Download the File

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Luisa Delos Reyes

California State University Maritime Academy

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Abstract

As many are aware, the United States and Iran have not had the best relations starting all the way back in 1945 and even today in 2017. Unless a person lived through the era while all of the attacks between the U.S. and Iran, no one really understands the reason behind their animosity towards each other. It is believed that both countries are at fault for the strong tensions due to actions that were done and comments that were made. These two countries did not always have poor relations, but decisions that were made has obviously affected those relations drastically.

This thesis will allow for readers to live through history and give them an idea on how much interactions between the U.S. and Iran were affected. This is not meant for the reader to determine who is in the right and who is at fault, instead, this thesis will give the reader a better understanding as to why these countries do not get along. Aside from the background between the U.S. and Iran, this thesis will also cover possible solutions, as well as what the future may look like if these countries do not make peace, and it does not look good.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Introduction

The United States and Iran have had a very inconsistent relationship where they have gone from potential allies to enemies. These two countries have not always had negative interactions between each other; however, the U.S. today describes Iran to be their bitterest enemy. They have worked alongside the other, not necessarily because they wanted to, because they felt that there were situations where they would complement each other to achieve a specific plan. On the other hand, there have been even more events where the two countries battled against each other, which negatively affected all types of relations. Since World War II, the relations between the U.S. and Iran have increased, but as time went on, the trust between the other decreased. There were too many events that occurred that could have begun this strong tension: U.S. overthrowing Iran's Prime Minister, Mohammed Mossadegh; the Cold War; Iranian hostage crisis; Iran-Contra affair; or one country attacking the other. It is hard to determine what really drew the line between these two countries starting from around 1946 all the way up until today in 2017.

Background

The purpose of this topic is to analyze how the relations between the U.S. and Iran have gotten to where they are today. There seems to be a lot of tension built up among these two countries, but not a specific reason as to why there is. Looking back on previous interactions, it will give a better idea as to why there is absolutely no trust between the U.S. and Iran. With their current interactions today, it is possible to determine whether their relations will improve or get worse.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

The Wars

World War II

In the early years of World War II, Iran was working with Germany by exporting grains to the Axis power while receiving technicians in return. In 1941, Iran was invaded by the British and the Soviet Union, both allies of the United States, with their focus on oil and a more convenient route to ship war materials to the USSR (History Staff, 2009). Iran signed the

Tripartite Treaty of Alliance with Britain and the Soviets in 1943 agreeing that the Allies would protect Iranian economy from the effects of the war, as well as exiting out of Iranian territory by

March 1946. The Soviets, instead, decided to move towards north Iran in Azerbaijan with the intent to create a permanent direct access to the Persian Gulf, which went against the Tripartite

Treaty of Alliance. Not only did the Soviet Union violate the 1943 treaty, but it also violated the

Russo-Persian Treaty of Friendship, which promised that the Soviet would not interfere in the internal affairs of Iran (Wolfe, 2011). The Friendship Treaty was signed in 1921 by the representatives of Iran and the Soviet Russia with the purpose to prevent White Russian counter- revolutionary forces from attacking the Soviets from Iranian territory (Mehdiyoun, 2000).

With the Soviets not leaving northern Iran, believing that they were entitled to oil-drilling rights, both countries came to an agreement that Iran would supply them with an oil concession if the Soviets left their territory by April 1946. The Soviet Union refusing to withdraw from the country created issues with Turkey: "Meanwhile, it demanded disputed territories on the Soviet-

Turkish border and pressed for partial control over the Turkish Straits" (Immerman & Goedde,

2013, P. 248). In response, Great Britain informed the U.S. of the Soviets' actions, which is when the U.S. began to provide Iran with aid and advice assisting in Iran's decision of backing out of their agreement with the Soviet Union. The U.S. were not pleased with the Soviets due to the

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today possible risk of Iran assuming that the U.S. was involved in this decision, and creating more problems. After the Soviets realized that the U.S. was supporting Iran, the Soviet Union made the decision not to have their armed forces re-enter Iran with the fear that they would be targeted by the U.S. and Great Britain (History Staff, 2009).

The Cold War

With the U.S. and Soviet Union ending on bad terms at the end of World War II, that negative tension carried over in 1947, the beginning of the Cold War. During the first few years of the Cold War, Iran unanimously voting to nationalize the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company

(AIOC), hoping to use that profit to develop their country (CBS News, 2010). British Prime

Minister, Winston Churchill, was not happy when Mossadegh, Iran's first elected Prime Minister, nationalized their oil since Great Britain was originally in control of Iran's oil. The U.S. tried remaining neutral with both Iran and Great Britain, but even the Truman administration agreed that nationalizing the oil company was causing more issues. Although President Truman did not want conflicts with both countries, he still refused to help the British overturn the Oil

Nationalization Act, but that all changed when President Eisenhower came into office (Mardi,

2008). President Eisenhower agreed that this decision was not fair to Great Britain since a large share of Iran's operations was given to American oil companies when the U.S. was already receiving shares from Saudi oil companies. It was hard for the U.S. to keep these neutral interactions between Iran and Great Britain because, although the U.S. was benefiting from Iran's policy, the British were furious about the results (Immerman & Goedde, 2013). That is when the

U.S. decided that Iran nationalizing their oil company should not be authorized.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Changes in Power

Pahlavi in, Mossadegh out

Iran began to change their views towards the U.S. starting in 1951 after interfering with

Iran's policy, but it was not until 1953 that Iran realized that the U.S. could no longer be trusted at all. In response to Mossadegh nationalizing Iran's oil company, the U.S. and Britain worked together by using the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and Britain's M16 to plot ways to get

Mossadegh overthrown as Iran's Prime Minister, and replaced by Shah Mohammad Reza

Pahlavi, who supported Western interests. The reason behind the coup was designed "to get rid of a nationalist figure who insisted that oil should be nationalised" (Dehghan & Norton-Taylor,

2013, P. 1). The replacement led to Mossadegh being sentenced to jail and later to house arrest while Pahlavi remained Prime Minister up until the Islamic Revolution in 1979. The nationalization of Iranian oil companies continued to be in effect, however, the only difference was that foreign oil companies were given the permission to control and market Iran's oil company (Immerman & Goedde, 2013). As a result of the 1953 coup, the Iranian government lost their trust in the U.S. which led to the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

After the U.S. and Iran had a falling out in 1953, these two countries eventually found their way working together. In 1957, the Iranian nuclear program was created with the help of the United States. The U.S. assisted Iran with this nuclear program by providing them with its first research reactor - "A nuclear reactor, a 5-megawatt nuclear reactor that is still functioning and still operational in Tehran" (Inskeep, 2015, P. ). This decision was made by President

Eisenhower as a part of his Atoms for Peace program, which was meant to provide countries with their own nuclear technologies, anticipating that these would not be used for anything

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today military related. The difference between Iran and the other countries that had a nuclear program created is that Iran had the funds and expertise to expand their program.

The Shah's government took full advantage of this opportunity and sent Iranian students to attend Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to study nuclear engineering (Inskeep,

2015). The Iranian students that were trained in nuclear engineering were the ones who ran the actual program when they returned back to Iran. In the early 1960s, Iran started to buy nuclear plants from West Germany and France, which worried the U.S. that Iran was trying to seek nuclear weapons. The U.S. decided to limit Iran's program now that Iran had the proper knowledge and resources for creating a much stronger nuclear program. Since the Middle East is well-known for sending their college students to MIT, in 2017, President Trump has currently banned the right of Iranian students returning to the MIT (Ebbert, 2017).

Although the U.S. and Iran started working together with the nuclear program shortly after the 1953 coup, Iranians were still very angered by the overthrowing of their Prime Minister.

The Shah remained as the sole leader of Iran until 1979 when he was exiled, which was the same year that the Islamic Revolution was formed. Prior to the Islamic Revolution, Iranians were very infuriated that Mossadegh was overthrown and replaced by the Shah as an ally of the United

States.

Not all Iranians hated the Shah since it sounded like he had ideas that were best for them such as giving women the right to vote, reducing the amount of illiteracy, and reforming and developing infrastructure (History Staff, 2010). All of these ideas were known as the White

Revolution of 1963. Although many of the people in Iran thought his ideas were going to be beneficial for them, they realized years later that only the elite class would be benefiting. In1978, millions of people in Iran were against the Shah, protesting in the streets and resisting from

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today going to work. As a result, the Shah fled into exile in January 1979 and was replaced by

Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who returned from exile (BBC News, n.d.). Khomeini was imprisoned, and later exiled, by the Shah in 1963 for refusing to follow any of the changes that the Shah was making. In January 1979, Pahlavi went on a vacation to Egypt with his wife where he left Prime Minister Shahpour Bakhtiar to lead Iran until Pahlavi returned. The Bakhtiar government believed that Ayatollah Khomeini would be an appropriate choice as the sole leader of Iran (Woollacott, 1979).

1979 Transformation

IRGC under Khomeini

While Khomeini was back in power, not only did he exile Pahlavi, he spread the word that the decisions made by the Shah were illegal and demanded that he be put on trial and charged. By the time that Iranians realized the Shah's orders were illegal, the Shah was already in the United States where he was receiving medical treatment for his cancer (History Staff, 2010).

In 1979, there were many changes, additions, and decisions made by Iran with the hope of making their country stronger, and let it be known to other countries that they are a possible threat. With Khomeini as Iran's supreme leader, his first decision was to form the Islamic

Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which was seen as the "people's army" for Iran. The purpose for the IRGC was to defend their country from internal and external threats, similar to the U.S. National Guard (Bruno, et al., 2013). During the end of that year, Iranian students tested their power by targeting the U.S. Embassy that is located in Tehran to capture fifty-two

Americans and holding them hostage for 444 days. Throughout this year, the decisions and actions made by Iran made the relations with the U.S. tougher than they were already.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

As mentioned, the IRGC was used as Iran's primary security force, as it was more powerful than their Artesh, or conventional forces. The Guards were put to the ultimate test when their country was invaded by Iraq in 1980, but were able to prove that they were strong enough to become Iran's premier military force. Before the Shah was exiled, he was very reliant on the Artesh who were trained and supplied by the U.S., which added some suspicion by the regime. With it being decided that the IRGC take full control of the war against Iraq, due to lack of military experience and ideological commitment, the war lasted a lot longer than it should have (Nader, 2010). Fast forwarding to 2007, militants that were linked to the Quds Force, the parliamentary arm of the Revolutionary Guards was captured after being accused of supplying

Iraq with roadside bombs to networks. After the accusation was made by President George W.

