I would like to thank my teacher, Ms. Mashal Shabbir. The supervision and support that she gave truly helped me in this project. Her cooperation is thus appreciated.
This report explains the US-Iran relationships, how they changed over the period of time and what the main reasons for that change were. I tried to analyze these reasons according to the International Relations theories as well as my own opinion. The report includes the information mainly from 1940 to date.
“In the last days before the culmination of Iranian revolution the electricity workers in Tehran would turn off the lights each evening and then from the rooftops came the chant “God is Great” with another chant, “death to America” however with a much contradicting tone” (Cottom, 1988). These words themselves explain the intensity which lies in the US- Iran relationships since the Iranian revolution. European intrusion in Iran has been a prolonged one with immense prominence. Trade was one of the most significant reasons. Iran’s geographical position made it the central attention for the European traders, as the land route which joined the western and eastern worlds crossed Iran. Moreover, as Cottom explains in his book that the only presence of the Europeans in Iran was “a matter of national prestige”. That is this prestige not only advanced Europeans economically but politically too. US initially was viewed as a caring western country, who was not only sincere but also advocated human rights of freedom, moreover encouraged courage, independence as well as dignity for the people of Iran. Before 1940’s it had no economic interest in Iran plus only a minute aid was granted to Iran during the event of Soviet invasion in Iran, however this minute interest which US had in Iran was not long lived. Iran, blessed with one of the most precious reserves of oil attracted the western world immensely. With increasing industrialization especially in Britain as well as America oil was becoming one of the main ingredients of their success. The British government purchased a large amount of Anglo-Persian Oil Company’s (APOC) stock during the First World War. This oil company was a predecessor of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC). By the time of Iranian oil crisis almost half of APOC’s stock was in the hands of Britain. Iranians on the other hand were kept away from the high ranking positions in the oil company. Moreover neither did the royalty payments satisfied the Iranian government nor did the high levels of confidentiality which prevailed in the major decision making contended them, giving birth to a situation which benefited neither of the two parties. Thus during 1951-1953 Iran strived to gain power over its oil industry which gave hype to the sense of nationalism in Iranians. The leaders in Iran provided the stance that out of the £250 million of profits which AIOC made in the late 1940’s their royalty payments only counted for one third of the total amount that is £90 million (Mary Ann Heiss). On the part of British Empire “oil” had become an evil necessity not only economically but also to sustain its political position as “a great power” in the World. Thus this nationalization not only threatened its position in the Middle East but also could have blown its largest investment abroad. Iranians on the contrary were keen to achieve independence nationally and politically. Although they were well aware of the fact that this may lead to serious economic adversity in Iran, they wanted the British dominance abolished to be treated as a sovereign nation. Therefore Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq stressed upon full control over Iran’s internal and financial affairs. The increasing tension between Britain and Iran and the wavering issues led the United States (US) jump in the situation. For US however the main goal was not the interests of either party that is Iran or Britain but it had its own...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document