Carters Failed Policy Essay1

8/9/2019 Carters Failed Policy Essay1

1/12

We just don't get it. The Left in America is screaming to high heaven that the mess we

are in, in Iraq and the war on terrorism has been caused by the right-wing and that

George W. Bush, the so-called "dim-witted cowboy," has created the entire mess. The

truth is the entire nightmare can be traced back to the liberal democratic policies of

the leftist Jimmy Carter, who created a firestorm that destabilized our greatest ally in

the Muslim world, the shah of Iran, in favor of a religious fanatic, the ayatollah

Khomeini.

MICHAEL D. EVANS, the Jerusalem Post - Jun. 20, 2007

Most events in history happen for a reason or other events trigger them and of course,

most political events can be traced back to their origins if studied closely. Its easy to

speculate for pundits and commentators but students of history have an obligation to

learn them, inspect them and unearth these events on a factual basis. This paper will try to

discuss the links between Carters foreign policy and the rise of the Islamic revolution in

Iran.

President Jimmy Carter was elected as the 39th President of the United States during the

time when the American people were confused and felt betrayed by President NixonsWatergate scandal and the political failure of the Vietnam War. Carter did sound like a

reasonable man at a time when America was in her darkest hour and people thought this

man of moral conviction could lead them through their national nightmares. He narrowly

defeated President Gerald Ford. But it all turned out to be a disaster for both the United

States and the world as a whole. He had too many issues to deal with, from sky high

inflation, energy crisis to Panama Canal dispute, Soviet-US talks and of course the

Iranian revolution and its terrible hostage crisis.

Jimmy Carter was unsuccessful in doing what he had promised to deliver and his lack of

leadership in foreign policy and national politics resulted in a disastrous political defeat

for his party and himself in November 1980.

1

8/9/2019 Carters Failed Policy Essay1

2/12

When Jimmy Carter entered the political fray in 1976, America was still riding the liberal

wave of anti-Vietnam War emotions and numerous mistakes made during the Nixon

presidency. In his Inaugural Speech on 20th of Jan, 1977, Carter revealed his stance on

human rights and served notice:

Our moral sense dictates a clear-cut preference for these societies which

share with us an abiding respect for individual human rights. We do not seek to

intimidate, but it is clear that a world which others can dominate with impunity

would be inhospitable to decency and a threat to the well being of all people.1

Carters pro Human Rights campaign shocked the foundations of many American allies

including the late Shah of Iran who was running an ancient country with cultural andhistorical complications that needed time to be corrected. The Iranian Constitutional

Revolution had already taken place in 1905 and the democratic experience of the society

was almost new and in its baby steps. The problems on the ground had been created over

a long period of time and over centuries. The country had been a battleground for

invading armies from Alexander to Arabs and Mongols. Invading armies came in, sacked

the people and imposed their own will and culture by force. Iran has had a long history

behind herself and reforms of any sort couldnt happen over night. It did need time to be

corrected and most of the time revolutions are not a good answer to the problems that run

deep in the social fabrics of the land. Prime examples were Russia and France where

revolutions produced tyrannies one after another.

According to Answer to History, the late Shah of Iran had promised to have full

democratic elections and reforms well by the year 1981.2

What happened in Iran in the late 1970's and the resulting takeover of the Islamic

extremists is a very complex issue. It is a culmination of many variables including social,

political, cultural, religious, economic and strategic, both domestically (Iran) and

internationally (U.S. and Europeans). The late Shah of Iran was an authoritarian ruler, but

1Inaugural address of Jimmy Carter on 20 th of Jan, 1977 via Carters Presidential library2Answer to History by Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, 1981

2

8/9/2019 Carters Failed Policy Essay1

3/12

not a tyrant. He was not like Saddam, Idi Amin, and Fidel Castro or like Khomeini and

his thugs, absolutely not. He was a patriot and seen as one among many Iranians and a

true one at that, for things he did to upgrade the lives of ordinary Iranians and

modernizing an old country he inherited. The social and mostly political problems were

not genuine excuses for a revolution like that of Iran in 1978-79 periods. If the protesters

were honest in their democratic demands, then the late PM Bakhtiar delivered them. Most

of their demands were met by him such as disbanding the SAVAK, and trying those who

were suspected of being corrupt, but the protestors didnt quite want to reform the

regime. They were driven by their religious beliefs that Shah was the corrupt on earth

and had to be removed.