Bush, it led to the belief that the Quds Force was playing a part in terrorist activities, which the

Iranians did not appreciate.

Iranian Hostage Crisis

While President Jimmy Carter was in office, he had a strong belief that the tensions between the Iranian government and the U.S. were dying down, until the Iranian hostage crisis happened. On November 4, 1979, hundreds of Iranian students shamelessly violated international law by targeting the U.S. Embassy located in Tehran where they held over fifty Americans hostage for 444 days. Iranians were still very angered from the CIA-led coup, and grew to be infuriated when they found out that the Shah was welcomed back into the U.S., which made Iran believe that America was planning another coup (Penn, 2009). As mentioned earlier, Iran demanded that the Shah return back to the country so that he could stand trial, however, the U.S. refused to let him back. Iran believed that going after the U.S. Embassy would be the perfect target to perform the crisis just because they know that it would be easier going after Americans

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today that are already in their territory. Not only was the U.S. Embassy seen as an easy target, but Iran had suspicions that the workers were all CIA spies watching over them. Throughout those 444 days that those Americans were held hostage, Iran was able to expose the U.S. and show the world that the Administration was weak.

The Rescue Mission

President Carter ordered the Pentagon, the headquarters of the U.S. Department of

Defense, to begin planning a rescue mission for the crisis. Eventually, they came up with

"Operation Eagle Claw" where it was prepared to be fully executed in two days, except that it is not how it went. The original plan was for eight navy helicopters from the U.S.S. Nimitz meet on the first night with the U.S. Delta Forces on "Desert One", secret area in central Iran. From there, the eight navy helicopters would fly the U.S. Delta Forces to "Desert Two", located about 50 miles south of Tehran, to hide out. On the second night, that is when Operation Eagle Claw was expected to be complete. The plan was to have the Delta Forces find their way onto six trucks, driven by Iranian CIA operatives, where they would be taken to the U.S. Embassy to free the hostages. Once the Delta Forces rescued the Americans, the plan was to move them to a nearby soccer field where the navy helicopters would meet and transport them back to the U.S.

Unfortunately for the U.S., Operation Eagle Claw turned out to be a complete disaster.

The eight navy helicopters had a difficult time making it to "Desert One" because of a terrible dust storm, Haboob, forcing one of the helicopters to turn back around. As a result to the dust storm, one of the helicopters crashed after being disabled while another helicopter became lost due to hydraulic problems (Sass, 2012). At that point, there were only five helicopters that were able to make it to "Desert One", but that is when the commanding officer ordered to abort the mission, and that is when everything failed. It was probably expected that Iran may have caught

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today on to their rescue plan and targeted them, instead, it was the Americans who were defeating each other.

While the helicopters were getting ready to evacuate, the helicopters crashed into each other which destroyed the helicopters and led to the deaths of eight U.S. personnel. Out of fear, the rest of the Americans chose to abandon the other helicopter, that were not destroyed, and the

Iranians took them over, some of which are still in service today (Sass, 2012). After the failure of

Operation Eagle Claw, the U.S. was looked at as a joke. In response to the mission failure,

President Carter appeared on live television and stated:

"I ordered this rescue mission prepared in order to safeguard American lives, to protect

America's national interests, and to reduce the tensions in the world that have been cause

among many nations as this crisis has continued. It was my decision to attempt the rescue

operation. It was my decision to cancel it when problems developed in the placement of

our rescue team for a future rescue operation. The responsibility is fully my own. . . The

United States remains determined to bring about their safe release at the earliest date

possible" (Houghton, 2001, P. 3).

The same year that the plan was poorly executed, the Shah died while in Egypt and

President Carter lost the election to Republican Ronald Reagan. With President Reagan in office, successful negotiations were made between the U.S. and Iran. The U.S. agreed to free about $8 billion frozen Iranian assets and the American hostages were released (History Staff, 2009) The decision made by President Reagan may have broke some tensions with Iran, but it created new tensions with his own administration. Americans did not like the fact that their President lied to them by saying that he did not make any deals with Iran in exchange for the hostages because it would prove to the people that the U.S. government really was weak (Sahimi, 2009).

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

The Tank War

Iran-Iraq War

The Iran-Iraq War began when Iraq invaded Iran in 1980 and did not end until 1988.

During that time, in 1982, the Reagan Administration secretly provided Iraq with technical assistance, which helped Iraq massively in the war. The part that was very confusing during that time was that the year right before, the U.S. gave Israel the permission to send billions of dollars worth of American arms and spare parts to Iran (Hersh, 1992). Although the U.S. claimed that they remained neutral within Iraq and Iran, their assistance to Iraq helped them defeat Iran over time, and helped them grow as a country. From what it looks like, the U.S. violated the Foreign

Assistance Act of 1961,forbidding any financial assistance from the CIA "unless and until the

President finds that each such operation. . . is important to the national security of the U.S. and reports in a timely fashion" to the Senate and House Intelligence Committees (Hersh, 1992, P. 1).

The U.S. argued that the CIA had no part in supplying these resources during the war, and that they were doing it so that neither country won. Until the end of the Iran-Iraq War in 1988, the

U.S., as well as the Soviet Union, continued to supply both countries with resources. However, at one point, Iraq started to experience a downfall as the Soviets refused to provide them with military goods. The U.S. noticed this downfall and agreed to create a new policy that Iraq had to be supplied with aid and could not lose that war, which created more tension between the U.S. and Iran.

During the time of the Iran-Iraq War, the U.S. Embassy located in Beirut received a delivery that was brought in a van, but it was not a normal delivery in April 1983. The person driving the van turned out to be a suicide bomber who entered the U.S. Embassy and ended up killing a total of sixty-three people, including seventeen Americans. It seems as if besides those

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today seventeen Americans, the rest of those deaths were not necessarily a target - they just happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. Iran probably did not think about the non-Americans because all of their focus was put on the U.S. citizens. The U.S. commanders admitted that they did not do enough, security wise, to figure out that the driver of the van was up to no good. Not too long after the U.S. Embassy was targeted, in October 1983, there was another incident involving a suicide bomber, except the main target was the U.S. Marine barracks in the Lebanese capital. The result of this event was 241 U.S. military personnel were found dead, which became the deadliest single incident for American troops since the Battle of Iwo Jima (Tharoor,

2015).The U.S. found that the attack was linked to the Iranian-backed militia Lebanese

Hezbollah, a Shi'a Muslim group suspected of being a terrorist organization by the U.S. and

European Union (Masters & Laub, 2014).

Illegal Policies

While the war was still going on, the U.S. became involved in the Iran-Contra Affair in which the U.S. would continue to sell arms to Iran, but use the profit to purchase supplies from

Nicaragua. The original deal between the U.S. and Iran was that the U.S. would send aid and assistance from Israel to Iran in exchange for the American hostages. Aside from Iran releasing the hostages, the U.S. also wanted to make these negotiations to hopefully break some of the tension between the two countries. The exchange was successful and missiles and weapons continued to be shipped to Iran, but Hezbollah took advantage of the deal. Since he knew that the deal was a secret that had to be kept from the U.S., he decided to plan more hostages so that more deals would be made and they would be able to receive more shipments.

After the Iran-Contra Affair was discovered a year later in 1986, Lieutenant Colonel

Oliver North of the National Security Council and National Security Adviser Admiral John

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Poindexter were removed from office. Although President Reagan also played a part in these illegal activities, there was not enough evidence linking him to the diversion. Even though

America found out about the Iran-Contra Affair, the illegal trades did not end. The investigation of these illegal activities continued and it resulted with a total of fourteen people being charged for either operational or "cover-up" crimes (PBS, n.d.). Fortunately for President Reagan, he did not receive any consequences for his involvement of law breaking, but his term ended as

President in 1989 as still very popular.

Embargo on Iranian Goods

Imports from Iran

In response to the belief that Iran was supporting terrorism, President Reagan made numerous restrictions to ensure that U.S. imports of Iranian goods and services go towards financial terrorism support. President Reagan was able to impose these sanctions on Iran by using the anti-terrorism provisions in the International Security and Development Co-operation

Act of 1985 (ISDCA). The act states that "Section 505 of the ISDCA prohibits imports 'from any country which supports terrorism or terrorist organizations or harbour terrorists or terrorist organizations'" (Alikhani, 2000, P. 157). Reagan announced the executive order where the U.S. will no longer be importing any goods or services from Iran would be officially effective on

October 29, 1987. However, there was a list of imports that this policy does not apply to: "(a)

Iranian-origin publications and materials imported for news publications or news broadcast dissemination; (b) Petroleum products refined from Iranian crude oil in a third country; (c)

Articles imported directly from Iran into the United States that were exported from Iran prior to the effective date of this order" (National Archives, 2016, P.1).

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

After the Executive order was created in 1987, the U.S. continued to add prohibitions to the original order: in 1995, the U.S. was not allowed to assist Iran with petroleum development; in 1997, all virtual trade and investment activities between the U.S. and Iran are prohibited; in

2008, the U.S. was no longer authorized to process transfers that involved Iran; and in 2010, certain foods and carpets from Iran were not to be imported into the U.S. If any of these restrictions were violated, the person(s) involved in the crime would have to pay a penalty of

$1,000,000, and may be imprisoned for twenty years.

