Inside Iran's Fury
Scholars trace the nation's antagonism to its history of domination by foreign powers
- By Stephen Kinzer
- Smithsonian magazine, October 2008, Subscribe
No American who was alive and alert in the early 1980s will ever forget the Iran hostage crisis. Militants stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran, captured American diplomats and staff and held 52 of them captive for 444 days. In the United States, the television news program "Nightline" emerged to give nightly updates on the crisis, with anchorman Ted Koppel beginning each report by announcing that it was now "Day 53" or "Day 318" of the crisis. For Americans, still recovering from defeat in Vietnam, the hostage crisis was a searing ordeal. It stunned the nation and undermined Jimmy Carter's presidency. Many Americans see it as the pivotal episode in the history of U.S.-Iranian relations.
Iranians, however, have a very different view.
Bruce Laingen, a career diplomat who was chief of the U.S. embassy staff, was the highest-ranking hostage. One day, after Laingen had spent more than a year as a hostage, one of his captors visited him in his solitary cell. Laingen exploded in rage, shouting at his jailer that this hostage-taking was immoral, illegal and "totally wrong." The jailer waited for him to finish, then replied without sympathy.
"You have nothing to complain about," he told Laingen. "The United States took our whole country hostage in 1953."
Few Americans remembered that Iran had descended into dictatorship after the United States overthrew the most democratic government it had ever known. "Mr. President, do you think it was proper for the United States to restore the shah to the throne in 1953 against the popular will within Iran?" a reporter asked President Carter at a news conference during the hostage crisis. "That's ancient history," Carter replied.
Not for Iranians. "In the popular mind, the hostage crisis was seen as justified by what had happened in 1953," says Vali Nasr, an Iranian-born professor at Tufts University's Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy in Massachusetts. "People saw it as an act of national assertiveness, of Iran standing up and taking charge of its own destiny. The humiliation of 1953 was exorcised by the taking of American hostages in 1979."
This chasm of perception reflects the enormous gap in the way Americans and Iranians viewed—and continue to view—one another. It will be hard for them to reconcile their differences unless they begin seeing the world through each other's eyes.
Iran's assertiveness on the global stage—especially its defiant pursuit of what it sees as its sovereign right to a nuclear program—is in part the product of traumatic events that have shaped its national consciousness over the course of generations. In fact, all of 20th-century Iranian history can be seen as leading to this confrontation. That history has been dominated by a single burning passion: to destroy the power that foreigners have long held over Iran.
Many countries in the Middle East are modern inventions, carved out of the Ottoman Empire by victorious European powers following the end of World War I. That is not the case with Iran, one of the world's oldest and proudest nations. Half a millennium before the birth of Christ, the great conquerors Cyrus, Darius and Xerxes built the Persian Empire into a far-reaching power. When Europe was descending into the Dark Age, Persian poets were creating works of timeless beauty, and Persian scientists were studying mathematics, medicine and astronomy. Over the centuries, the nation that would become Iran thrived as it assimilated influences from Egypt, Greece and India.
Persian armies were not always victorious. They failed to turn back invading Arabs who conquered Persia in the seventh century, decisively reshaping it by introducing Islam. But the Persians turned even this defeat into a kind of victory by adopting their own form of Islam, Shiism, which allowed them to maintain the distinct identity they have always cherished. Shiite Muslims broke ranks with the majority Sunnis as a result of a succession dispute following the death of the Prophet Muhammad in A.D. 632.
While Sunnis believe that Muhammad's friend and adviser, Abu Bakr, was the legitimate successor, Shiites believe that 'Ali ibn Abi Talib, the Prophet's first cousin and son-in-law, was the rightful heir, and that the Prophet's legitimate lineage ended with the "occultation" of Muhammad al-Mahdi around A.D. 874. This Twelfth Imam is believed to have been hidden by God and is destined to return before the Last Judgment. Shiite religious scholars argued that they should take on some of the Imam's responsibilities in the meantime. (Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini further expanded this concept to justify the clerical rule he imposed on Iran after 1979.) Shiite rulers brought Persia to another peak of power in the 16th and 17th centuries, creating a magnificent capital at Isfahan, where spectacular buildings like the Imam Mosque still testify to the empire's grandeur.
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.
Comments (44)
+ View All Comments
I just toured the magnificent cities of Tehran, Tabriz and Esfahan in Iran. Such prosperous and peaceful cities populated by the most friendly, most hospitable and awesomely beautiful people in the world. Iran is totally the opposite of what headlines in the mainstream media depict. The negative portrayal of this lovely country by the western media and the sanctions by the western countries are just another form of colonialism and foreign interference that are suppressing Iranians. God Bless Iran.