There are evidences pointing to the fact that Shah was not a dictator as many tend tobelieve. One of them is the fact that unlike other ruthless dictators of the 20 th century,

Shah didnt limit the interaction of his people with the outside world. Indeed, he

encouraged it to such a degree that he set up scholarships in order for Iranian students to

study abroad. His government was a western oriented ally and a member of NATOs

CENTO pact. He didnt try to build walls around his country, limiting his peoples access

to the free world the way Soviets, Eastern European dictators or Cuba have done. No

mass graves trailed the late Shah when he finally left the country in January, 1979. No

"death caravans" haunted his memory though. Tehran produced no equivalent of Buenos

Aires "Plaza de Mayo" where "grandmas" gather every Sunday to reclaim news of their

missing children. To be sure the military courts were quick to hand in the death sentences

to the opposition, but the practice of royal pardon was abundantly resorted to and

practiced. The sentences were systematically commuted or annulled. Some viewed this

practice as a gimmick to earn political capital but be it as it may, few now dispute the fact

that the Shah was averse to cruelty or execution.

When President Carter took office in 1977, the Iran of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi

was a staunch American ally, a bulwark in the standoff with the Soviet Union, thwarting

the dream held since the time of the czars of pushing south toward the warm waters of the

3

8/9/2019 Carters Failed Policy Essay1

4/12

appropriately named Persian Gulf. Being an ally of the U.S. in the Cold War, Iran was a

target for Soviet subversion and espionage.3

Like the U.S. in today's war on terror, Iran arrested and incarcerated many who

threatened its sovereignty and existence, mainly Soviet agents and their collaborators. To

support the fact that the Shahs regime did not kill or torture hundreds of thousands of

people, as many claim nowadays, Id draw your attention to works of Iranian author and

historian Emad Baghi who in August 2003 published his works on the number of

casualties suffered by the anti-monarchy movement. Rumors, exaggerated claims by the

leaders of the Islamic revolution and a disinformation campaign against the fallen

monarchy, not to mention western media reports that the imperial Iranian regime was

guilty of "mass murders", has finally been challenged by a former researcher at theMartyrs Foundation (Bonyad Shahid). The findings by Emad Baghi, now a respected

historian, has caused a stir in the Islamic Republic for it boldly questions the true number

of casualties suffered by the anti-Shah movement between 1963 and 1979. Mr. Baghi

states: 4

The statistical breakdown of victims covering the period from 1963 to 1979

adds up to a figure of 3,164. Of this figure 2,781 were killed in nation-wide disturbances

of 1978/79 following clashes between demonstrators and the Shah's army and security

forces.

Despite this revelation all officially sanctioned books in Iran and other publishing around

the world dealing with the history of the Islamic revolution write of "15,000 dead and

wounded". Such wild figures have found its way in Western accounts. The irony here is

that when Khomeini overthrew the shah in February 1979, many of the former 3,000

political prisoners allegedly detained by the Shahs security forces were executed by the

ayatollah's firing squads along with some other 20,000 pro-Western Iranians and ex-shah

army generals and ministers. And according to the book The Real Jimmy Carter, it is

believed that revolutionary regime executed more people in its first two years in power

3Profiles in Incompetence: Jimmy Carter. Investors Business Daily newspaper, May 2007

4A Question of Number:.http://www.emadbaghi.com/en/archives/000592.phpPublished in August 2003

