Inside the six-day siege of the Iranian Embassy in London
On the morning of 30 April, 1980, a group of armed men invaded the Iranian Embassy in London.
They took 26 people hostage, including staff, visitors and a police officer and issued demands in the name of a cause almost no one had ever heard of.
The 'Group of the Martyr', a collection of Iranian Arabs, wanted independence for their province of Iran, but their demands were impossible for the British Government to meet, and so the then-little known Special Air Service (SAS) were told to plan an invasion of the building to rescue the hostages.
The six-day siege was eventually broken by the SAS, and their storming of the embassy galvanised the world as people watched it all unfold on live television.
Historian and author Ben McIntyre takes a deeper look at this dramatic siege and rescue operation, uncovering the real, powerful story of ordinary people responding as best they could to lethal jeopardy.
Further information
The Siege is published by Penguin Random House.
This episode was recorded live at the 2025 Sydney Writers' Festival.
Find out more about the Conversations Live National Tour on the ABC website.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
36 minutes ago
- ABC News
The Israel-Iran ceasefire holds hidden costs for Iranians hoping for the end to an oppressive regime - ABC Religion & Ethics
NOTE: The author has requested to remain anonymous due to safety concerns for them and their family in Iran. While Israel's overt objective in its recent military campaign has been to halt Iran's nuclear advancement, its strikes have carried an equally potent, and perhaps unintended, message to the Iranian populace: this regime cannot even defend its own territory. By systematically degrading air-defence batteries, command centres and key missile sites, Israeli has undercut the regime's invincibility — an image also achieved by what was described as Israel's 'total control of the skies over Tehran'. These blows exposed Iran's internal fragility, fuelling domestic critics who have long accused the Islamic Republic of prioritising regional ambition over citizen welfare. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself has hinted that crippling Iran's military apparatus could pave the way to dismantle its hard-line leadership. On 23 June Reuters reported that Israeli air strikes hit not only nuclear and missile facilities but also 'the headquarters of Iran's Revolutionary Guard and Basij militia' in central Tehran. By targeting this repressive infrastructure, Israel sent a dual signal: external military vulnerability and the potential for domestic fractures. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei delivers a speech on the occasion of Basij Week, organised by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps on 25 November 2024. (Photo by Iranian Leader Press Office / Anadolu via Getty Images) The Trump administration initially disavowed any intention of regime change, mindful of past interventions. However, under intense pressure from Congress to end the conflict quickly, President Trump brokered a ceasefire on 24 June — only to chastise both sides when violations followed. Iran's parliamentary speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, announced that the country will 'continue their nuclear programme without interruption', underscoring the fact that the truce does not signal an end to strategic competition, only a pause in open hostilities. President Donald Trump had earlier stoked the debate on regime change in Iran that galvanised both hard-liners (labelled as 'foreign-backed traitors') and reformist factions (who saw it as a rare external endorsement of internal change). He later walked back any talk of overthrowing the regime, warning it 'would cause chaos'. This hasty truce may have halted the missiles, but it risks reinforcing the internal security state the strikes sought to expose. Mass arrests and summary executions Iran's missile exchanges with Israel may have dominated headlines, but beneath the thunder of air strikes lies Tehran's deeply entrenched security apparatus — the very bedrock of its political survival. After the 24 June ceasefire, Iran's security forces started spreading a false narrative about Iran's victory, launching fresh detentions, show trials and executions. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), its paramilitary Basij force and the Ministry of Intelligence have seized the cover of war to intensify repression and silence critics. These forces that are deeply settled inside Iran's cities and villages, and even abroad, have long crushed student protests, religious minorities and reformist movements alike — security units detaining thousands and opening fire on crowds many times since the Islamic Revolution in 1979. An Iranian Armed Forces General Staff outlet confirmed fresh Basij checkpoint deployments nationwide to 'promote internal security and regime stability' amid the conflict. In the days since Israeli strikes on 13 June, hundreds have been arrested and thousands detained on suspicion of 'collaborating' with Israel's intelligence agency, Mossad. On 15 June, Gholamhossein Mohseni Eje'i, the head of Iran's judiciary, instructed prosecutors to punish anyone who 'disturbs public peace and security or collaborates with Israel,' stressing: these cases should be reviewed and fast-tracked