informed sources in the Islamic Republic that the real retaliatory strikes are yet to come and that 'what has happened so far was just an early warning.'

Iranian ambassador derides Trump's call for 'unconditional surrender'
Iranian ambassador derides Trump's call for 'unconditional surrender'

Nahar Net

time11 hours ago

  • Nahar Net

Iranian ambassador derides Trump's call for 'unconditional surrender'

by Naharnet Newsdesk 18 June 2025, 14:29 Iran's ambassador in Geneva derided as 'hostile' and 'unwarranted' U.S. President Donald Trump's comments calling for Iran's 'unconditional surrender.' Ambassador Ali Bahreini told reporters the Israeli campaign 'has not been able to bring big damage to our nuclear facilities' because it had taken precautions to protect them. Bahreini insisted that Iran has no intention to produce nuclear weapons, a top concern for Israeli authorities. He said 'we will continue to produce the enriched uranium as far as we need for peaceful purposes.' The ambassador rejected any talk of a 'setback' on Iran's nuclear research and technological activities caused by Israel's military action, saying 'our scientists will continue their work.' The Iranian diplomat said his country will 'respond strongly' to Israel's 'aggression' and will do so likewise against the United States if U.S. forces join the conflict between the rival Middle East powers as it moved into a sixth day on Wednesday.

How else could Iran retaliate to Israeli strikes?
How else could Iran retaliate to Israeli strikes?

Nahar Net

time11 hours ago

  • Nahar Net

How else could Iran retaliate to Israeli strikes?

by Naharnet Newsdesk 18 June 2025, 15:59 As Israel pounds Iran with airstrikes targeting military facilities and its nuclear sites, officials in Tehran have proposed a variety of steps the Islamic Republic could take outside of launching retaliatory missile barrages. Those proposals mirror those previously floated by Iran in confrontations with either Israel or the United States in the last few decades. They include disrupting maritime shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, potentially leaving the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and attacks by allied militants. Here's a look at what those options could mean — both to Iran and the wider Middle East. Targeting the Strait of Hormuz The Strait of Hormuz is the narrow mouth of the Persian Gulf, through which some 20% of all oil traded globally passes. The strait is in the territorial waters of Iran and Oman, which at its narrowest point is just 33 kilometers (21 miles) wide. The width of the shipping lane in either direction is only 3 kilometers (2 miles). Anything affecting it ripples through global energy markets, potentially raising the price of crude oil. That then trickles down to consumers through what they pay for gasoline and other oil products. There has been a wave of attacks on ships attributed to Iran since 2019, following President Donald Trump's decision to unilaterally withdraw the U.S. from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal and re-imposing crushing sanctions on Tehran. U.S. forces routinely travel through the strait, despite sometimes-tense encounters with Iran's Revolutionary Guard, a paramilitary force answerable only to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The U.S. Navy's Bahrain-based 5th Fleet conducts those operations, known as freedom of navigation missions, to ensure the waterway remains open to business. Iran views those passages as challenging its sovereignty — as if it operated off the coast of the U.S. Since the Israeli attacks began, Iranian officials have repeatedly raised blocking the strait — which likely would draw an immediate American response. Withdrawal from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty Experts fear Tehran could respond to the strike by deciding to fully end its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, abandon the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and rush toward a bomb. As a member of the treaty, Iran is obligated to explain any radioactive traces outside of declared sites and to provide assurances that they are not being used as part of a nuclear weapons program. Iran insists its program is peaceful, though it is the only non-nuclear-armed state to enrich uranium up to 60%, a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%. U.S. intelligence agencies and the IAEA assess Iran hasn't had an organized military nuclear program since 2003. There is precedent for the concern. North Korea said it withdrew from the treaty in 2003 and tested a nuclear weapon in 2006. However, again, if Iran withdrew from the treaty, it could draw the U.S. into the fight, something Tehran so far has been seeking to avoid. Asymmetric attacks by militants Iran could encourage more asymmetric attacks, targeting Jewish tourists, synagogues or Israeli diplomatic missions as it has done in the past. However, it's been a rough few years for those forces. Iran's allies, the self-described "Axis of Resistance," have been severely hurt by ongoing Israeli attacks since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel, particularly Lebanon's Hezbollah and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Iran has long used those groups as both an asymmetrical way to attack Israel and as a shield against a direct assault. Iraqi groups backed by Iran so far haven't become involved, leaving just Yemen's Houthi rebels as the only member of the axis to launch attacks on Israel since its campaign against Iran began.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store