Exports to Iran

Similar to the U.S. being prohibited from importing any goods or services to Iran, the

U.S. was not allowed to export any goods or services to Iran. Unless licensed by the Office of

Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), goods and services were not to be exported, re-exported, sold, or supplied from the U.S. to the Iranian government. OFAC is an organization that administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions for the U.S. against foreign countries that may be a possible threat to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States (U.S.

Department of the Treasury, 2017). No person, no matter if they are a U.S. citizen or foreigner, they are unable to export any goods from the U.S. if they have the intentions of supplying those goods to Iran. The purpose of restricting the U.S. from importing or exporting any goods, technology or services to Iran is to prevent any risks of benefiting Iran and possibly making their country stronger.

Donations and Licensed Goods

As mentioned, if a good or service is licensed by the OFAC, then that good or service may be imported/exported. Some examples of these exceptions would be gifts that have a value of $100 or less, medicine, medical devices, and "information and information materials"

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

(Treasury Department, n.d.). By "information and information materials", the U.S. government refers to artworks, photographs, films, tapes etc. In order to be considered one of these materials, the good must fall under the 9701, 9702, and 9703 chapter subheadings of the Harmonized Tariff

Schedule - paintings, original engravings, pastels, and/or original sculptures (USITC, 2017). If a good or service has an OFAC license, the transaction is accepted as long as it does not involve a debit or credit that belongs to any person in Iran. Instead, licensed sales must be completed in advance and only in cash.

Caution: Iranian Waters Ahead

USS Stark Incident

A year after the Iran-Contra Affair was discovered, the U.S.S. Stark was patrolling through the Persian Gulf when it was mistakenly hit by two missiles from an Iraqi Dassault

Mirage F1. The pilot of the Mirage F1 ordered to fire the two missiles at the U.S.S. Stark because he believed that the frigate was an Iranian tanker, which resulted in thirty-seven sailors dead (LaGrone, 2017). The pilot of the Mirage F1 was not completely at fault - it was also the commanding officer of the U.S.S. Stark, Captain Glenn R. Brindel, as he failed to warn Iraqi of their identification. After Iran heard about the missile attack, they took the initiative and sent two of their own helicopters to assist in searching for any Americans that may be stranded in the

Gulf. As a result, President Reagan prohibited U.S. ships and planes from entering into Iranian or

Iraqi territorial waters to avoid any more attacks, especially during the Iran-Iraq War.

Almost a month after the tragic incident, the media shared with the public how Iraqi was not to blame: "The USS Stark did not try to warn an Iraqi warplane away until more than a minute after the plane had launched its two deadly missiles against the frigate and was headed home" (Sputnik International, 2017, P. 1). Even though Iraq knew that the U.S. frigate did not

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today send any warning signals, Iraq still agreed to pay four hundred million dollars to American victims who suffered from the attack. After Iraq agreed to compensate the U.S., Iraq and the U.S.

Central Command (CENTCOM) made a secret agreement that CENTCOM would monitor

Iraqis' positions to help them attack Iranian shipping (Crist, 2012, P. 231). As a part of the agreement, Iraq was not allowed to come within 30nm of a U.S. ship unless they gave a warning call, and if they failed to give any warnings, Iraq would get shot down.

Unaware of it, Iran was able to listen in on the U.S. and Iraq's radio conversations, but they were smart enough to know not to attack a U.S. combatant due to lack of training and expertise. Instead, Iran purchased silkworm missiles, Chinese copy of Soviet surface-to-surface missile known as the Styx, to use as a shipborne offensive weapon or as a part of a coastal defense system (Broder, 1987). Once the U.S. State Department learned about Iran's purchase, they sent warnings to the Swiss Embassy, Tehran, not to use the silkworm missiles, but Iran never responded, which worried the U.S. Rather than firing the missile, Iran attacked other ships indirectly by laying hundreds of mines along the Gulf. These types of attacks ended with numerous ships, including the Soviet tanker Marshal Cuykov, were hit by these mines. The U.S. needed help getting rid of the mines to prevent more ships from getting hit so the American ambassador asked Kuwait to help (Crist, 2012, P. 239). Unfortunately, Kuwait lacked the hardware and fortitude to take on this challenge, which left the U.S. no choice but to have their navy go out to search for these mines and destroy them.

Indirect Attacks in Farsi Island

As mentioned, if the Iranian leadership wanted to attack the U.S., it had to be done indirectly because the U.S. had so much destructive power over Iran. As ordered by Khomeini, he wanted a secret mining campaign that would target any U.S. ships that sailed through Iranian

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today territorial waters. Even though the U.S. knew that Iran were indirectly targeting them, the U.S. was still prepared for any Iranian attack that way there is no risk of another Pearl Harbor incident. Senior Officer Major General Mohsen Rezaee, however, wanted to attack U.S. ships directly. Behind Khomeini's back, General Rezaee ordered for Iranian small boats to attack any convoys that pass through Farsi Island. When Khomeini found out about Rezaee's orders, he made sure to put an end to them coming into direct contact before the U.S. was able to make their way to Farsi Island.

As Kuwaiti oil tankers were escorted by the MV Bridgeton, massive tanker, and the Gas

Prince, a liquefied-gas carrier. As the ships were sailing through the island, the U.S. navy

Lockheed P-3 Orion, maritime surveillance aircraft, was stationed on Omani Islands of Masirah on patrol. The Omani Islands was an Iranian missile site where the P-3 took photos of the missiles that were stored, as well as collect data on them. While the MV Bridgeton was sailing through Farsi Island, a helicopter, who failed to identify itself, flew over the convoy. Since the helicopter was considered to be unidentified, one of the warships fired a warning flare, which forced the helicopter to turn away from the convoy.

After the suspicious helicopter flying over the convoy, the convoy finally passed through the Farsi Island and right around Iranian island of Abu Musa, a base where the Revolutionary

Guard where they store small boats. The IRGC laid out nine mines about 500 yards apart from each other, and gave the commander of the Middle East, Harold Bernsen, no choice but to order for a different route (Crist, 2012, P. 244). Not only is the convoy able to avoid striking mines, they are able to avoid going through the main channel into Kuwait, where they assumed a lot of mines would be laid out.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Along with U.S. navy warships searching the Gulf to find and destroy Iranian mines, they were also escorting Kuwaiti-owned tankers from Iranian attacks, also known as Operation

Earnest Will. The MV Bridgeton struck a mine near Farsi Island causing to leave a fifty-squared- meter hold on the side of the convoy (Crist, 2012, P. 245). MV Bridgeton was slowed down from striking the mine, however, it was still able to sail. After the Bridgeton incident, the U.S. decided that they needed extra help from minesweeping ships in the Persian Gulf. The U.S. wanted to ask for assistance from the Saudis, however, they were hesitant: U.S. had very little faith in the

Saudis' ability because of the possibility of them not having the proper training. Ignoring the possible lack of training, the U.S. still reached out to Prince Sultan, Saudi's previous Defense

Minister, and asked for the Saudi navy to sweep the main Kuwaiti. Sultan agreed to accept this task and ordered for the navy captains to return back to site after they were excused for a 3-week leave.

The U.S. and Saudis were working on searching for mines, but the U.S. wanted as much as help as they could get. Secretary of State George Shultz requested for minesweeping vessels with the goal to "portray a multinational commitment against the illegal mining of international waters" (Crist, 2012, P. 248). Unfortunately, the European allies turned down Shultz's requests because they thought that this was a unilateral American military action to protect and support

Iraq in the war, which they did not want to be a part of. Paris, France, offered to sell the U.S. two of their mine hunting boats, but the U.S. denied their offer. The U.S. did not like the idea that until American crews were trained on how to man the boats, the hunting boats would be manned by non-uniformed French sailors.

With the U.S. pretty much out of luck seeking assistance from their allies, Commander

Bernsen called Fattah Al-Bader looking for an oil service craft with a large aft deck on which to

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today rig some things (Crist, 2012). Being the head of Kuwait's Oil Tanker Company, Al-Bader had two tug vessels, the Hunter and Striker, that the U.S. could possibly use. The biggest concern that Al-Bader had was the fear of Kuwait's tugs striking a mine. The two of them came to an agreement that in order for the U.S. to use the two tugs, they must cut across the Iranian exclusion zone and let Iraq know so that they are aware of their presence (Crist, 2012). Al-Bader believed that cutting across the exclusion zone would help them avoid any Iranian threats, except, that is all the convoy ran into. There were several moments when Iran sailed within a few miles of the convoy making the U.S. believe that they were planning to conduct a suicide attack.

An Iranian four-engine P-3 approached within twenty-five miles from the convoy, but was turned away when the USS Klakring used its fire control radar to lock on to the aircraft. After the

P-3, the surprise approaches did not end: an Iranian frigate shadowed the U.S., multiple small boats sailed within a few miles, and eight warships were underway (Crist, 2012). However, Iran did not fire any missiles and the radar emissions ended, leaving the U.S. convoy able to safely enter into the open waters of the Indian Ocean.

USS Samuel B. Roberts Strikes a Mine

On April 14, 1988, the USS Samuel B. Roberts was struck by a mine as it was sailing through the central Persian Gulf's main eastbound shipping channel while on duty. With the USS

Stark incident less than a year prior, it made other convoys cautious when patrolling the Persian

Gulf. In the fleet instructors at Guantanamo Bay considered the USS Samuel B. Roberts to be the best ship that they have seen in a while so there was no doubt that the frigate would be an appropriate choice to turn away Iranian warships and Iraqi fighters. Commanding officer of the

USS Roberts, Commander Paul X. Rinn, ordered for the ship to halt once they spotted three mines in the water. Once they spotted the mines, a log entry was reported: time 1639; position 26

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today degrees, 22.5 minutes north; 52 degrees, 18.4 minutes east—midway between Qatar and Iran

(Peniston, 2015).

