Islamic Fundamentalism : The Threat Of The Long Term Hostility Involving The United States And Iran

On David Farber 's book Taken Hostage, Farber informs us about the Iran Hostage Crisis and America 's First Encounter with Radical Islam. This book tells us how the United States and Iran got into conflict, leading to the Iranians holding American Embassy members hostage as revenge for them feeling betrayed by the United States. It also informs us about other events that occurred in a decade that caused the United States many problems. Farber talked about all the events that lead to the Iranian Hostage Crisis. November 4, 1979, seizure of the United States embassy in Tehran and the hostage of four hundred and forty four days following, were the first steps leading up to the perpetual War on Terror. Farber believes the failure from American policymakers and more specifically from President Carter, to identify the severity of the crisis made for the prolonged crisis. The sheer ineptitude of Carter administration was the cost of the US to lose it’s way economically, culturally, politically and even military. Carter struggled to respond to the impulses of Islamic fundamentalism within the prevailing Cold War paradigm. They saw the real battle as against secular modernism and they recognized that the US was the major force spreading this cultural and political belief throughout the world. The media misrepresentations of the struggle and mass media manipulation of Americans played on the peoples emotions. Although Carter was popular at the beginning of his presidency, this began

Iran’s nuclear programme has in recent years worsened US-Iran relations. The United States accuses Iran of seeking to develop nuclear weapons (Bahgat , 2009). Other reasons for mistrust include USA’s support for Iraq during the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980’s. Specifically, Iran continues to resent the US supplying Iraq with the chemical weapons it used during the war. Adding fuel to the fire, in 1988, US guided missile Cruiser the USS Vincennes on station in the Persian Gulf mistakenly shot down Iranian Airlines flight 655 killing 290. (Milinski, n.d.)

“ The Islamic Revolution of 1979: The Downfall of American- Iranian Relations” analyzes American- Iranian diplomacy from 1953- 1979. It is an explanation of the causes and developments of the Iranian revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini’s rise to power and

The 1970s is described as the Era of Limits, a decade when Americans were criticized for being self-absorbed. However, in 1979, American anxiety and the public concern towards the impact of the rise of radical Islam tends to contradict the claim of the widespread selfishness amongst the American people. The Iranian hostage crisis, which lasted for four hundred and forty days, from 1979 to 1981, was a defining moment in the history of United States and Iran’s relations. David Farber, in his book, Taken Hostage: The Iran Hostage Crisis and America 's First Encounter with Radical Islam, narrates a detailed account of this relations in five insightful chapters. He concentrates on the emergence of radical Islamic fundamentalism led by Ayatollah

In September of 1980, Iraq invaded Iran, in the beginning of the eight year Iran-Iraq war. Iran was paranoid that Iraq’s leaders had “ambitions….in terms of expansion and regional hegemony”. 2 The invasion justified their fears. At first, we “did not have good relations with Iraq, which was had been close to the Soviet Union”.3 Although “not an ally of Iraq”, the United States believed that “Saddam Hussein should not be allowed to be defeated by a radical Islamist, anti-American regime”.4 There was speculation that the U.S. had given the Iraqis “the green light to launch war” against Iran.5 This would have been plausible because if Saddam Hussein, leader of Iraq, could seize oil-rich territory, the U.S. would then have “access to Iranian crude”.6 The United States also wanted to terminate the radical Khomeini government and with the prospect of Hussein capturing Iran’s main source of revenue, this was probable. Because of this, “over the next decade Washington would play an ambiguous role in the Iran-Iraq War.”7 Not only was Iraq receiving U.S. support, but Iran was too, despite the fact our relations with them were

Counter-terrorism expert Steve Emerson, senior advisor to the RAND Corporation Brian Jenkins, Ryan Mauro and the Clarion Project have documented and exposed the reality of radical Islam in the United States. “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1, English Standard Version). Since the attacks on 9/11, the American public has settled into a false sense of security while the internet has enabled homegrown radicalization and enlarged the footprint of radical Islam inside the United States. “Many law enforcement officials fear that a new style of jihadist group is appearing, a hybrid of foreign and homegrown terrorists” (White,

The U.S wanted to adopted to its new international relations as it assumed the role of the defender of freedom and liberty. To secure freedom, NATO was created as a means to unify and strengthen the Western Allies' military response to a possible invasion by the Soviet Union and its allies. This, and the additional expansion of the U.S’s defense expenditures created by NSC-68, promoted a system in which the America and other countries could survive and flourish because it affirmed “the necessity of our positive participation in the world community...a healthy international community” (Hoffman 287). NSC-68 allowed the U.S. to “block soviet expansion, expose the falsities of Soviet pretensions, and induce...control and influence” (Hoffman 288). The concept of containment was needed to maintain a strong military posture and promote national security.

Radical Islamists are activists whose main goal is to form an international group of Islamic believers. They are determined to form this group in whatever way they can, even using violence and having mass killings. The United States of America allows them to be radical because of their needs such as, oil. They take teachings from the Qur’an and radicalize them into violence and harsh beliefs, however, the majority of Muslims do not believe in most all of the ways of radical Islamists.