under the pertinent wartime statutes, and any verdicts should be executed swiftly … If proceedings for some individuals drag on for two or three months, the deterrent effect is lost. In two weeks, six people were hanged: three alleged spies (Esmaeil Fekri, Mohammad Amin Mahdavi Shayesteh and Majid Mosayebi) were executed following summary trials, and after the ceasefire three Kurdish cross-border porters (Idris Aali, Azad Shojaei and Rasoul Ahmad Rasoul) were accused of collaborating with Israel. Over 700 individuals have now been arrested on similar charges. Human Rights Activists in Iran (HRA) condemned the trials as 'arbitrary' and warned that those detained face disappearance, torture and other forms of maltreatment without recourse or redress. Commentators have likewise warned that any ceasefire without safeguards could lead to mass extrajudicial executions worse than 1988 purges. Tools of repression Executions are only the tip of Tehran's coercive toolkit. When the cost of a public hanging becomes too high, the IRGC and Basij routinely resort to other brutal methods. During the 2022 'Women, Life, Freedom' protests, for example, Iran Human Rights documented that security forces 'intentionally and systematically targeted protesters' eyes and faces', firing metal pellets and rubber bullets at close range to maim rather than kill, leaving victims with permanent disfigurement and profound psychological trauma. Such tactics serve a dual purpose: they deter future dissent through visible horror and sidestep the international outcry that accompanies executions. Moreover, political prisoners are paying a steep price. Evin prison, Iran's most notorious detention centre, lies perilously close to targeted military installations. On 23 June 2025 Israeli jets struck the prison's entrance to demonstrate its ability to reach deep into Iran's core security sites, but also to symbolically challenge the regime's repressive apparatus, offering a show of solidarity with embattled dissidents. However, this escalation has compounded the danger faced by those trapped inside. Families and insiders report that guards have refused to evacuate inmates during air-raid alerts, leaving them 'helpless under collapsing ceilings' and cut off from food, medicine and communication. Photographs of Iranians allegedly killed since the Iranian Revolution are displayed at the 'Free Iran' demonstration on the National Mall in Washington, DC, on 22 June 2025. (Photographer: Aaron Schwartz / Bloomberg via Getty Images) Beyond physical violence, the regime has mounted a sweeping assault on independent information channels. In the first week of the conflict, Iran shut down the national internet, causing a roughly 97 per cent drop in traffic, in part to choke off external reporting and prevent Iranians from accessing uncensored news. Meanwhile, daily forms of repression continue unabated. Basij-affiliated networks send messages, warning any woman seen in public without a mandatory hijab with treason charges. The Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has formally delegated key powers to the IRGC high command from his bunker, cementing its grip on both military operations and domestic security enforcement. Even after key IRGC and Basij sites were struck, Tehran mobilised mass anti-war rallies by regime loyalists. At the same time, anti-war protests by the Iranian diaspora in American cities — most notably in New York and Washington — pressured US leaders to show restraint. Many of these demonstrations have been fuelled by Tehran itself, with regime-linked funds directed to campus and city-centre protests. What comes next Iran's repressive system thrives on perpetual crisis. While many conflict-weary voices hoped for a ceasefire — which is now in place — for ordinary Iranians this pause is often frightening, knowing that a ceasefire grants the regime recovery time to update its coercive apparatus and redirect its full arsenal against civilians. Observers warn that only a ceasefire coupled with robust international monitoring and specific guarantees for detainees can break this cycle, and prevent Tehran from turning temporary relief into a permanent crackdown. As the smoke of war clears, shining a light on Iran's domestic security apparatus will determine whether this conflict becomes a catalyst for regime change and democracy in Iran or simply the latest chapter in a never-ending story of repression. The lack of mass street protests, driven by exhaustion and fear, underscores Iran's need for international support and protection for domestic dissent. International diplomatic efforts — such as external pressure to hold a UN-backed referendum on political reforms — may help secure guarantees for detainees, institutionalise safeguards against arbitrary justice and chart a peaceful transition toward genuine accountability. As an Iranian living in diaspora, I look to such interventions with cautious hope, trusting that only enforceable guarantees can shield our loved ones from an unchecked security apparatus. The author is an Iranian academic at Monash University, who specialises in peace studies in higher education. Their work focuses on documenting the consequences of regional conflicts on civilian populations. The fact that the author wishes to remain anonymous reflects the treatment of Iranian dissidents by the Islamic Republic, both at home and abroad.