Commander Rinn believed that the best way to avoid entering deeper into the minefield was to sail backwards from the mines that they spotted, but the plan backfired. As the ship was moving backwards, those onboard heard a scrape of metal on metal which ended up being the ship crushing a mine foil's trigger. The frigate was at risk of sinking to the bottom of the Gulf as the explosion broke the ship's keel and blew a hole in the beneath the waterline, resulting in fires and multiple rooms starting to flood (Peniston, 2006). As a result, the electricity went out and the engine room filled up with fire and water. As the crew continued to fix the issues on the ship,

Rinn noticed that they were sinking themselves: the hose team poured tons of water into the skin of the frigate. The problem with having a fire and a flood on a sinking ship was that in order to get the fire out, you needed water, and adding water only made the ship heavier causing it to sink faster. A few hours after the explosion, all of the fires on the USS Roberts were out, and the frigate was towed to Dubai and ferried to Maine where it was repaired for $90 million. After the incident, the U.S. learned two big lessons that day: "One is that the more you sweat in peace, the less you bleed in war. Another is that no matter how technologically advanced a military gets, simple weapons can still inflict pain upon it" (Peniston, 2015, P. 1).

USS Vincennes Shoot-Down

Later that same year of the USS Samuel B. Roberts striking a mine, there was another incident that broke out, except it was not the U.S. suffering this time. On July 3, 1988, the U.S.S.

Vincennes shot down Iran Air Flight 655, which killed every passenger onboard making it the seventh deadliest air disaster. It is not that the USS Vincennes had any grudges towards the Air

Flight 655, instead, they were working together by exchanging fire with each other. The

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Vincennes made a mistake by getting the Air Flight 655, which transported civilians, mistaken for a F-14 fighter jet. It was reported that the U.S.S. Vincennes blamed the Iranian pilot for not identifying itself, leaving the U.S. no choice but to do what was safe for themselves, which was firing two missile shots resulting in the deaths of 290 passengers and crew members. Admiral

William Crowe, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stated that the Iranian plane flew at 9,000 feet at a "high speed" of 450 knots directly at the USS Vincennes (Kaplan, 2014). Soon after the shoot-down, Iran went to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to punish the U.S. for their "criminal act", but President George H.W. Bush refused to apologize no matter if the U.S. was in the wrong. From Iran's point of view, this incident did not look like an accident, and that the U.S. purposely fired shots as a way to enter into the Iran-Iraq War to join Iraq's side. From there, Iran came to the conclusion that the U.S. was doing and saying whatever they could to put a stop to the Islamic Republic, which ruined Iran's trust in the U.S. (Fisher, 2013). As a result to the USS Vincennes and Iran Air Flight 655 incident, Supreme Leader Khomeini explained to the people of Iran that there is no way that the U.S. could be trusted, and Iran should be able to proceed in building a nuclear weapon.

Eight years later, the U.S. decided that they would take full responsibility for the incident, and would compensate the families of the victims. In a press conference with Admiral Crowe, he was changing his story about what military channel the U.S. was trying to reach the Iranians on, and it was pointed out right away from Iranian leaders. As Crowe also stated in the press conference, "'Due to heavy pilot workload during take-off and climb-out, and the requirement to communicate with' two air traffic control centers, the pilot 'probably was not monitoring' the international air-distress channel" (Kaplan, 2014, P.1). However, it was not until 1992 (four years after the incident) when Iran found out that Crowe admitted on ABC's Nightline that the

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

USS Vincennes actually was in Iranian waters, but the year of the event he stated that they were in international waters. Iran ended up filing a case against the U.S. in the International Court of

Justice, and in response, President Bill Clinton decided that the U.S. was at fault, based on the facts provided. As mentioned, the Clinton administration compensated Iran with $131.8 million, with $61.8 million for the victims' families, which allowed Iran to drop the case (Kaplan, 2014).

Early 2000s

U.S. Admits to 1953 Coup

Along with the U.S. deciding to take full responsibility for the USS Vincennes shoot- down, the U.S. decided to take the blame for the 1953 Coup. On April 19, 2000, the U.S.

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright appeared on CNN News where she expressed an apology towards Iran for the overthrow of Mohammed Mossadegh. As Albright stated in the interview,

"The coup was clearly a setback for Iran's political development, and it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs" (CNN

Insight, 2000, P. 1). Mark Gasiorowski, a journalist, joined Albright where he explained the intent of overthrowing Mossadegh in 1953 - to prevent the Communist Party from getting stronger and possibly taking control over the country. As mentioned, Mossadegh decided to nationalize Iran's oil production, which would benefit the USSR. Unlike the USSR, the United

States and Great Britain would suffer from this decision, and that was the exact reason for the coup.

However, according to James Risen, author of the article on the coup, the U.S. government showed some regrets with executing the coup. Risen stated that the CIA was not proud of overthrowing Mossadegh, and felt even more guilty for placing Pahlavi as the new leader of Iran (CNN Insight, 2000). Although the overthrow of the Prime Minister occurred over

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

60 years ago, Iran still uses this event as a reason to challenge the U.S. and instigate new issues with them. Even in 2005, 50 years after the coup, Iranian President at the time, Mahmoud

Ahmadinejad, continued to demand for apologies from the U.S. for their involvement in the event (Merica & Hanna, 2013). To prevent even more tensions between the U.S. and Iran, in

2009, President Barack Obama took fault for the United States' role in the coup and apologized, but even then, Iran was not able to rebuild their trust in the U.S.

Clinton Blamed for Khobar Attack

In 1996, the Khobar Towers, located in Saudi Arabia, were bombed where almost 400 individuals were killed or injured, including the deaths of nineteen U.S. servicemen. Aside from the deaths and injuries, it was a complete mystery on who was behind this horrific event - evidence shows that it was between either al-Qaeda, radical Islamic group, or Iran. A few years after the actual attack, former President Bill Clinton sent a secret cable to the then President

Mohammad Khatami stating:

"Message to President Khatami from President Clinton: The United States Government

has received credible evidence that members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps

(IRGC) along with members of Lebanese and Saudi Hezbollah [sic] were directly

involved in the planning and execution of the terrorist bombing in Saudi Arabia of the

Khobar Towers military resident complex" (Winer, 2015, P. 1).

The Iranian government took the letter as President Clinton trying to create more tension between the two countries, however, Clinton did not mention it to intelligence agencies to investigate.

Louis Freeh, former FBI Director, believed that President Clinton purposely did not allow

Freeh's agency from persecuting the possible suspects involved in the attack. In Freeh's opinion,

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today it looked as if Clinton was trying to protect Iran from being accused of terrorist acts

(Shahidsaless, 2015). Clinton, on the other hand, claimed that he actually demanded that

Khatami allow an open investigation in Iran and pursue the suspects. Instead, Khatami denied

Clinton's order. Khatami threatened that if the U.S. tried doing an investigation in Iran, then the radical leaders would publicly release Clinton's message (Rushing, 2015). As a result of the bombing, the U.S. federal court were able to indict fourteen men.

Bush as President

Iran's Role in 9/11

On September 11, 2001 - also known as 9/11- that day officially became the worst terrorist attack in history. In this attack, nineteen militants who were associated with al-Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden, took off with four airplanes where they performed suicide attacks targeting the United States. Two of the planes flew into the twin towers of the World Trade

Center in New York City, the third plane flew hit the Pentagon located right outside of

Washington, D.C., and the last plane crashed in Pennsylvania (Locker, 2016). Although al-Qaeda planned and executed the attack, the U.S. had a strong belief that Iran was the main country at fault. Similar to the bombing of the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, al-Qaeda and Iran supported each other to make the attack happen. According to evidence, Iran was very active with planning 9/11: helped move al-Qaeda members in and out of Afghanistan; ten of the hijackers were allowed entry through Iran; and the Lebanese Hezbollah trained the al-Qaeda members (Novak, 2017). At this point, it was clear that Iran was willing to support any country that was against the United States, and the U.S. was well aware of it.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Axis of Evil

In 2002, President George W. Bush added Iran to the "Axis of Evil", a term used to describe countries that are a threat of terrorism, along with North Korea and Iraq. The reason that

Iran was added is because of how they support terrorism and have the proper resources to cause mass destructions. Bush may have ruined all types of relations between the U.S. and Iran after presenting his speech:

"'Iran aggressively pursues these weapons [of mass destruction] and exports terror, while

an unelected few repress the Iranian people's hope for freedom. ... States like these, and

their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world'"

(Washington Post, 2002, P. 1).

Before Bush presented his speech, former Deputy National Security Advisor, Stephen Hadley, tried convincing him to not add Iran to the Axis of Evil, but Bush clearly ignored the request. As a result of Bush's speech, it led to the U.S. invading Iraq in 2003 leaving Iraq highly dysfunctional. North Korea and Iran, on the other hand, continued to grow stronger with building their nuclear and ballistic missile programs.

Axis of Evil Today

It has been a little less than a decade since Bush ended his Presidential term. While

President Barack Obama was in office, Obama was able to reach an agreement for Iran to temporarily put a halt on their nuclear program by lifting the sanctions. The Axis of Evil have not been an issue until recently with Donald Trump as the U.S. President. Trump has announced new sanctions on the IRGC, and has created a negative effect: the Axis of Evil have reformed.

North Korea, Iran, and Syria (Iraq's replacement) have come together and joined the Islamic

State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), an extremist militant group. In response, Trump has made orders

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today that may have ruined the relations between the U.S. and these three countries: ordered a carrier battle group to the Korean Peninsula; demanded a review of U.S. policy toward Iran that is seen as "threatening"; and upped the rhetoric toward North Korea (Miller & Sokolsky, 2017). If the people were to compare Obama's policies from Trump's, the people would see how important it is for the U.S. and Iran to cooperate. Cooperation between the two countries is crucial for the

United States because, with Obama as President, it kept Iran's nuclear ambitions secured, as well as created foreign business deals. If President Trump continues to place sanctions on Iran, the

U.S. will lose any relations they have with Iran, which may lead to a negative impact on the world economy. As Pat Thaker, regional director for the Middle East and Africa, put it, "Direct confrontation in the Gulf is a major risk to the global oil market, given that 20 percent of the world's oil travels through an Iranian-controlled chokepoint at the Strait of Hormuz" (Crabtree,

2017).