4

8/9/2019 Carters Failed Policy Essay1

5/12

than the Shah's SAVAK had allegedly killed in the previous 25 years. Mr. Baghi further

states:

In any case, the total [number] of those killed for underground actions against the

Shah's regime comes to 383 which added to the 2,781 "martyrs" would mean that 3,164

Iranians lost their lives in the revolution against the monarchy and not 60,000 as the

Imam had stated. In time, other historians may take up the task of finding the truth about

the countless people executed or eliminated during the brutal years rule of the mullahs.5

However, all these facts did not sit well with the Carter administration, who, on taking

office, declared that advancing "human rights" was among his highest priorities. The shah

was one of his first targets. Carter accused the Shah of torturing some 3,000 "political"prisoners. The fact was that the Islamic clergy hated the shah not because he was an

oppressive dictator. They hated him because he was a secular, pro-Western leader who, in

addition to other initiatives, was expanding the rights and roles of women in Iranian

society. Under Khomeini, women returned to their second-class role, and citizens were

arrested for merely owning satellite dishes that could only pick up Western television

channels. The land reforms made the traditional clergy angry and took the main source of

income of the rural mullahs away from them. According to Comparative Education6, the

shahs land reform took away the entire traditional clerical establishment by surprise

when he declared his White Revolution. Up until 1962, Islamic clergies had the

opportunity to be the judge, teacher and even medical doctor of far-distant villages of the

country and could earn good sums of money by doing these jobs without being trained

and educated enough to do so. The land reforms of the Shahs government made them

despise the entire system for taking their source of income away.7

Indeed the late Shah of Iran made some notable mistakes and a few grave ones. He

should have been more aware and in tune with the needs of his people rather than being

5 Ibid6The Shah's White Revolution-Education and Reform in Iran - Keith Watson - Vol. 12, No. 1 (Mar., 1976),

pp. 23-367Eternal Iran; P 69-71 A publication of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy

5

8/9/2019 Carters Failed Policy Essay1

6/12

so single minded in implementing his vision for a secular and modern Iran. It was a

vision being implemented too quickly and not aligned with the cultural and social

maturity of the Iranian population. His Majesty the late Shah of Iran once said that the

single unifying point for Iran was "the King, the Monarch". Thats partly true. But,

equally, the other unifying point, certainly at that time for Iran, was religion - i.e. Shiite

Islam. Perhaps not among a few educated, westernized Iranians, but certainly for the

majority of average people there. Progress is a great thing provided your average

populations mindset can keep up with it. Its true that Irans economic and industrial

modernization was not matched by a political modernization. One of the most notable

mistakes of the Shah was that he didnt truly permit the middle class he helped create in

late 60s and early 70s, to participate in political process. The late Shah of Iran saw his

economic and industrial success as the sole proof of his wisdom. Thats where he waswrong. The overall economic record of the period 1953-1979 was stunning. An IMF

report confirms it:

During 1960-76, Iran enjoyed one of the fastest growth rates in the world. The economy

grew at an average rate of 9.8 percent in real terms, and real per capita income grew by

7 percent on average. 8

People tend to forget that the Shahs reign brought modernity and social changes to the

country but again many are quick to criticize the SAVAK. Righteously, the security

apparatus of the government, for its deadly contribution to the collapse of the Shahs

regime, deserves its own fair share of criticism. The SAVAK blended ruthlessness with

sheer incompetence. It had been effective in dismantling the clandestine structure of

Iran's Communist Party (Tudeh party) in late 1950s but failed to gauge the creeping

popular discontent, fanned by Marxist groups like the Mojahedin e Khalq (MEK) and

Marxist Fedayeen. The SAVAKs pure incompetence forced many to turn to more

extreme factions to fight the monarchy. The Shah would pay dearly for his failure to

permit a more democratic opposition. A case study would support a theory that the value

accorded to any given regime should be measured in light of its inevitable successor and

8Answer to History, authored by the late Shah of Iran 1980

6

8/9/2019 Carters Failed Policy Essay1

7/12

the ability of the latter to improve conditions and ills of which they accused the

predecessors. Jimmy Carters mistakes were much graver than the Shahs.