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
If we can think together, maybe we can live together: What the history of philosophy can teach us about inter-religious harmony - ABC Religion & Ethics
Over the last two weeks, long simmering hostilities between Israel and Iran flared, with the United States deciding to join the fray. In Syria, a recent suicide bombing targeting Christians at prayer in the Greek Orthodox Church of Mar Elias in Damascus killed 25 people and wounded 63 others. Ever since 7 October 2023, antisemitism and Islamophobia have both been on the rise in Australia. The painful paradox behind these global and local upheavals is that the communities in question — Jews, Muslims and Christians — all see themselves as inheritors of a common biblical tradition, centred on the figure of Abraham. As conflict escalates abroad and social cohesion fractures at home, the challenge of inter-religious harmony is as urgent as ever. Is there any hope of harmony between the three Abrahamic faiths? We hope so, and we think there is a surprising and neglected resource to draw on — the history of philosophy. There is an extraordinary record of shared philosophical inquiry among the three Abrahamic traditions. It begins with philosophers like Philo of Alexandria (a Jew), Gregory of Nyssa (a Christian) and al-Kindi (a Muslim), and it cascades through the Middle Ages with some of the finest minds in human history — such as Maimonides (known to Jews as Rambam and to Muslims as Musa Ibn Maymun), Avicenna (Ibn Sina, from present day Iran) and Thomas Aquinas. Brilliant women like Hildegard of Bingen and Christine de Pizan are part of the story too. The Abrahamic philosophical traditions explore the deepest questions that the three faiths ask — which are also some of the deepest questions any of us ask: What is the meaning of my life? What makes for a good society? How do we find truth? What is the nature of the divine? The three traditions were in continual conversation with each other around these questions. Over centuries, Jews, Muslims and Christians found themselves debating, writing and living alongside each other — with their scriptures in one hand, and Plato or Aristotle in the other. Ninth-century Baghdad and twelfth-century Toledo are especially vivid instances. In these cities, networks of Jewish, Christian and Islamic scholars, fluent in multiple languages, wrote, translated, commented on and dispersed philosophical texts in Greek, Syriac, Arabic, Hebrew and Latin, transporting new ideas across the Islamic and Christian worlds. An iconic moment is the collaboration in Toledo between the Jew, Abraham Ibn Daud, and the Christian, Dominicus Gundissalinus, who together translated major works of Islamic philosophy for Latin Christian readers, working out their own distinctive philosophical views along the way. The point of all these cross-tradition conversations wasn't to agree about everything — which would be both impossible and boring. Rather, like fans of opposing football teams who watch the game together and enjoy it more for that reason, the point was a shared project . These Abrahamic thinkers worked together on the project of philosophy, which is itself the project of seeking wisdom ( sophia , ḥokhmah , sapientia , ḥikmah ). They worked on shared questions, and thinking together helped each tradition sharpen its own answers to those questions — finding common ground here, differences there — and in the process they made neighbours of each other, intellectually and literally. Disagreements were many, of course. Indeed, there was as much disagreement within each faith as there was between them — as when Maimonides sides with Avicenna against the Rabbis of the Talmud regarding natural science, or when Aquinas favours Aristotelian Muslim accounts of the soul and body over some Christian alternatives. And we cannot ignore the periods of political and social conflict in this history, particularly the oppression of religious and cultural minorities in both the Christian and Islamic worlds. But the stand-out fact of Abrahamic philosophical history is the degree of intellectual collaboration between the three traditions. We are the directors of the Notre Dame Centre for the History of Philosophy. We are both philosophers — one Jewish, the other Christian. Next week, we are launching a new annual lecture series, The John and Anna Belfer Oration in the History of Jewish Philosophy, in partnership with The Great Synagogue Sydney. It's an initiative we hope to replicate in Sydney's Christian and Muslim communities. The extraordinary history of Abrahamic philosophy inspires our work in the Centre. Our hope is that — maybe, in some modest way — shared philosophical inquiry can once again serve as a bridge between Abrahamic communities. If we can re-learn how to think together, perhaps we can re-learn how to live together. David Bronstein is Co-Director of the Centre for the History of Philosophy, Director of the Institute for Ethics and Society and Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Notre Dame Australia. He is author of Aristotle on Knowledge and Learning: The Posterior Analytics. Nathan Lyons is Co-Director of the Centre for the History of Philosophy and Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Notre Dame Australia. He is author of God and Being and Signs in the Dust: A Theory of Natural Culture and Cultural Nature.