U.S. Sends Aid to Iran

The city of Bam, Iran, experienced one of the deadliest earthquakes in history, killing nearly 50,000 people. Despite everything that was said and done while Bush was President at that time, the U.S. still offered to help Iran recover from this natural disaster. Iran accepted this offer, and the tensions between the two countries were not as strong. The U.S. assisted by having their U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Disaster Assistance Response

Team (DART) arrived to Iran. These two groups organized the entire mission to help Iran by directing where individuals are needed and making structural assessments. Fifty units of blood were donated to victims being treated by the field hospital that the International Medical/Surgical

Response Team (IMSuRT) set up.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

ESTIMATED Numbers at Glance Source

Government of Iran

Total Population Killed 33,000 - 34,000 (GOI)

United Nations Office for the

Total Population Injured 30,000 Coordination of Humanitarian

Affairs

(UN OCHA)

U.S. Agency for International

Total Homeless 40,000 - 60,000 Development/Disaster

Assistance Response Team

(USAID/DART)

Total USAID/DART Earthquake Assistance to Iran: $2,132,607

Total USG Earthquake Assistance to Iran: $4,144,892

Figure 1.0 right above represents the amount of Iranians were negatively affected by the earthquake - dead, injured, or have lost their homes (USAID, 2004). On the far right side of the table lists the organizations that made the estimates of those who have suffered from this terrible earthquake. Listed right below the table is the amount of aid that the U.S. government provided

Iran.

Sanctions Placed on Iran Once Again

A few years after President Bush allowed the U.S. government to assist Iran after the

2003 earthquake, new unilateral sanctions were placed on Iran, once again. As mentioned, the

U.S. imposed sanctions on Iran for being a threat of supporting terrorism after the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979. The sanction placed on Iran at the time in 2007 were to prohibit any U.S.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today citizen or private organization from entering any financial transactions with Iran. The reason for the sanctions this time was because, not only did they support terrorism, they had the proper resources to become an even bigger threat to other countries, especially the United States. The then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had accusations on Iran of:

"pursuing nuclear technologies that can lead to a nuclear weapon; building ballistic

missiles; supporting Shia militants in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and the Palestinian

territories; and denying the existence of a fellow member of the United Nations,

threatening to wipe Israel off the map" (CNN Politics, 2007, P. 1).

The U.S. imposed these sanctions mainly because of the two Iranian military groups, the IRGC and the Quds force. The IRGC was guilty for participating in proliferation activities while the

Quds force was supporting terrorism, therefore, resulting with the U.S. designating three Iranian state-owned banks for sanctions. As always, Iran was not happy about these sanctions, but they are aware that the U.S. continues to place sanctions to put a halt on Iran's intent to develop a nuclear arsenal. The United States demanded that Iran suspend its enrichment of uranium, but with Tehran denying these demands, sanctions continued to be imposed.

Since Iran does not have the intentions of putting an end to their nuclear program, the

Bush administration decided to create the Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial

Intelligence primarily to enforce sanctions, particularly on Iran. However, Iran is not the only country that is being punished for terrorist activities: Chinese and Russian companies, as well, for helping Iran's program (Clawson, 2010). Soon after the Under Secretary for Terrorism and

Financial Intelligence was created, the U.S. government formed another unit in the Justice

Department. This unit was designed to prosecute any person(s)/companies that associated in

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today selling arms or weapons to Iran. With multiple security agencies being created, it has led to thirty arrests between 2008-2010.

Barack Obama Takes Over

Obama Gets an Early Start

During the time of the Presidential elections, Barack Obama decided to send a letter to

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayotallah Ali Khamenei requesting a negotiation between the United

States and Iran. With all of the events between the two countries from the past, it was hard for

Khamenei to determine whether the U.S. actually wanted to have ties with Iran, or if they did not really mean it. At this time, the Iranian government did not want to speak with any of the U.S. candidates until they knew for sure who the next U.S. President would be, which made Iran pretty impatient. Iranian leaders believed that the longer the Presidential election went on, the less likely it was for the U.S. and Iran to start negotiating (Amanpour, 2009).

Although President Obama was trying to reach out to Khamenei throughout the election and even when he won it, the Iranian leader continued to be unresponsive. As Obama mentioned to a small group of journalists, he wanted to inform Iran that the United States might be willing to make a deal where they allowed Iran to continue their nuclear program, as long as Iran provides proof that they are not building a bomb. The reason that Khamenei ignored Obamaś letter, not because he was not interested in making a deal, because Obama did not respond to letters from Iran. When it was announced that President Obama won the election, Iranian

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sent the U.S. President a congratulatory letter, but Obama decided not to respond back. For the former Iranian President, it was difficult for him to even write the letter considering all of the issues between the U.S. and Iran, as well as all the times that the U.S. placed sanctions on Iran (Leverett & Leverett, 2010). Even though Obama reached

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today out to Khamenei with a proposal, the entire Iranian government still had trouble with trusting the

United States.

Obama Makes Call to Rouhani

The 2013 Iranian President Hassan Rouhani decided to speak with U.S. President Obama, which was the first direct conversation between leaders of these two countries since 1979 with

U.S. President Carter and Shah Pahlavi. Rouhani agreed to this talk with Obama only if the conversation was over the phone. Obama believed that if he and Rouhani could reach an agreement regarding Iran's nuclear program, the U.S-Iran relations would be able to improve. As

Obama stated in the, "While there will surely be important obstacles to moving forward and success is by no means guaranteed, I believe we can reach a comprehensive solutions" (Carter,

2013, P. 1). While on the phone, both Presidents wanted to meet in person to discuss the agreement, however, Rouhani decided that there was not enough time to plan a face-to-face meeting.

Iran Nuclear Deal

Two years after the U.S. and Iranian President had their over-the-phone conversation, the

Iran Nuclear Deal was created between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. The United States allowed for Iran to continue their nuclear program, however, there some limitations that come with the agreement. Along with the deal, the U.S. has agreed to lift their nuclear-related sanctions on Iran as long as Iran does not violate the agreement. As part of the agreement, Iran must reduce the amount of centrifuges, a tube-shaped machine used to enrich uranium, they have. Iran is able to continue to enrich their uranium, but only enough for civil use in certain parts of the country, but not enough to build a nuclear bomb. Before the nuclear deal, Iran was capable of building nuclear weapons in about

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today two or three months, but after the deal, it was negotiated that Iran must wait a year until starting a new nuclear weapon. Iran was given the permission to continue their research on how to develop their program, but is once again limited which will make sure that they do not breakout time frame of one year. The final part to the nuclear deal is that Iran is required to allow inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency to ensure that there are no military- related developments.

U.S.-Iran Relations Today

Trump as President

With President Trump in office, it seems like how he views Iran is almost the same way that former President Bush looked at them. These two U.S. Presidents do not trust Iran even if there was a formal agreement that was agreed upon. The "Axis of Evil" was created during the time that Bush was in office, and now the group is returning back while Trump is now the U.S.

President. Iran does not appreciate being looked at as untrustworthy, and especially being looked at as terrorists. There are many ways to show that there is a lack of trust between the United

States and Iran, for example, Trump does not want students from the Middle East to return back to school at MIT. Although that topic was mentioned earlier, it is a prime example on how the

U.S. President does not trust that these students are pursuing their education for their own benefit, instead it is possible that they are planning to develop their nuclear program.

As mentioned, former U.S. President Obama and Iranian President Rouhani agreed on the nuclear deal in 2015 where Iran is allowed to continue their nuclear program, but with some restrictions. Since Trump became the U.S. President, the relations that were starting to build up between the two countries have gone backwards. President Trump feels that the nuclear deal has got to be one of the worst deals that he has ever seen because it is a one-sided transactions that

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today the United States has entered. The deal worked for a while, but then went downhill after it backfired on the U.S. and now they apparently owes Iran $1.7 billion. In the nuclear deal, the

U.S. agreed to lift any nuclear-related sanctions, but President Trump wants to do the opposite and impose more sanctions against Iran. The main reason why Iran agreed to the nuclear deal is because the U.S. promised that they would lift the sanctions against Iran, but Trump believes that an aggressive approach to Iran's nuclear development is more reasonable. Aside from the deal being one-sided, Trump also claims that Iran is violating the deal: having too many centrifuges in its operations; and "intimidating" the inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency from using their full authority (Collinson, et al., 2017). President Trump presents a speech on live television explaining why the United States should not have entered the nuclear agreement with Iran based on Iran violating the agreement, as well as past events with them attacking the

U.S.

The Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif responded to President Trump's

"hate speech" and described him as ignorant. Zarif publicly explains that "Trump's shameless and ignorant remarks, in which he ignored Iran's fight against terrorism, displays his lack of knowledge and unawareness. Trump's ignorant hate speech belongs in medieval times - not the

21st Century UN-unworthy of a reply. Fake empathy for Iranians fools no one" (O'Connor,

2017). Iran was angry about what President Trump had to say regarding the nuclear deal and all of his accusations of the country. Iranian President Rouhani was not happy after hearing Trump's doubts in Iran after the Iranian government promised that they would abide by the restrictions in the agreement. As President Trump may have forgotten, the nuclear deal is not a bilateral agreement, cannot be altered or negotiated, so it can only be annulled by unilateral action.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Iran Gets Bold

Iranian Patrol Boats Harass Navy Vessels

These two countries have always had tension between the other, and it is fair to say that the animosity still exists today. Based on all the times that the United States imposed sanctions against Iran and all the other negative interactions from the past, Iran has thought of a different way of going after the U.S.: use patrol boats to harass any U.S. vessels that sail through the

Persian Gulf. This idea is not necessarily to attack the U.S., instead, it is intended to alter their pathway and force the U.S. vessels into taking another route. Around the end of the 2015 year,

Iranian patrol boats have been performing these actions, without direct communication with U.S. navy vessels, and is seen to be unsafe and unprofessional. There have been numerous events where the patrol boats have approached the U.S. navy ships and have gotten too close. The U.S. consistently tried to communicate with the Iranian crew multiple times throughout the events, but

Iran will not give them any type of response.