The main difference is that Carter's mistakes have affected the world today. By not

supporting the Shah, and by enabling Khomeinis hands, Carter's actions gave birth to

what we call Islamic Fundamentalism today. The alliance of the Reds (Communists) and

Blacks (Islamists) contributed to the Shah's downfall and was emboldened by one single

factor that was President Carters ignorance of the problems on the ground and not using

diplomatic tools properly to enforce his vision. Its right to claim that his ignorance later

came to deny him a second presidential term in 1980 elections. The US government run

by Jimmy Carter gave little useful advice to the Shah during the turmoil of 1978-79. In

mid December of 1978, Ambassador Helms, the former US ambassador to Iran and

former head of CIA, weighed in, saying: Washingtons response to developments in Iranis lethargic and uncomprehending.9

Carters mishandling of the Iranian revolution and backstabbing of the Persian monarch

emboldened the Soviets to invade Afghanistan, and also sent confusing signals to other

US allies in the world. He should have known at the time that the soviets were intimately

and actively involved in getting rid of the Shah. Its hard to believe that he didnt know

and not only allowed it to happen, but enabled it so that he could get rid of the Shah and

replace him with this religious man, Khomeini. President Carters administration hardly

knew what to do with Iran. It was unable to adjust itself in dealing with the situation and

what the US government couldnt comprehend was that the cement holding the

Communists and Islamic clerics together was their shared hatred for America. Carters

foreign policy makers didnt see that clearly.10 To make matters worse, CIA had failed to

see the seriousness of the challenges posed by the anti-American elements of the society

to the US interests in Iran and the Mideast region.

One other issue that Carters administration was unable to comprehend was the fact that

the Iranian hostage crisis of 1979-1980 had almost nothing to do with the 1953 coup

9A look over my shoulders, A life in CIA by Richard Helms; pp 417-41810 I Accuse: Jimmy Carter & the Rise of Militant Islam by Philip Pilevsky. Durban House, Published July

2007, pp 87-88

7

8/9/2019 Carters Failed Policy Essay1

8/12

against Prime Minister Mossadeq. This argument made by the Iranian militants who had

taken over the US Embassy in Tehran was historically inaccurate. Mossadeq was not

elected by popular vote to the post of prime minister. In fact he was appointed to run the

cabinet by the Shah.11 In summer of 1953 when he was asked to step down, he refused.

Therefore Mohammed Reza Pahlavi had to have the military remove the very man he had

appointed to premiership a few years back.12 This was the basic argument for the

ayatollahs during the hostage crisis of 1979 and was the Iranians grievance, but the truth

was that it painted a false picture and confused the nave western audience including the

US President Carter who didnt like the previous US foreign interventions around the

world including those that were made by the Republican administrations. However,

Khomeini by taking the US embassy staff as hostages and keeping them for 444 long

days was up to an ugly game: Eradicating those who were secular and/or liberals andthose that his regime didnt like, including Prime Minister Bazargan, Foreign Minister

Qotbzadeh and other nationalist and secular forces that once were his allies. President

Carters foreign policy-makers did not understand that by hostage taking, Khomeini and

his followers were into removing the very allies Carter had earlier hoped to be in charge

of Iran. He did not predict it and did not actually plan for the consequences that would

follow after the Shah was out of the picture.