Iran and the United States are frigid bedfellows indeed. For the last thirty-seven years, these two cultures dogmatically opposed each other philosophically and theologically. To this day, the two countries monitor the other’s actions with suspicion and disdain. The United States accuses Iran’s Islamic theocracy of state sponsored terrorism and proliferation of nuclear materials with the intent of use against Israel. Iran by contrast sees the United States as an aggressive interloper driven by a lust for fossil fuel hegemony and diametrically opposed to Iran’s own national interests. Truly a match made in heaven.

The “Preface to the 2008 Edition: The Folly of Attacking Iran”, highlights the decades that have followed the coup and reasons for the United States attacking Iran. It concludes by introducing the idea that Operation Ajax, which was the code name of this operation, brought tragedy to Iran, which led to the rise of anti-American terror, and weakened the security of the United States. The author explains how most Americans are unfamiliar with the history of what the CIA did in Iran in 1953 and the reason why the country had such hatred for America following the hostage crisis in 1979. The chapters begin with a clear overview of Iranian history and ends with explaining the effects of the countries because of the coup. This book is written like a thrilling story rather than a history book, which makes the information easier to comprehend, for those uneducated about the topic.

As Michael Axworthy states on the back cover of his book, A History of Iran: Empire of the Mind, Iran is a “land of contradictions”. As this is true these contradictions is what makes Iran, Iran. Iran today is looked as the pinnacle of the Islamic faith in the form of a Government structure. Since 1979, Iran has been known as the Islamic Republic of Iran and Iran will continue being an Islamic Republic for centuries to come. Iran has a rich history of intellectuals and scholars. Iran is known for its vibrant culture that dates back longer than the Western Ideals were even conceived. However Axworthy asks a question about Iran and its impact on the world’s history and the current events that we see in Iran today, Axworthy asks “Is Iran an aggressive power, or a victim?” This statement is a true paradox, can Iran be the next Nazi Germany, the next Soviet Union or the next Great Islamic Caliphate or is Iran just fighting to keep its culture alive from a vast array of attacks from foreign entities and internal struggles.

In the year 2014, The United States and Iran are considering working together in order to put a stop to the threats posed by the militant group, Isis. This is a big step for the two countries since just in 2013, the United States threatened to use force against Iran to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Even though, the two countries are facing a common enemy, Iraq; this does not reduce the tension that the U.S and Iran have towards each other. For 60 years, the U.S. had a tumultuous relationship with Iran. From the removal of Iran Prime Minister in 1953 to the most recent, Iran’s nuclear agenda, the United States have been involved. This raises the questions of how did the U.S. involvement in past history shape current Iran

There is no dispute that the Middle East, for the past century, has been a region plagued with tension and conflict. Differences in religion and ethnicity have been the source for hundreds of thousands of deaths, and the progression of those issues have shown very little evidence of slowing down as the bloodshed continues. Many parties on the global scale fear that the combination of evolving technology and weaponry, and desire to harness nuclear power, is fueling the hatred that some of the countries in the area have for one another and will eventually lead to an extremely disastrous nuclear war. As a result, international global organizations, such as the United Nations, have been working to prevent such an outcome. They are

Majid Khadduri is an Iraqi born author who was known for his prolific work in regards to the history of the Middle East and how it affects the current geopolitical climate. Born on September 27th, 1909 in Mosul, Khadduri received his education at the American University of Beirut for his BA and PhD; for 12 years, from 1937 to 1949, he served as a law professor for the Iraqi ministry of education and as a member of the first Iraqi delegation to the UN. The Islamic Conception of Justice takes a very comprehensive approach to the question of justice found in Islam and reflected in the Islamic community, and is among the last of Khadduri’s published works (Killgore, 1996). Khadduri has written books and works in regards to individual states, its history, relation to other states, as well as taking broader, more holistic approach when he writes about general concepts and ideas and how they are understood by different groups of people in space in time. Khadduri served as a lecturer in the University of Indiana and then Chicago before finally settling at Johns Hopkins University. During his tenure Khadduri served as a visiting professor for at Columbia University, Harvard University, the University of Virginia and Georgetown University. He died on January 25, 2007, in Potomac, Maryland, United States at the age of 97 (Klubes, 2007).

Still, Iran continuously denies that its nuclear objectives are to construct atomic weapons, but a large majority of the international community remains skeptical to the legitimacy of this claim due to the secrecy of Iran’s productions and their refusal to cooperate with the IAEA on several notable occasions. However, in defense over the concerns pertaining to the secrecy of Iran’s program, Iran’s former ambassador to the United Nations, Mohammed Javad Zarif, claims Western tension and dwindling support for Iran’s early nuclear energy programs forced Tehran with no choice but to continue their nuclear activities in a discreet matter. Zarif wrote in Colombia University’s Journal of International Affairs, “To avoid the