These incidents only occur when a U.S. vessel sails through the Persian Gulf, Iranian waters. It is reported by the U.S. Navy that Iran has committed 23 "unusual" confrontations in

2015 and 35 in 2016 (Lamothe, 2017). How Iran "harasses" U.S. vessels is by sailing too close, within yards, to the navy ship and even holding U.S. sailors as hostage, but then letting them go soon after. As far as the U.S. is aware, there are no specific reasons as to why Iran is performing these actions against, what seems to be, only U.S. navy ships, only possible suggestions. With the U.S. consistently trying to reach out to the Iranian crew through radio calls to try and figuring out what exactly their intentions are, Iran refuses to respond. It is very possible that Iran is tired of letting the U.S. determine what their country can and cannot do, and wants to show the United

States that the country of Iran is stronger and more aggressive than what the U.S. thinks they are.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

USS Nitze

One of the first harassment incidents done by Iran was when the Destroyer USS Nitze

(DDG-94) was passing through the northern end of the Persian Gulf. In this event, the Destroyer reported that they were followed and harassed by four Iranian patrol boats without any warning as they were passing through. These patrol boats chased down the U.S. vessel and even came within 300 yards of the vessel before they finally left the U.S. alone. It was reported that the

Destroyer attempted to contact the IRGC at least twelve times, but as mentioned, the Iranians failed to reply (LaGrone, 2016). After the attempt of communicating with the patrol boats, the crew members of the USS Nitze fired ten warning shots, as well as blasting the ship's whistle sounding a maritime danger signal. The IRGC continued to ignore everything that the vessel was throwing at them and went on with their chase. The USS Nitze, as well as the U.S. Naval Forces

Central Command (NAVCENT), stated that Iran's actions violating international law and maritime standards by getting too close to U.S. vessels. Not too long after the harassment incident with the USS Nitze, the same actions were committed by Iran on a U.S. patrol craft and the Kuwaiti Navy ship. The U.S. Navy, just like the crew members of the Nitze, fired three flares as warning shots into the water, which is standard maritime procedure. This incident was pretty

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today much the exact same as the USS Nitze, except Iran use other ways to "harass" the patrol craft and navy ship: sailing very close to the vessel, using rocket launches, and drones.

The Harassment Continues

Soon after the first couple of incidents, Iran continued their chase-down of U.S. vessels.

The USS Firebolt (PC-10) was next on the list. The ship was operating on the international waters in the central Persian Gulf. As the USS Firebolt was operating, they were approached and harassed by seven members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (IRGCN). Three fast in-shore attack craft (FIAC) started moving closer to the Firebolt at a distance of 500 yards for eight minutes (Eckstein, 2016). Three FIACs moved closer to the vessel while another one made its way towards the ship, but ended stopping as soon as they were directly in front of the

Firebolt. Again, there was an attempt at communicating with FIACs to find out their intentions, but no response.

The incident with the U.S. Navy Seahawk helicopter is much different than the most recent incidents as the U.S. was not sailing the time of the event. The U.S. Navy Seahawk helicopter was flying over the Iranians and noticed that Iran had a weapon aiming straight at the helicopter, but did not fire. This event took place while the Seahawk was escorting the aircraft carrier, USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, as they were on their way out of the Persian Gulf. General

Joseph Votel warned that "If they continue to test us, we are going to respond, and we are going to protect ourselves and our partners" (Starr, 2016, P. 1). Basically, Votel means that if Iran wants to keep up these actions with the U.S., then the U.S. will have no problem with fighting back.

The USS Mason (DDG-87) was the next target, except this time Iran actually fired missiles at the vessel. The USS Mason was operating in the Red Sea at the time when they

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today noticed multiple coastal defense missiles started firing at them. In response, the destroyer fired three missiles to defend themselves, which helped the ship and crew from being harmed. Before this attack, there was a similar one a little before against the HSV-2 Swift, an ex-U.S. Navy experimental catamaran. Iran also fired missiles at the Swift, except the damages to the vessel were a lot worse. The United States believe that the same group of people that attacked the

HSV-2 Swift, the Iran-backed Houthi rebel fighters, was the group that placed an attack on the

USS Mason (LaGrone, 2016).

While the missile destroyer USS Stout (DDG-55) was operating in the northern Arabian

Gulf, the Stout decided to try a different route as a way to try and avoid the IRGCN, especially after hearing about previous harassment incidents. The destroyer carried specific weapons that would hopefully keep these Iranian speed boats away. Although the Stout was looking for alternate routes to get through the international waters, a Naser-class Wireless Application

Protocl (WAP) Iranian vessel was still able to locate the navy ship. Even after Iran fired at the vessel, the Stout was found a way to escape the attack (Lockie, 2016). The harassment did not stop there either. There were two other ships, USS Tempest and USS Squall, who were followed and harassed by the same Iranian vessel where the Iranian patrol boats came within 600 yards of the navy ships. Flare warnings were shot, yet again, leading to Iran leaving the two vessels alone.

One of the most recent events with these Iranian patrol boats occurred when the USS

Mahan and two other ships entered through the Strait of Hormuz. As these ships were sailing, five Iranian vessels approached the ships. After the Iran came within 900 yards of the Mahan, a

U.S. helicopter flew overhead the vessels and released smoke grenades causing the Iranian vessels to turn away. Iran stopped harassing U.S. navy vessels for a small amount of time, but eventually returned to these actions. The incident that was reported to have the most interactions

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today between the U.S. and Iran involving the USS Mahan, the USS Makin Island, and the USNS

Walter Diehl. These three ships were harassed by four inshore attack crafts as the U.S. ships were entering towards the Persian Gulf. The Iranian crafts were traveling at a high speed and sailed within 500 yards of the ships and, as usual, warning shots were fired as a defensive measure. Rather than Iran turning away from the U.S. like they would, Iran put up an unmanned aerial vehicle, which then led to the three warning shots by the U.S. ships using a .50-caliber machine gun (Starr, 2017).

Iran's Missile Test

Once again, the U.S. has imposed sanctions on Iran, except this time they are unilateral sanctions. The reason for the sanctions this time is because Iran tested a new ballistic missile as a way for Iran to strengthen their country's missile capabilities. In response to Iran's missile test,

President Trump has ordered to be travel restrictions and visas are not being accepted from

Iranians. As Trump mentioned on his social media, "Iran just test-fired a Ballistic Missile capable of reaching Israel. They are also working with North Korea. Not much of an agreement we have!" (CNBC, 2017, P. 1). At this point, neither the U.S. government nor the Iranian government are considering the agreements from the nuclear deal: Iran is performing missile tests when it violates the deal; and the U.S. is placing more sanctions against Iran. This hurts the relations because both countries are accusing the other of not sticking to what they agreed to in the nuclear deal. The more that these two countries try to get revenge on the other and are not willing to work together, the more tensions will build and will most likely become an even worse situation.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Analysis

Possible Reasons for Negative Interactions

After numerous incidents, the U.S. is still trying to figure out as to why Iranian vessels are performing these unsafe actions, all in the Persian Gulf. It is too hard to tell if all the actions in the Persian Gulf are linked back to the animosity between the United States and Iran. There is could be a possibility that after all of the attacks and imposed sanctions by the U.S., these actions are Iran's way of retaliating. As for being unresponsive to calls from the U.S., Iran could still be using Obama not responding back to Khamenei's congratulatory letter. At this point, it is difficult to determine whether these orders are coming from the IRGCN or the Iranian government. No matter where the order is coming from, there is no saying in what Iran's intentions are, but it is a most likely a warning to the U.S. that Iran will not accept anymore disrespect.

Since the Strait of Hormuz pretty much runs across Iranian waters, and the strait is used for international shipping, Iran is unable to tell if the U.S. is planning another attack. Iran's defense minister stated "If any foreign vessel enters out waters, we warn them, and if it's an invasion, we confront" (Steele, 2016). In Iran's view of things, the past has driven them into always being ready for war due to all of the unexpected attacks against their country. To Iran, this is their way of letting it be known to all countries, especially the U.S., that they are prepared to put up a fight against anyone. It seems as if Iran does not appreciate the inappropriate use of words that President Trump uses towards them, however, it does not look like they necessarily want to provoke a war with the United States.

Another possibility as to why Iran is committing these actions on U.S. and British navy vessels is to portray its strength to its own people (Wald, 2016). It is believed that Iran is trying to continue the Islamic Revolution that they started in 1979, and with the U.S. being Iran's

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today primary target, negotiations are not what the Iranians are looking for. Going back to the U.S.-

Iran Nuclear Agreement, the purpose of this agreement was to hopefully break the tension between the two countries. Experts believe that after the Nuclear Agreement, Iran had to show that their country was still strong and powerful, which is why they have decided to start targeting the navy ships. If Iran could chase U.S. navy ships out of Iranian waters, it may appear that Iran is the more powerful country.

After multiple reports by the U.S. navy regarding Iran's actions, Iran still denies that they are chasing vessels out of the Persian Gulf. Iran was labeled "the number one terrorist state" former U.S. Presidents and even the leaders of five world powers. Due to the accusations, Iran has argued that the U.S. is making up these reports to make it look like Iran actually is the biggest threat of terrorist activities (Hindustan Times, 2017). Iran has always been viewed as the country full of terrorists, and are still viewed that way today. President Trump continues to speak negatively about Iran and suggest to all other countries to be cautious of Iran. How Iran looks at these accusations is that if they are going to be labeled as a terrorist state, they might as well live up to the name, but find ways to commit these actions without violating any laws, or even just not getting caught.

From what it looks like, the Iranians may have been set off into performing more attack- like events when current U.S. President Trump was just one of the Presidential candidates. With

Trump was aware of the previous attacks, he mentioned in his speeches and interviews that he would rebuild America's depleted military to make it stronger and tougher against other countries, especially against Iran. He emphasized that if these actions continue, as President, he would have the Iranian patrol boats "shot out of the water" (Davis, 2017, P. 1). Trump did not agree with former President Obama and his decision to not let the navy ships fire at the Iranian

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today patrol boats, instead, to just send warning signals. In Trump's opinion, Obama was being too nice with Iran even though firing warning shots are a part of the defensive method. There are only two results that will occur with Trump as President: either the IRGCN stops because they are afraid that the new President will actually stick to his words and punish them for their actions; or they will continue these actions and test the threats coming from Trump.

After the incident with Trump not allowing an Iranian student back into the U.S. for another semester at MIT, Iran grew furious. The Iranian government believes that Trump is purposely trying to keep any Iranians from entering the U.S. by keeping them "on notice".

President Trump actually announced that he is officially banning Iranians from entering the

United States. For those Iranians that have applied to migrate to the U.S., they have now lost their opportunity until further notice. Whatever relations that are left between the U.S. and Iran are nothing but animosity. Not only is Trump denying entry to all Iranians, possibly anyone from the Middle East, but he is also considering "toughening up" the nuclear deal, or even ripping it up since he sees it as "disastrous" (Fattahi, 2017).

U.S. Responds to Iran's Actions

Iran has put up an argument that they are trying to protect their waters from being attacked by foreign vessels, however, it is still not a good enough reason to go after every single vessel that sails through. It is understandable that they want to make sure that their country and their waters remain safe, but there are other approaches they could take rather than constantly harassing vessels. Iran could also argue that they were offended by former Presidents making comments that Iran's country is full of terrorists and all other countries must be careful of them.

In response to these unprofessional acts, President Trump warns the Islamic Republic that they are "playing with fire and all U.S. options were on the table" (Reuters, 2017). Ever since

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Trump's warning to Iran, Iranian patrol boats stopped targeting U.S. navy ships. However,

President Trump has pledged to be a lot tougher with Iran, which is causing the people of Iran to worry if they are safe in their homes or if the U.S. will bomb the country. There is also that possibility that interactions have cooled down for a bit because Iran may be planning an even bigger attack on the U.S., not necessarily afraid of the pledges that Trump has made. As Iran must know by now, their whole country is terrified about if their homes are going to be destroyed, and if they will even be able to ever to travel to the United States. Whoever is making these orders, the IRGCN or the Iranian government, must think about the safety or their people instead of putting their entire country at risk. Although not allowing Iranians enter the U.S. may seem to work for now, there is no guarantee that it will solve the tensions between the two countries, if anything, it will make them even worse. It is believed that the tensions between the

U.S. and Iran are just way too strong, and will possibly never be resolved.

Ever since the nuclear deal was signed, the number of times Iran has targeted the U.S. has increased. However, Iran is currently not being prosecuted for violating international laws since the Big Three Networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) are not reporting these incidents. Not only has the three networks failed to report these attempts, but the United Nations Security Council has done nothing to stop Iran's missile tests, instead, the lawmakers in Iran have voted to increase the military spending to five percent of Iran's budget (Fondacaro, 2017). Instead of the U.N. going by the deal in the nuclear agreement, the U.N. has given permission to let Iran receive 130 tons of natural uranium from Russia to hold on to until all restrictions expire, which is ten years after the agreement was signed.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

If U.S.-Iran Relations Get Worse

If the relations between the U.S. and Iran continue to get worse, there will be an increase in negative interactions and retaliation. These two countries do not have to necessarily become allies, but both of their countries will never be at peace because the citizens will be scared for their lives. Every individual in both Iran and the U.S. will have to live everyday wondering if their country is going to be attacked by the other country. If these two countries are unable to put the animosity behind them, their actions and threats could possibly lead to another devastating war

As an American diplomat and scholar George Kennan states, "to prove himself right in the thesis that the world is his enemy; for if he reiterates it frequently enough and makes it the background of his conduct he is bound eventually to be right" (Sadjadpour, 2017, P. 1). The point that Kennan is trying to make is that if an individual has a hard time taking accountability for their actions against those who are opposed from them, they will create enemies. But if the individual is open-minded and consider their opponents' thoughts, it could make a major a difference. Kennan believes that both leaders, President Trump and Iranian Supreme Leader

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, are examples of the point that he is trying to make. Both leaders are so quick to say that the other one is wrong, but that is because both of them have different views to situations. There is a possibility that if both leaders have a conversation and negotiate an agreement that both countries are willing to follow, tensions will not be as strong.

If President Trump were to continue on with the strategy that Obama was trying to start with Iran, there is a chance that the U.S. and Iran will be able to eventually come to an understanding. However, if Trump tries to continue with what Bush began, there is absolutely no way that Iran is going to be willing to listen to what the U.S. has to say, especially if Iran is

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today looked at as a terrorist state. Majority of Iran's economic trade is with countries that are not the

United States. If the U.S. wants to be a part of the economic trade, the U.S. must figure out a way to coordinate with Iran’s largest economic and strategic partners: China, Russia, Europe, India, and South Korea (Sadjadpour, 2017). Adding to that, if Iran wants to be able to receive funds so that they are able to rebuild their military and their other plans, they must be willing to negotiate a deal with the U.S

Possible Solution

Stirring away from the history between the two countries, it is best to think of possible solutions that will improve the U.S.-Iran relations, even if it is not by much. With the amount of negative interactions between the two countries in the past, it is unrealistic to say that the relations will change. Both countries have said and done things in the past that angered the other country and clearly are not willing to forgive the other. Rather than trying to gain peace between these countries, they could attempt establishing another agreement, except with the purpose of trying to prevent similar events from happening in the future.

Similar to the 2015 nuclear agreement, the U.S. and Iran should also attempt an agreement when it comes to sailing through the Persian Gulf. Although Iran has already stated that they have no interest in negotiating with the U.S., establishing an agreement could prevent these countries into attacking each other. At least there would be one less country to worry about.

The U.S. should promise Iran that they have absolutely no intentions of attacking their country while operating on international waters or sailing through with exports/imports. For Iran's part of the agreement, they should discontinue chasing the any vessels passing through the Persian Gulf so that the vessel is able to exit quicker. However, Iran may be prepared in case another country does decide to attack.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Conclusion

There is no doubt that these two countries are very powerful with strong-minded leaders, and it will be rough for them to put their pasts behind them. However, both the U.S. and Iran will suffer in different ways if there is no peace between them. Throughout all of the attacks, hate speeches, distrust, sanctions, etc., improving the relations between the two countries will be almost impossible to overcome. If former U.S. President Obama was able to start a positive change with Iran, that means that both countries are fully capable of doing it again. In order to attempt a better relationship, it all starts with the leaders of the countries. It may be too late to start over between the current Presidents, but there will hopefully be a leader from Iran and the

U.S. that wants to resolve all issues.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Bibliography

Alikhani, H. (2000). Sanctioning Iran: Anatomy of a failed policy. New York.

Amanpour, C. (2009, June 24). Obama sent letter to Iran leader before election, sources say.

Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/24/iran.obama.letter/index.html.

BBC News. (n.d.). 1979: Exiled Ayatollah Khomeini returns to Iran. Retrieved from

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/february/1/newsid_2521000/2521003.st

Broder, J. M. (1987, October 17). Silkworm Missile is Chinese Copy of 28-year-old Soviet

Stynx. Retrieved from http://articles.latimes.com/1987-10-17/news/mn-3719_1_surface-

to-surface

Bruno, G., Bajoria, J., & Masters, J. (2013, June 14). Iran’s Revolutionary Guards. Retrieved

from https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/irans-revolutionary-guards.

Carter, C.J. (2013, September 28). It's a three-decade first: Presidents of U.S., Iran talk directly,

if only by phone. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/27/politics/us-

iran/index.html.

CBS News. (2010, June 30). BP and Iran: The Forgotten History. Retrieved from

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bp-and-iran-the-forgotten-history/.

Clawson, P. (2010). U.S. sanctions. Retrieved from http://iranprimer.usip.org/resource/us-

sanctions.

CNBC. (2017, September 25). Iran and US relations grow increasingly strained after latest

missile test. Retrieved from https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/25/iran-missile-test-strains-

us-relations.html.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

CNN Insight. (2000, April 19). U.S. comes clean about the coup in Iran. Retrieved from

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0004/19/i_ins.00.html.

CNN Politics. (2007, October 25). U.S. slaps new sanctions on Iran. Retrieved from

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/25/iran.sanctions/.

Crabtree, J. (2017, October 17). Why Trump's stance on Iran could backfire. Retrieved from

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/17/trump-sanctions-iran-revolutionary-guards-impact-

nuclear-deal.html.

Collinson, S., Liptak, K., & Merica, D. (2017, October 13). Trump says Iran violating nuclear

agreement, threatens to pull out of deal. Retrieved from

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/13/politics/iran-deal-decertify/index.html.

Crist, D. (2012). The Twilight War: the secret history of America's thirty-year conflict with Iran.

New York.

Davis, G. (2017, January 9). Trump Said Iranians Would Be Blown Out of Water and US Navy

Just Opened Fire.Conservative Tribune. Retrieved from

http://conservativetribune.com/trump-iranians-us-navy/.

Dehghan, S. and Norton-Taylor, R. (2013, August 19). CIA Admits Role in 1953 Iranian Coup.

Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/19/cia-admits-role-1953-

iranian-coup.

Ebbert, S. (2017, January 31). MIT Engineering Student from Iran Barred Entry into US.

Retrieved fromhttps://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/01/31/mit-engineering-student-

from-iran-barred-entry-into/fQBJ7kLIhY7P79YNKVKtTN/story.html.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Eckstein, M. (2016, September 6). Iranian Patrol Boats Harass Another U.S. Navy Ship. USNI

News. Retrieved from https://news.usni.org/2016/09/06/iranian-boats-harass-another-u-s-

navy-patrol-coastal-ship-persian-gulf.