Posted by Iskandar Zulbryner on May 11,2012 | 01:12 PM
Umm...Iran right to their nuclear is not just something they claim, it is a fact - Iran has the same rights as the US and Argentina and any other country (in fact the program started under the Shaggy with US aid.) And, you've overlooked the role of the pro-Israeli lobby in exasperating the conflict with the US. I'm not sure where you get info thst inflation etc is spiraling but the IMF just commended Iran on halving inflation. And US polls show for the first time that not only does the nuclear program enjoy massive popularity but for the first time a large majority of Iranian endorse building nuclear weapons too, though their govt has repeatedly offered to place additional restrictions on their nuclear program well beyond their legal ovligstions, which the US has torpedoed as stated by firmer IAEA head Elbaradei.
Posted by hass on June 20,2011 | 07:32 PM
Wow, what a great article. Goes to show that what US elites view as "past history" is still very real for the victims of their interventionist foreign policy
Posted by Tomas on March 7,2011 | 03:31 AM
Living in Iran as an American teenager during the 1950's, I saw first hand the demonstrations that occurred during the spring and summer of 1953. Some of the parades were part of Moharram, the Shia month of mourning, but the news reporters did not distinguish between those parades and the political demonstrations, making the whole situation seem worse than it was leading up to CIA intervention. For many years I have told my friends what really happened, just as the article describes. I also remember all the rumors spread by Kermit Roosevelt to justify his actions, which to those of us who had lived there many years knew to be blatantly false. Iran is a country of culture, history, and long memory.
Posted by Margaret F. on December 27,2008 | 02:29 PM
Iran is a great ancient civilisation with a long history of and culture and heritage like India and China. No western culture can come anywhere near that of Iran, India and China and we must all be proud of our heritage ad try to uphold the dignity of out Nations before the neuvaux rich powers of the modern world with super eapons of destrction.
Posted by Ranjan Khastgir on November 25,2008 | 09:12 AM
Well said EM - stop living in the past, makes something of yourself NOW, stop whining and complaining and get it done instead of talking about it
Posted by GoozNejad on November 23,2008 | 07:39 PM
So am I to gather that when Persia conquered many other countries and created an "empire" this is cause for admiration? But when Iran itself falls victim to foreign powers this is injustice?
Posted by EM on November 15,2008 | 08:23 PM
Sadly, there is simply too much interest in the US -- financial and political -- to keep the demonization of Iran and other nations and peoples alive.
Posted by Ellen on November 12,2008 | 02:55 AM
This excellent article should serve as an eye opener to the Americans who see Iranians the tunnel vision of the US presidents since Jimmy Carter as terrorists and war mongers. It is time for a change in American foreign policy and it is time for normalization of relations with the people of Iran and to recognize that American policy leading to the overthrow of the Shah was flawed and not in the interest of the people of Iran and it is time for putting the past behind and making peace and promoting trade between Iran and the USA. The Iran Iraq war in the early 80s was imposed on Iran and the rest of the world ganged up on it and did not share the sorrow of its people. The Reagan Bush administration cheered Saddam Hussein to bloody the Iranian people and built up Saddam's army. No the US has no higher ground in relations to Iran. The US needs to therefore forget the past and look to better relations with the Iranian people. As an Obama supporter I would urge him to take a revisit the strategic relationship with Iran.
Posted by Girish on November 11,2008 | 09:27 AM
Definitely, one of the best articles that describe almost all things about Persian.
Posted by Dariush on November 6,2008 | 02:42 PM
I sure am glad that we are refusing as Americans to talk to Iran. I'm sure that this will make the world a safer place to live. Long live insanity.
Posted by Kirk Nelson on October 24,2008 | 05:53 PM
As an Iranian raised in Canada, I am often frustrated that people don't take the time to actually examine my country's history before they pontificate on its domestic and international affairs. I want to sincerely thank you for doing the opposite: your honest and even-handed approach is refreshing.
Posted by Azin Samani on October 17,2008 | 02:00 AM
Can someone print this out for Senator McCain? Maybe he will quit singing "Bomb bomb bomb Iran". Warmongering must stop. In all seriousness, I agree with other comments. This type of historical perspective should be included in core curriculum. Yes, it is hard to believe our government could be involved as it was in teh 1950's but we must learn from history, not repeat it as it appears we are today. Coincidently, the August 2008 edition of National Geographic has an article about Iran. Well worth the read. http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/08/iran-archaeology/del-giudice-text
Posted by Walter on October 17,2008 | 07:07 PM
It would be a great idea to send a copy of this to the candidates for the office of president and the current president and their staffs to read. This gives one a slightly different take on the present standoff between the U.S. and Iran. How is this true of our relationships with some other countries?
Posted by James R. Miller on October 15,2008 | 03:17 PM
+ View All Comments