What would have happened if the Shah had remained in power? If the Shah remained in

power, and the U.S. supported his successor when he died, it isn't likely the Iraq-Iran

War, with upward of a million casualties on both sides, a war that saw Saddam Hussein

first use mass-murder weapons, would have taken place. Nor is it likely there would

have been a Desert Storm, fought after Saddam invaded Kuwait to strengthen his

strategic position in the Persian Gulf region. Saddams invasion of Kuwait definitely led

to foundation of American military bases in Saudi Arabia that fueled radical Muslims

resentment, one of the reasons given by Osama bin Laden for attacking America through

out the 1990s and on September 11th. The Soviet Union, seeing the US so willingly

abandon a staunch ally, invaded Afghanistan in December 1979, just six months after11Amir Taheri, The Persian Night: Iran under the Khomeinist Revolution. Encounter Books, 2009, ISBN978-159403240012 Mark J. Gasiorowski, The 1953 Coup D'tat in Iran, International Journal of Middle East studies, Vol.19, No. 3, p. 26186 (1987)

8

8/9/2019 Carters Failed Policy Essay1

9/12

Carter and Russian leader Leonid Brezhnev embraced after signing a new arms-control

treaty. The reaction of Carter to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was to boycott the

1980 Moscow Olympic. It made the United States look weak in the eyes of its allies and

enemies. Khomeini established the first modern Islamic regime, a role model for the

Taliban and other Islamic militants to follow. And when the U.S. Embassy was stormed

on 4th of November 1979 and more than 60 Americans taken hostage for 444 days,

America's lack of resolve was confirmed in the Jihadists mind. They saw first hand that

US dared not to respond.

One might pose the question whether President Carter was scared of the Soviets or did

not want to get into any conflict with the Russians. On November 19 th, 1978 the Soviet

leader Berzhenev issued a stern warning to Jimmy Carter about the consequences of anyUS intervention to save the Shah:

It must be clear that any interference, especially military interference in the affairs of

Iran would be regarded as a matter affecting security interests of the Soviet Union.

The events taking place in that country constitutes purely internal affairs, and the

questions involved them should be decided by the Iranians..13

The response from Carter was a weak response issued by the US State Department:

The United States does not intend to interfere in the affairs of another country.14

Foreign observers were entitled to conclude that the US had deserted her long time ally

and Carter didnt want to demonstrate to the Soviets that his country is willing to back

one of his countrys most reliable allies in that important corner of the world. Jimmy

Carter simply didnt want to challenge the Soviets on the issue of Iran either. The

invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviet Union in 1979 caused the US to rush to contain the

threat of Communism in South and Central Asia again in 1980s. Aided and directed by

Saudi Arabia and Pakistans intelligence services, the US had to fund the Mujahedeen for

13I Accuse: Jimmy Carter & the Rise of Militant Islam by Philip Pilevsky. Durban House, Published July2007, pp 8614Ibid

9

8/9/2019 Carters Failed Policy Essay1

10/12

ten bloody years. These foreign fighters later, empowered by the defeat of the Soviet

Union the Evil Empire- decided to bite the hand that fed them for the most part of the

1980s. The lack of resolve in handling of the Iranian revolution and the US

Embassy Hostage Crisis gave the green lights to other militant groups around the globe

that if the US is attacked, it wont have the guts to fight back. We saw the similar

incidents happening through out the 1980s until 2001 - A few of them are the US

Marines Barracks bombing by the Iranian backed Lebanese Hezbollah in 1983, 1993

attack on WTC in New York City to attacks on the USS Cole in 2000 and finally the

September 11th tragedy. The mistakes made during the 1979 by both sides still haunt us

until today.

And it was the resistance to the Soviet invasion that helped give birth to the Taliban andAl-Qaeda. The fall of Iran, hastened by Jimmy Carters diplomatic incompetence, set in

motion the advance of radical Islam and the rise of terrorism that culminated in Sept. 11.

British author and commentator Christopher Hitchens recalls a discussion he had with

Eugene McCarthy. A Democrat and former candidate for that party's presidential

nomination, McCarthy voted for Ronald Reagan instead of Carter in 1980. The reason,

McCarthy explained was: Carter had "quite simply abdicated the whole responsibility of

the presidency while in office. He left the nation at the mercy of its enemies at home and

abroad. He was quite simply the worst president we ever had." 15

Mr. Carter could not or did not understand that by playing the Diplomacy Game with

the Iranian ayatollahs, he was paying a higher price for the US national and international

interests. His diplomatic gestures were seen as signs of American weakness and demise.

