The Iranian Side of the Story: Justification Behind Taking American Diplomats as Hostages

Throughout history, nations have often found themselves in complex and challenging situations that lead to actions that are still debated and discussed today. One such controversy involves the taking of American diplomats as hostages by Iranian students. This article explores the Iranian perspective, providing a deeper understanding of the events and context that led to this incident.

Context and Background

The Iranian hostage crisis, which began in 1979, was a result of a long-standing series of events. To comprehend the Iranian perspective, it is essential to recognize the historical context that led to this crisis. One of the central figures in this saga is the Shah of Iran, who was a key player in the nation's turbulent history.

The Shah came to power in 1953 with the help of the United States, after a successful coup d'état. However, his regime was marred by repressive measures and the use of SAVAK, the secret police, as instruments of terror. SAVAK was known for its brutal methods of interrogation and torture, which were widely reported and documented. The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) recognized the atrocities committed by SAVAK, adding to the anti-Shah sentiment in Iran.

The Shah's Repression and Iranian Sentiment

Iranian students and citizens were highly critical of the Shah and his regime. The Shah's authoritarian rule, combined with the brutality of SAVAK, created a deep-rooted resentment among the Iranian population. When riots broke out and led to the overthrow of the Shah, many Iranians saw this as a positive development.

The new regime, led by Ayatollah Khomeini, took power promising a more just and democratic society. However, the continued desire to hold the Shah accountable for his actions led to tensions. The Shah was in the United States for medical treatment and was no longer a part of Iran's direct control. Yet, the idea of bringing him back to Iran to stand trial for his crimes was a significant factor in the decision to take American diplomats hostage.

Justification for the Hostage-Taking

From the Iranian perspective, the primary justification for the hostage-taking can be traced back to the Shah's actions. Iranian students and citizens felt that the United States was complicit in supporting a repressive regime and felt that it was their duty to take action. The brief plan to hold the hostages did not align with the popular sentiment in Iran, which favored a prolonged occupation of the embassy as leverage. This decision was rooted in the desire to hold the US accountable for its historical support of the Shah.

Impact and Consequences

The hostage crisis had severe consequences on both sides. The United States was forced to confront the reality of the student protests and the new regime in Iran. The crisis lasted for 444 days, ending only in 1981 with the release of the hostages. Throughout this period, the hostages were poorly treated, which only fueled the tensions and anger.

The hostage-taking was a pivotal moment in the relationship between Iran and the United States, influencing future diplomatic relations and geopolitical dynamics in the region. Recent developments, such as the release of funds seized from the new regime by the US in 2016, can be seen as efforts to bring some closure to this long-standing issue.

Conclusion

While the act of taking American diplomats as hostages is widely condemned, the Iranian perspective provides valuable insights into the historical context and motivations behind this event. The complex web of historical events, including the support for the Shah and the subsequent repressive regime, deeply influenced the decision to take action. Understanding these nuances can help in comprehending the broader implications of the Iranian hostage crisis and its impact on the region.

Keywords: Iran hostage crisis, Shah of Iran, SAVAK

References: Mohammad Mosaddegh - Wikipedia Iran hostage crisis - Wikipedia