Fattahi, K. (2017, February 21). The Rising Risk of Showdown Between Trump and Iran. BBC

News. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-38961027.

Fisher, M. (2013, October 16). The Forgotten Story of Iran Air Flight 655. Retrieved from

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/10/16/the-forgotten-story-

of-iran-air-flight-655/?utm_term=.a96cea46a92c.

Fondacaro, N. (2017, January 9). Nets Ignore Iran Harassment, UN Sending ‘130 Tons’ of

Uranium. NewsBusters. Retrieved from http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-

fondacaro/2017/01/09/nets-ignore-iran-harassment-un-sending-130-tons-uranium.

Grobe, S. (2017, March 2). A Rocky Ride: U.S.-Iran Relations Since 1979. Retrieved from

http://www.euronews.com/2017/02/03/a-rocky-ride-us-iranian-relations-since-1979.

Hersh, S. (1996, January 26). U.S. secretly gave aid to Iraq early in its war against Iran.

Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/1992/01/26/world/us-secretly-gave-aid-to-iraq-

early-in-its-war-against-iran.html?pagewanted=all.

Hindustan Times. (2017, March 26). Iran Denies ‘Harassing’ US Warships in Gulf, Warns of

Armed Clashes. Retrieved from http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/iran-denies-

harassing-us-warships-in-gulf-warns-of-armed-clashes/story-

rjk6WumeKlWxBU4NTJZFoL.html.

History Staff. (2009). Iran Hostage Crisis Ends. Retrieved from http://www.history.com/this-

day-in-history/iran-hostage-crisis-ends.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

History Staff. (2009). Iran Signs Treaty of Alliance with Great Britain and USSR. Retrieved

from http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/iran-signs-treaty-of-alliance-with-great-

britain-and-ussr.

History Staff. (2009). Soviets Announce Withdrawal from Iran. Retrieved from

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/soviets-announce-withdrawal-from-iran.

History Staff. (2010). Shah Flees Iran. Retrieved from http://www.history.com/this-day-in-

history/shah-flees-iran.

Houghton, D. (2001). US foreign policy and the Iranian hostage crisis. United Kingdom:

Cambridge.

Immerman, R. & Goedde, P. (2013). The Oxford Handbook of the Cold War. doi:

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199236961.

Inskeep, S. (2015, September 18). Born In The USA: How America Created Iran’s Nuclear

Program. Retrieved from

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/09/18/440567960/born-in-the-u-s-a-how-

america-created-irans-nuclear-program.

Kaplan, F. (2014, July 23). America's Flight 17. Retrieved from

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2014/07/the_vincennes_do

wning_of_iran_air_flight_655_the_united_states_tried_to.html.

LaGrone, S. (2016, August 24). Video: Destroyer USS Nitze Harassed By Iranian Patrol Boats -

USNI News. USNI News. Retrieved from https://news.usni.org/2016/08/24/video-

destroyer-uss- nitze-harassed-iranian-patrol-boats.

LaGrone, S. (2017, May 17). The Attack on USS Stark at 30. Retrieved from

https://news.usni.org/2017/05/17/the-attack-uss-stark-at-30.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Lamothe, D. (2017, January 9). Navy Destroyer Opens Fire After ‘Harassing’ Behavior by

Iranian Patrol Boats. Washington Post. Retrieved from

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/01/09/navy-destroyer-

opens- fire-after-harassing-behavior-by-iranian-patrol-boats/?utm_term=.179c373367f8.

Locker, R. (2016, September 10). 10 things you may have forgotten about 9/11. Retrieved from

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/transcripts/sou012902.htm.

Lockie, A. (2016, August 25). US Navy Ship Fires Warning Shots After Multiple Ships

'Harassed' by Iranian Attack Craft. Business Insider. Retrieved from

http://www.businessinsider.com/uss- squall-fired-shots-after-incident-iranian-navy-ship-

2016-8.

Mardi, F. (2008, August 22). The Aftermath of Ajax. Retrieved from

http://www.payvand.com/news/08/aug/1227.html.

Masters, J. & Laub, Z. (2014. January 3). Hezbollah. Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved

from https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/hezbollah

Mehdiyoun, K. (2000). Ownership of Oil and Gas Resources in the Caspian Sea. The

American Journal of International Law. Vol. 94, No. 1, pp. 179–189.

Merica, D. & Hanna, J. (2013, August 19). In declassified document, CIA acknowledges role in '53 Iran coup. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/19/politics/cia-iran-1953-

coup/index.html.

Miller, A.D. & Sokolsky, R. (2017, April 26). The 'Axis of Evil' is back. Retrieved from

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/26/opinions/axis-of-evil-is-back-miller-

sokolsky/index.html.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Nader, A. (n.d.). The Revolutionary Guards. Retrieved from

http://iranprimer.usip.org/resource/revolutionary-guards.

National Archives. (2016, August 15). Executive Order 12613 - Prohibiting Imports from Iran.

Retrieved from https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-

order/12613.html.

Novak, Poorang. (2017, September 11). Iran's role in 9/11 attacks. Retrieved from

https://irannewsupdate.com/news/terrorism/4189-iran-s-role-in-9-11-attacks.html.

PBS. (n.d.). The Iran-Contra Affair. Retrieved from

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/reagan-iran/.

Peniston, B. (2006). No higher honor: Saving the USS Samuel B. Roberts in the Persian Gulf.

Naval Institute Press.

Peniston, B. (2015, May 22). The day frigate Samuel B. Roberts was mined. Retrieved from

https://news.usni.org/2015/05/22/the-day-frigate-samuel-b-roberts-was-mined.

Penn, N. (2009, November 3). 444 Days in the Dark: An Oral History of the Iran Hostage

Crisis. Retrieved from https://www.gq.com/story/iran-hostage-crisis-tehran-embassy-

oral-history.

O'Connor, T. (2017, September 19). Iran blasts Trump 'Hate Speech,' as world leaders react to

President's first United Nations address. Retrieved from http://www.newsweek.com/iran-

blasts-trumps-hate-speech-world-leaders-react-presidents-first-united-667878.

Rushing, J.T. (2015, October 15). Did Bill Clinton order cover-up of Iran's involvement in 1996

massacre of US forces. Retrieved from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-

3262282/Did-Bill-Clinton-order-cover-Iran-s-involvement-1996-massacre-forces.html.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Sadjadpour, K. (2017, February 9). How America could stumble into war with Iran. Retrieved

from https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/02/iran-trump-nuclear-

deal/515979/.

Sahimi, M. (2009, November 3). The hostage crisis, 30 years on. Retrieved from

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranbureau/2009/11/30-years-after-the-

hostage-crisis.html.

Sass, E. (2012, April 24). Operation Eagle Claw: The disastrous rescue attempt during the

Iranian hostage crisis. Retrieved from http://mentalfloss.com/article/30528/operation-

eagle-claw-disastrous-rescue-attempt-during-iranian-hostage-crisis.

Shahidsaless, Shahir. (2015, September 3). The Khobar Towers bombing: Its perpetrators and

political fallout. Retrieved from http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/khobar-towers-

bombing-its-perpetrators-and-political-fallout-181130043.

Sputnik International. (2017, May 19). Why 30-year-old Incident of USS Stark Hit by Iraqi

Missiles Remains Relevant. Retrieved from

https://sputniknews.com/politics/201705171053707250-us- uss-stark-missile/.

Starr, B. (2016, August 24). US Fires Warning Shots at Iranian Vessel. CNN. Retrieved from

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/24/politics/iranian-vessels-come-within-300-yards-of-us-

destroyer/.

Steele, J. (2016, August 26). Why is Iran harassing U.S. warships?. sandiegouniontribune.com.

Retrieved from http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/military/sdut-iran-navy-harass-

analysis-2016aug26-htmlstory.html.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Tharoor, I. (2015, April 2). The Key Moments in the Long History of U.S.-Iran Tensions.

Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/03/31/the-

key-moments-in-the-long-history-of-u-s-iran-tensions/?utm_term=.4c0b7b0b9db5.

Treasury Department. (n.d.). Iranian Transactions Regulations - 31 CFR. Part 560. Retrieved

from https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/Documents/iran.txt.

U.S. Department of the Treasury. (2017, October 6). Office of Foreign Assets Control -

Sanctions Programs and Information. Retrieved from https://www.treasury.gov/resource-

center/sanctions/Pages/default.aspx.

United States International Trade Commission (USITC). (2017). Harmonized Tariff Schedule of

the United States. Chapter 97. Section XXI.

Van de Graaf, T. (2013, September 1). The ‘Oil Weapon’ Reversed? Sanctions Against Iran and

U.S.-EU Structural Power. Middle East Policy 20, no. 3.

Wald, E. (2016, August 25). Three Truths Behind Iran's Harassment of the U.S. Navy. Forbes

Welcome. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/ellenrwald/2016/08/25/three-

truths-behind-irans-harassment-of-the-u-s-navy/#53bf43862c25.

Washington Post. (2002, January 29). Text of President Bush's 2002 state of the union address.

Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-

srv/onpolitics/transcripts/sou012902.htm.

Winer, S. (2015, October 6). Bill Clinton knew Iran was behind Khobar attack, cable shows.

Retrieved from https://www.timesofisrael.com/bill-clinton-knew-iran-was-behind-

khobar-attack-cable-shows/.

Wolfe, L.R. (2011, February 9). Soviets Refuse to Leave Iran at the End of WWII. Retrieved

from https://coldwarstudies.com/2011/02/09/cold-war-iran-1945-1959/.

Previous Relations Between U.S. and Iran Affect Them Today

Woollacott, M. (1979, January 16). Embittered Shah leaves for Egypt, and exile, today. The

Guardian. Retrieved from

https://www.theguardian.com/world/1979/jan/16/iran.martinwoollacott.