Daily Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Daily Telegraph
Russia's unconvincing ploy to virtue signal during the Middle East crisis
Don't miss out on the headlines from World. Followed categories will be added to My News. As the world fixated on the sudden eruption of hostilities between Israel and Iran, a quieter, more calculating player loomed just offstage. Analysts have warned about how the Kremlin has leveraged chaos in the past for its own benefit. But Russia's elites played their same old tune as missiles flew over the Middle East this week. In the span of just a few days, what began as tit-for-tat missile exchanges between Israel and Iran escalated into what alarmists dubbed 'WWIII'. It was a solid gold opportunity for the Kremlin to divert global attention from its own misdeeds, while also posturing as a so-called peacemaker. The United States, despite initial hesitations, was eventually drawn into the fray to assist in defending Israeli airspace and then de-escalate the situation 'diplomatically' with a devastating B-2 stealth bomber assault. But in the background, Vladimir Putin quietly worked a different angle. Russia jumped at the opportunity to pose as the adult in the room and appear 'above the fray' — all while exploiting the fog of war to reduce public focus on Ukraine and test the boundaries of US restraint. This is the opinion of Dr Ivana Stradner, a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, who claims Russia 'never misses an opportunity to exploit a crisis'. 'Russia benefits from the situation in the Middle East to divert [the] West's attention from Ukraine,' Dr Stradner told That strategy came into sharp focus as the Kremlin loudly condemned Israeli strikes, all while continuing its relentless three-and-a-half-year assault on sovereign Ukraine. Moscow then boldly positioned itself as a mediator in the conflict, using the UN as its springboard. The crisis was a juicy opportunity for the Kremlin to appear as the adult in the room. (Photo by Menahem Kahana / AFP) 'The Kremlin is trying to portray itself as a reasonable voice that wants to stop 'WWIII' and act as a pillar of stability in the Middle East,' Dr Stradner continued. 'Moscow is also using the UN to flex its diplomatic muscles, as Russia has a veto there. 'Ironically, Putin has also offered to mediate the conflict, but he is neither willing nor able to be an effective mediator. Putin wants to pander to President Trump to strengthen his position in negotiations on Ukraine and to portray himself as a reliable partner to Washington.' While the deception might fall flat among those keenly aware of Russia's advanced misinformation tactics, the Kremlin's propaganda train chugs on, hoping to win the hearts of those undecided on who to trust in the twisted theatre of world politics. But even more telling is what Russia didn't do. Despite its longstanding security relationship with Iran, which includes the presence of Russian technicians at Iranian nuclear sites, Moscow made no military moves to support Tehran directly. Instead, as Dr Stradner points out, 'Russia already abandoned its allies Armenia and Syria, and now Iran. The West should remind Putin's allies across the world that with friends like Putin, they do not need enemies.' 'Russia never misses an opportunity to exploit crisis'.(Photo by Vyacheslav PROKOFYEV / POOL / AFP) Trump fires up at 'N-word' Whilecertain Russian assets were virtue signalling, others were jumping on the opportunity to put a fright up the West. Former President and Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev ominously warned that Iran could just source their nuclear weapons from allies. 'A number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their own nuclear warheads,' Medvedev wrote on X. Those comments riled up Donald Trump, who accused Medvedev of playing with the 'N-word' a little too haphazardly. 'Did I hear Former President Medvedev, from Russia, casually throwing around the 'N word' (Nuclear!), and saying that he and other Countries would supply Nuclear Warheads to Iran?' Trump wrote on Truth Social. 'The 'N word' should not be treated so casually. I guess that's why Putin's 'THE BOSS.'' But Dr Stradner says it's all hot air. Former President and Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev threw the 'N-word' around a bit last week. (Photo) 'Medvedev's words are a textbook case of reflexive control,' she explained, referring to Russia's longstanding strategy of seeding confusion and fear to paralyse decision-making. 'For Putin, nuclear weapons are cognitive weapons.' Dr Stradner stressed that the Trump administration and Western powerbrokers must avoid reacting to intentionally inflammatory tactics. 'Nobody should take Medvedev's words seriously,' she said. 'It is pure propaganda.' Russia's nuclear chest-beating has become a predictable tool to distract, distort, and deter. It may not intend to launch missiles, but it absolutely intends to shape how others behave through the threat of escalation. Alliances tested but not broken While many view the Russia-Iran relationship as purely strategic, Dr Stradner sees a deeper ideological connection forming between the two nations. 'They are like friends with benefits,' she said. 'They have different interests in Central Asia, but they have a mutual enemy: the United States, and that's their bond.' More than just co-operation on drones or ballistic missiles, the partnership reflects a shared desire to bypass Western-led institutions and promote a traditionalist, anti-liberal order. 'There is an ideological alliance defending traditionalist, religious, and anti-liberal values,' Dr Stradner noted. While put under heavy strain this week, Russia's alliances with anti-West nations are growing. While put under heavy strain this week, Russia's alliances with anti-West nations are growing. (Photo by / AFP) Russian nationalists have advocated for an 'Axis of Aggressors' that includes Iran, China, and North Korea, connected through projects like the International North-South Transport Corridor, an initiative that would provide a logistics lifeline to sidestep Western trade routes. Then there's the BRICS alliance, consisting of major superpowers like China, India and Russia. Mr Putin riled up the Mr Trump camp late last year at a BRICS summit in Moscow, calling for a 'multipolar world order' in front of 20 leaders from powerful allied nations. They had gathered in the Russian capital to discuss sweeping plans, including the development of a BRICS-led international payment system. Russia has touted the platform as an attractive alternative to Western-led international organisations like the G7. 'The process of forming a multipolar world order is underway, a dynamic and irreversible process,' Mr Putin said at the official opening of the summit. Originally published as Russia's ploy to virtue signal during the Middle East crisis is dripping with irony