And Islamic terrorists spiritually, politically and financially, emboldened by the late

Ayatollah Khomeinis revolution, had learned that it is possible to take on the Great

Satan and other western powers without the fear of backlash. No one is going to punish

them for their wrong doings. The weakness of the United States, the leader of the free

world, throughout Carters presidency resulted in great tragedies. In short, the US didnt

15The Real Jimmy Carter by Steven F. Hayward of AEI Published in May 2004

10

8/9/2019 Carters Failed Policy Essay1

11/12

have a capable leader with one voice when more than any other time, unanimity of action

was increasingly essential. If the contradictory policies of the Carters administration

were not a calculated move as suggested by many foreign observers, then one can only

conclude that the US foreign policy establishment had no appropriate mechanism to deal

with the Iranian crises. Considering the abundance of resources available to the US

government in Iran, its loss of Iran should be viewed as a masterpiece of flawed and

mistaken diplomacy. 16

Jimmy Carter's belief that every crisis can be resolved with diplomacy has had many

catastrophic results. What we encounter today as Islamic Terrorism mostly backed by the

current Iranian regime is one of the few gifts of the Carters failed foreign policy. Had he

shown resolve in dealing with the 1979 revolution and the US embassy hostage crisis, wewould not be in this mess we are today. Diplomacy is a great tool to enforce your

policies, if other tools of foreign policy including military might and economic incentive

and disincentives correctly back it. Jimmy Carter didnt apply these tools properly in

order to handle many crises he faced during his 4-year presidency. All the blame does not

lie with Carters failure but he played an important role in this.

President Carter failed and his failures still haunts us.

16 Planning Foreign Policy; can it be done? http://www.jstor.org/pss/2149530

11

8/9/2019 Carters Failed Policy Essay1

12/12

Bibliography:1- Rise to Globalism, American foreign policy since 1938. Stephen E. Ambrose2- President Carters biography at Whitehouse.gov official web site3- Inaugural Address of Jimmy Carter 20th of Jan, 1977 via President Carters library andmuseum4- Father of the Iranian revolution, by Michael D. Evans, the Jerusalem Post, 20 th of

June 2007

5- Guest of the Ayatollahs, by Mark Bowden Publisher: Atlantic Monthly Press (April25, 2006) - Look at http://iran.theatlantic.com/homepage.html6- Eternal Iran, by Michael Rubin & Patrick Clawson Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan

(November 2005) The Washington Institute for Near East Policy7- I Accuse: Jimmy Carter & the Rise of Militant Islam by Philip Pilevsky. DurbanHouse, Published July 20078- A Question of Numbers. Written by the Iranian investigative journalist Mr. EmadBaghi published on August 8th, 2003. External Link:http://www.emadbaghi.com/en/archives/000592.php

9- Profiles in Incompetence: Jimmy Carter. Investors Business Daily May 2007External link: http://www.ibdeditorials.com/Special3.aspx10- The Real Jimmy Carter... Author: Steven F. Hayward, Published in 200411- Amir Taheri, The Persian Night: Iran under the Khomeinist Revolution. EncounterBooks, 2009, ISBN 978-159403240012- U.S. Foreign Policy since 1945 by Alan P. Dobson, Steve Marsh.13- Planning Foreign Policy; can it be done? http://www.jstor.org/pss/214953014- US Foreign Policy and the Iran Hostage Crisis by David Patrick Houghton.15- Mark J. Gasiorowski, The 1953 Coup D'tat in Iran, International Journal of MiddleEast studies, Vol. 19, No. 3, p. 26186 (1987)16- The Cold War: The United States and the Soviet Union, 1917-1991. A Book byRonald E. Powaski; Oxford University Press, 1998

12