Ryan
Kelsey
Dr.
Muck
PSC
223
November
5, 2015
Death to America… n Policies: A Change of
Tone in Tehran
On Wednesday November 4, 2015, Iran
celebrated the 36th anniversary of what they call their Second
Revolution, the storming of the U.S. Embassy.
To them, this event marked a major blow to U.S. foreign policy in their
country, mainly their support for Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi and their attempts
to undermine the Iranian Revolution.
This event marked a pivotal moment in U.S.-Iranian relations, which had
been extremely positive and friendly prior to this event. After the upheaval of the Shah, relations
deteriorated quickly. Currently, prayers
in the country regularly begin with the chant, “Death to America!” Following this are hardline statements from
the Iranian government condemning the United States. However, during Iran’s 36th
anniversary celebration, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei elaborated the
true meaning of this popular phrase. He
stated, “The slogan ‘death to America’ is backed by reason and wisdom; and it
goes without saying that the slogan does not mean death to the American nation;
this slogan means death to the U.S.’s policies; death to arrogance.” What does this shift in tone mean for
U.S.-Iranian relations moving forward?
Recently the Iranian government has
shown a willingness to enter into dialogue and cooperate with the West. Not only has Iran negotiated a nuclear
non-proliferation treaty with the United States and others, they are becoming
more active in developing a strategy to end the conflict in Syria. This seems to suggest that, even if Iran
still considers the United States to be the Great Satan, they are at least wiling
to make deals with the devil. In late
September, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani stated that if the U.S. were to
free Iranian prisoners, the conditions would be right for the four Americans
imprisoned in Iran to be released. However,
this does not imply by any means that Iran is looking to stop their antagonism
towards the U.S., because as they said, they still have policy disagreements.
While the Ayatollah’s remarks on
their celebration of the storming of the U.S. Embassy seemed to mark a shift in
policy, the actions of the crowd on that day suggest a reluctance to do
so. Demonstrators in the audience on
this day opened the ceremony by burning American flags and waving signs
affirming the U.S. to be the Great Satan.
However, this does not account for other parts of the population who are
ambivalent or have favorable feelings toward the U.S.
How should the U.S. shape their
policy moving forward in the light of recent events in Iran? My opinion is that Iran is in a moderately
turbulent period at the moment. Both the
Iranian government and the people are trying to decide whether Iran is better
in complete isolation from the United States and the West, or if a limited role
would be beneficial. Furthermore, the
results of the Iran nuclear deal as well as their involvement in Syria are yet
to be determined. With Iran’s tendency
in the past to renege on agreements, it would be foolish for the U.S. to drop
all suspicions of them. Furthermore,
Iran and Saudi Arabia are largely seen as rival powers in the Middle East. With the Saudis being our largest ally in the
region, dealings with Iran would complicate this relationship. My recommendation is that the United States
should embark upon the creation of a minor, yet cordial relationship with Iran. Even if the nuclear deal and a potential
prisoner exchange are the extent of communication between the two countries,
the symbolism of an ability to cooperate would result in a lessening of
tensions in the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment