1

RICE UNIVERSITY
Policy Analysis
POLI 338 Spring 2010
Professor Don Ostdiek
Research Paper
Anastazija Ristovska
Rice Class of 2013
05 May 2010

United States Foreign Policy

And the
Islamic Republic of Iran

2
Contents

Maps . 3
Summary of Key Points .. 5
Failure to Foresee: Lack of Information vs. Lack of Internal Insight . 7
History .. 7
Irans Monarchy Under Shah Mohamad Reza Pahlavi . 7
Cultural shock . 8
1979 Revolution .... 9
Exporting the Revolution .. 9
Hostage Crisis ... 9
A View from Within ..... 10
The Iran Iraq War .. 11
Irans Military Capabilities . 11
Irans Nuclear Facilities .. 12
When Negotiations Fail ... 13
U.S. Sanctions ... 13
UN sanctions 15
Anti-Zionism and Holocaust Denial ,. 15
Ahmadinejad vs. Mir-Hossein ,. 16
Psychological Approach to Foreign Policy Analysis ..16
Iran Fact Book .. 16
Gas and Oil Reserves ..17
Latest News .. 18
Recommended Further Readings ... 19
Works Cited 20

Maps

Political map of Iran {36}

Iran Atomic Underground [37]

5
Summary of Key Points

The 1979 Iranian revolution, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and the Islamic extremists
attack on the Grand Mosque in Mecca (the hallmark of Saudi Arabias turning to Radical
Wahabbism)[34], have become the modern day French Revolution of the Middle East. The
Hostage Crisis, Ahmadinejads threats to Israel and the U.S., the proofs for sponsorship of
terrorism, and the Iraq-Iran War have singled out Iran as a strategic threat to the U.S., Israel and
many of its Middle Eastern neighbors.
The Hostage Crisis of 1979 stands as an emblem of enmity between Ayatollahs Islamic regime
and the United States.
In the viewpoint of some Iranian scholars, the revenues generated by a major oil-producing
country such as Iran, combined with the mullah regimes policy of state-sponsorship of terrorism,
produce an extremely dangerous and explosive mix. [] the clerical regime in Iran has been
actively engaged in acts of international terrorism, pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, and
promotion of radical militant-Islamist fundamentalism throughout the world.
Although Iran is a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, the International Atomic Energy Agency
states that Iran has repeatedly failed to meet its obligations under the safeguard agreement
enacted in 1974.
The radical clerics that came to power during the Iranian Revolution of 1979 are losing popularity
with the majority of Iranians due to growing discontent caused by institutional chaos, constant
economic lapsing, and lack of human rights. Nevertheless, the radical leaders are able to sustain
their position of power via populist techniques such as identifying the concepts of democracy,
human-rights, and nation-state as opposed to Islamic republic, as Western and corrupted, and
therefore contrary to Islams values. They label Western society as debased and immoral, and
consider the democratic forms of government in many Muslim countries to also be western
influence and thus un-Islamic, a notion that has turned into action, as the clerics have not limited
their influence to domestic policy, but, on the contrary, ever since its inception, the regime has
tried to export the revolution to the rest of the Muslim world by state-sponsoring terrorist
organizations in different countries seeking to establish Islamic governments in place of the
existing secular ones.
Iran has become a state-sponsor of terrorist organizations worldwide, and has especially extended
its influence to the Levant by military and in other ways backing Hezbollah and The Palestinian
Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas).
Prior to the overthrow of the Shah, Irans nuclear energy program was backed by the U.S. and
Europe. However, the 1979 Radical Revolution and especially the attack of the U.S. Embassy in
Tehran and the hostage crisis worsened U.S. Iranian relations to the point of no recovery over
the past 30 years. The nuclear program was now in the hands of the Iranian radical Islamic
leadership, and, in the last couple of years, despite Irans claims to the contrary, the nuclear
energy program has been deflected to pursuit of weapons of mass destruction.
Irans latest president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly denied the Holocaust, has been
promoting anti-Semitic literature such as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and is famous for
his address at the 2005 World without Zionism conference in Asia where he declared that

6
Israel must be wiped off the map. His words that at the time made headlines in the U.S. and
globally have become more moderate today as opposed to 5 years ago, and proclamations such as
the claim that a strike against Israel would kill more Palestinians than Israelis are being made.
Even so, the clerics concern for human lives, whether Jewish, Palestinian, or Muslim is to be
doubted. Many of Irans nuclear facilities have been built in close proximity to population centers
with the purpose of deterring potential attackers. A conventional attack to a nuclear facility might
cost thousands of Iranian lives. [5]
Iraqs extensive use of chemical weapons against Iran despite of the fact that both Iran and Iraq
are parties to the 1925 Geneva Protocol which forbids use of chemical weapons, and even more,
the fact that the International Community and United Nations choice to remain indifferent to
Iraqs actions, are believed to be two of the main background motivations for Irans pursuit of
nuclear weapons.
Several U.S. Laws and Legislative Acts have sought to weaken Irans regime, stop its support for
terrorism, its anti-U.S. and anti-Israel policy, and curb the nuclear proliferation by targeting Irans
economy. While the United Nations have mainly focused on curtailing the supply of weapons and
proliferation related technology to Iran, the U.S. Legislative acts targeted Irans energy sector, as
80% of all government revenues are dependent on oil revenues and foreign investment.

7
U.S. Foreign Policy and Iran
Failure to Foresee: Lack of Information vs. Lack of Internal Insight
The fall of the Shah of Iran and the Communist takeover of China and South Vietnam were two major
drawbacks to successful U.S. foreign policy since World War II. The sudden and unexpected nature of
these two events has pointed the lack of capability to predict and manage major political change in an era
of sophisticated intelligence acquiring techniques and policy planning strategies. [1] In the words of Henry
Kissinger, foreign policy is the "ability to perceive trends and dangers before they become
overwhelming," and policy makers must act on "judgments about the future that cannot be proved true
when they are made.[2] Much of the policy on Iran following World War II has been guided by the
developmental paradigm, also known as the modernization theory, where it was believed that
developmentalism and spread of Western culture could bring about positive change and gradual
industrialization in Third World countries, as in the case of Turkey. Lack of development was blamed on
internal factors in the society, such as traditions and social hierarchy. Soon the modernization theory was
dismissed and the dependency paradigm was adopted, predicting a spontaneous shift in the Iranian society
toward the Indian or Yugoslav political models (Seliktar xx). The dependency theory claims that
globalization and spread of capitalism would eventually create a core of wealthy and economically
developed countries, surrounded by peripheral Third World countries such as Iran, where economic
regression is caused by external factors (e.g. Colonialism). Both of these theories were wrong in the case
of modern-day Persia. Political analysts failed to foresee the religiously ridden creation of an Islamic
republic. Experts have often blamed the unawareness of a peril of radical political change on the lack of
understanding of the internal social and religious structure of Iranian society. This lack of internal insight
became evident during the sudden radical change in 1979, and the same lack of insight may cause severe
mistakes in policy behavior today. In an address at the Southern Methodist University in 1996,
Manouchehr Ganji, former Minister of Education of Iran (1976 1979) and founder of Flag of Freedom
(a democratic opposition movement against the clerical regime), said: To those who believe that the U.S.
sanctions policy alone will cause the militant fundamentalist leadership in Iran to change its ways and
become more moderate, and behave in ways that the international community regards as civilized and
acceptable, I have to say that you are profoundly and dangerously mistaken because you do not get to the
first base of understanding what militant fundamentalism is, as pursued by Rouhollah Khomeini and
followed by his disciples. It is driven by a fanatical and unchangeable conviction that it only represents
the only true faith and that its time for conquest of the region and the Islamic world has come. So to those
who believe that sanctions alone will turn the ruling mullahs into moderates I say this: Forget about
sanctions. Carry on trading with the regime. Carry on making your short-term profits in dollars, pounds,
marks, yen and so on; but do so in the knowledge that you will be contributing to a catastrophe for my
people, the region and the world. The price for your short-term economic gain will be longer-term human
and economic disaster.[3]
History
Irans Monarchy under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi
Ever since 1501 when Shah Ismail made Twelve Shiism a state religion, the ulama have been very
influential components of Iranian elite and political structure. They were judges, teachers, managers of
the traditional educational institutions, prayer leaders of the mosques, guardians of farmed shrines,
prosperous landlords, and administers of auqaf (charitable-religious endowments). [25] In the 18th and 19th
century Iran went through a constitutional revolution where a parliament was established; nevertheless,
religion continued to play dominant role in society and the clerics had immense influence.

8
In November 1925, with the assistance of the army and the British, Reza Khan convinced the Majlis
(legislature) to dethrone the Qajars Dynasty (the ruling party at the time), and to choose him (that is, Reza
Khan) as the head of a provisional government. In a short while the Pahlavi dynasty was created. Once he
ascended to power, Reza Shah, together with a close team of capable men began a comprehensive
modernization program based on Iranian nationalism, glorification of pre-Islamic Persia, and emphasis on
Irans Ariyan heritage. Reza Khan often used Turkeys Mustafa Kemal Ataturk as a model, and even
though he himself had little formal education, Reza had a clear vision for transition to modernity. [25] He
modernized the armed forces, reformed the states financial institutions, created a large state bureaucracy,
built hundreds of modern schools (some of which were coeducational), founded the University of Tehran,
and sent hundreds of students to Europe for higher education. His greatest achievement was laying the
foundation of a modern economy and large infrastructure. He created the Bank-e-meli-ye Iran that started
issuing money notes (which were previously issued by the British), built new roads and ports such as the
850-mile TransIranian Railroad, introduced electricity in most cities and built more than 200 industrial
plants with over 60,000 employees. In order to secularize Iranian politics, he suppressed ulamas (the
Islamic clerics) power and subdued anyone who tried to oppose him. The Shah introduced European laws
at the cost of removing the existing Islamic ones. Besides building many secular schools, the dynasty
began to directly manage religious schools, and created a theology department at the University of
Tehran, thus taking away ulamas monopoly over teaching religion. In 1936 Reza Shah forced women to
unveil by declaring veiling illegal, and sent to exile any woman who refused to appear unveiled in public.
It is worth to note that, even though Reza shah tried to reduce western influence in Iran, Iranian economy
could not escape this influence since modernization relied on Western technology. All the same, Britain
continued to control the Anglo-Persian Oil Company, a major source of revenue to Irans budget.
When his son Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi came to power, Reza Shah had already built a powerful
centralized state, a professional middle class, secularized politics, and a large working class.

Cultural Shock
Despite these impressive reforms, the Pahlavi dynasty suffered from two serious drawbacks. The main
burden of the expensive development projects was borne by the poor classes. The infrastructure and
industrialization reforms were financed almost entirely from high tax rates on items such as tea and sugar.
The second problem is well defined in Ann Lambtons words: the old structure of society was destroyed,
but no mechanism through which [Reza Shah] could undertake effective social action replaced it, [26] and
therefore force was the only remaining method to political and economic ends. There was a general sense
of fear and mistrust, and no one dared to protest or criticize. [25]
The Iranian 1979 revolution is regarded as a reaction to the cultural shock of modernization and is not so
pro-Islamic as it is anti-modernity. According to many it was this clash between Western modernization
and traditional, religious economic and social structures, as well as the abrupt, destabilizing methods
through which reforms were introduced, that prompted Iranians to embrace the negative attitude toward
modernization offered by Khomeini. The transition from a rural, traditional society into an urban,
industrial civil order produced a cultural and psychological shock that naturally caused a violent
flinching back. Had such reforms occurred in a democratic society, the natural tendency of
industrialization to lead to centralization would have been kept in check by forces such as occupational
diversity, freedom of expression, growing political participation, and stress on the importance of
individualism and personal self interest. [27] In the Iranian society, however, there was a widening gap
between the elitist lifestyle copied from western societies, and the traditional model based on old,
reactionary standards and habits, a gap which created resentment, revolt, and gravitation toward the old
model of authoritarian, charismatic, religious leadership. As some Iranian students defined it, The goal

9
was rationalized modernization, to be pressed forward ruthlessly by means of science, technology,
planning and despotic authority. No elements of tradition, no personal desire, no aesthetic value, no
religious qualm, no philosophic hesitancy was to stand in the way. The opposition to the shah was not
primarily because of his repressive treatment but because of the outrageous simple-mindedness of his
modernization programs. [28]
Maybe the most controversial aspect to Shahs monarchy was SAVAK, his Intelligence and Security
Agency. In order to deal with domestic opposition, which was believed by the regime to consist of purely
Marxist and Tudeh (communist) party elements, the Shah, with help of Washington and Tel Aviv,
established a modern intelligence and security organization, SAVAK, modeled after the CIA. However,
instead of patiently gathering information about the opposition and carefully eradicating their leadership,
SAVAK had an impatient tactic of eliminating objectors through immediate arrests, speedy trials,
summary executions, or quick imprisonment. The SAVAK was so preoccupied with the communist and
Marxist threats that it failed to spot and warn against Islamic groups and their underground network. They
did not foresee Ayatollah Khomeini as an unstoppable leadership behind an imminent Islamic uprising.

1979 Revolution
The first major demonstrations against the regime started early in 1978 and by the end of the year strikes
and demonstrations paralyzed the Iranian society. The Shah was exiled in January 1979, and guerrillas
and rebel troops overwhelmed Shahs troops in street fighting. Simultaneously with these events the 80year old exiled religious leader from Qom, Ayatollah Khomeini, returned to the country where several
million Iranians greeted him on the streets of Tehran. Iran became an Islamic republic via national
referendum on April 1, 1979, and established a theocratic constitution with Ayatollah as the Supreme
Leader of the country. The supreme leader was accountable only to the popularly elected Assembly of
Experts, a body of 86 clerics, beyond which he practiced almost unlimited power.

Exporting the Revolution

The overthrow of the Shah had a great impact on the international scene, as Ruhollah Khomeini always
sought to export the revolution and called for rejection by the Muslim world of the Soviet, West European
and American models of society, and overthrow of capitalism and American influence. Even during the
Iran-Iraq war when Iran had regained most of the lost land and Iraq had offered a truce, Iran refused to
stop fighting under the intentions of replacing the regime in Baghdad with an Islamic Republic. [29] This
intention has been projected in a more subtle manner to other Muslim countries where Iran has
demonstrated moral support and/or state-sponsorship to terrorist groups that seek to overthrow their
countries secular governments. In the words of Seyyed Hossein Nasr, an Iranian University Professor of
Islamic studies at George Washington University, The Iranian Revolution of 1979 and the establishment
of the Islamic Republic of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini is an event that made Islamic Fundamentalism
a political force from Morocco to Malaysia.

Hostage Crisis
Ayatollahs rise to power was accompanied by the hostage crisis of November 4, 1979, when a group of
Islamist students and militants, in support of the Iranian revolution, seized the American Embassy and
held 66 American embassy employees as hostages, making the American president himself powerless to
release the hostages for 444 days. The crisis was a milestone in U.S. Iranian relations, and probably the

10
main background for the stern U.S. foreign policy towards Iran. The Hostage Crisis represented an
emblem of enmity between Ayatollahs Islamic regime and the United States.
The reason behind the Crisis is best described in the words of Foreign American hostage Charles Scott:
We had no feeling for the view of the vast majority of the Iranian people at the time. Because they
believed as an article of faith that if the shah came to the United States, it would usher in a series of
events similar to those that had happened in 1953, when the CIA assisted the pro-Shah demonstrators
in overthrowing Mohammed Mossadegh and putting the Shah back on the Peacock throne. They believed
that as an article of faith. Whether it was true or not is irrelevant.
In response to popular dissatisfaction, reformer president Hojjat ol-eslam Mohammad (elected 1997) and
the reformist Majles (elected 2000) initiated a campaign of political reform; however, the enacting of
these reforms was suppressed by conservative politicians who eventually reestablished their power in the
2003 municipal, 2004 Majles, and 2005 presidential elections. In the 2005 elections hardliner Mahmud
Ahmadinejad came to power. Nonetheless, his 2009 controversial reelection, which multitudes of Iranians
allege to be an electoral fraud, induced the Green Revolution resistance movement which voices the
majority of Iranians desire for overthrow of the radical regime.
A View from Within
Ever since the establishment of the Pahlavi Dynasty, Pahlavi Reza Shahs strict policy of modernization
and secularization, his extremely ambitious and yet unsuccessful economic development program, as well
as the brutal methods used by his Intelligence Agency to suppress the opposition, brought great discontent
among, at the time very religious and impoverished population. The result was Irans flinching back to a
religious conservative system lead by a charismatic, totalitarian figure; a society and way of living that
has been forcibly taken away from Iranians with the establishment of the Dynasty.
During the years that followed, the clerical regime began to lose popularity with the people. Since 1979
more than 4 million, mostly educated Iranians have left the country. International reports document at
least 120,000 executions in name of the regime (Ganji 210). The discontent among Iranians is growing
due to institutional chaos, constant economic lapsing, and lack of human rights. Nevertheless, the radical
leaders have been able to sustain their positions by populist techniques of identifying the concepts of
democracy, human-rights, and nation-state as opposed to Islamic republic, as Western and corrupted,
and therefore wrong according to Muslim law. They label Western society as debased and immoral, and
consider the democratic forms of government in many Muslim countries to also be of western influence
and thus un-Islamic. This notion has turned into action, as the clerics have not limited their influence to
domestic policy; on the contrary, ever since its inception, the regime has been trying to export the
revolution to the rest of the Muslim world. The first ones to welcome the radical viewpoint were the
Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), Hezbollah, Osama bin-Laden, the Taliban, and al-Qaeda. In the
period after the 1980s, Osama bin-Laden and al-Qaeda were the most influential of what we today call
terrorist organizations. Notwithstanding, after its short-termed success and ultimate failure, al-Qaeda
produced a lot of spin-off terrorist groups throughout the Middle East, South Asia, North and SubSaharan Africa. All of these spin-offs are mostly targeting state property (e.g. oil refineries) in attempts to
weaken and overthrow the secular governments of their respective countries, and establish Islamic
regimes in their place. Several examples of such groups are the Armed Islamic Group (GIA, Algeria),
Khmer Rouge (Cambodia), Al-Jihad and Al-Gamaa al-Islamiyya (Egypt), Abu Nidal Organization
(ANO, Iraq), Asbat al-Ansar, (Lebanon), Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG, Phillipines), Qibla and PAGAD
(South Africa), Popular front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP, Syria, goal: oppose current
negotiations with Israel; oppose the Palestinian Liberation Organization), and the Islamic Movement of
Uzbekistan (IMU, Uzbekistan).

11

The Iran-Iraq War

The Iran-Iraq War is often compared to World War I in terms of the techniques being used and the great
loss of human lives. However, the technological means of warfare and military organization was not
matched on both sides. While Iraq made a great effort in training its troops and supplying them with the
latest technology, the Iranian clerics did little to organize the army which consisted of un-trained,
uneducated, but yet zealous soldiers. One of Irans least efficient techniques during the war was human
wave attacks, where the confidence in the large numbers of Iranian infantrys potential to suppress Iraqi
troops was eminent. However, Iraq often used chemical weapons against these wave attacks, causing
great numbers casualties on the Iranian side. Iraq also used chemical weapons against Iranian civilians,
killing and severely injuring many in villages and hospitals. Those victims that didnt die immediately
still suffer from serious health problems.
Irans Military Capabilities
Iraqs extensive use of chemical weapons against Iran despite of the fact that both Iran and Iraq are parties
to the 1925 Geneva Protocol which forbids use of chemical weapons, and even more, the fact that the
International Communitys and United Nations choice to remain silent about Iraqs actions, are believed
to be two of the main motivations behind Irans pursuit of nuclear weapons. Iran is a signatory to the
Chemical Weapons Convention, the Biological Weapons Convention of 1972/75, and the Nuclear NonProliferation Treaty of 1968/70. Nevertheless, Iran started its Chemical Weapons Program during the
Iran-Iraq War, [7] and is also suspected to have been producing biological weapons since 1980. Iranian
pharmaceutical and bioscience industry is well capable of producing biological weapons, and already has
in stock some of the biological agents used by other countries for production of BW. This knowledge,
combined with the fact that Iran is a state sponsor of many terrorist organizations, makes these weapons
potentially available to terrorists. Iran is able to deliver any WMD it has developed or is in the process of
developing using its 2100 km-range Shahab-3 missile capable of carrying conventional, chemical,
biological, radiological and perhaps nuclear warheads; Shahab-4 (believed to be under development,
range 2000 km, payload 1000kg); or Shahab-5, an intercontinental ballistic missile (range 10,000km) for
which there are still no proofs but rather only suspicion to be under development. [9] It also possesses 12
X-55 cruise missiles (guided missile, range 2500-3000 km, carries nuclear warheads, is described as a
flying bomb) and a Fajr-3 ballistic missile that can avoid radar detection and can shoot multiple warheads
simultaneously at different targets (uses multiple independently targeted reentry vehicles MIRV
technology) [10]. Irans military branches are composed of the Regular Forces (Artesh): the Ground
Forces, Navy, Air Force (IRIAF); The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC): Ground Resistance
Forces, Navy, Air Force, Qods (Special Forces), Basij (Popular Mobilization army); and Law
Enforcement Forces
On November 4, 2009, Israel seized a ship near Cyprus bound to Lebanon carrying hundreds of tons of
Iranian weapons intended for Hezbollah. Although Iran, Hezbollah and Syria denied the accusations, a
similar attempt to smuggle weapons to Hamas was prevented in January 2002 when the IDF seized the
Karine A ship smuggling 50 tons of Iranian weaponry to the Palestinian Authority, or, according to other
sources to Lebanese Hezbollah. [11] These rockets are well able to target cities in the south of Israel from
the Gaza Strip, or northern cities from Lebanon. There have also been recent reports of smuggling arms,
especially sophisticated weapons and rockets across the Syrian border to Hezbollah, and even though
there is no reason to believe these weapons are of Iranian origin, Ahmadinejad threatened Israel to cut
off its feet should it attack Syria on basis of the smuggling accusations. This most recent threat came
after growing, though unestablished, fears among Syrians of an Israeli strike, in spite of the fact that Israel
is hardly probable to take any war initiative against Damascus. There exists the probability that Iran is
able to potentially supply these terrorist organizations with weapons of mass destruction, whether

12
biological or chemical, or alternatively, weapons of mass disruption, such as dirty bombs. Dirty bombs
use a radiological dispersion device (RDD) that disperses radiological material over a large area, possibly
in the form of high-explosive shell fragmentation, and maybe loaded with chemical and biological
weapons.

Iranian Shahab-3 Missile

[35]

Irans Nuclear Facilities

Among Irans nuclear facilities and reactors are: Anarak near Yazd (has a waste storage site), Arak
(heavy water production plant; research reactor production of isotops for medical and agricultural
purposes), Ardakan, Bonab, Bushehr (contains a MWe VVER-1000 water-water energetic pressurized
water reactor; in December 2007 Russia started delivering nuclear fuel to this site under a 1995 contract
between Iran and Atomstroyexport, Russias nuclear power equipment and service export monopoly),
Chalus (located in a mountain; existence not confirmed by IAEA), Darkovin (nuclear power plant),
Isfahan (technology supplied by China; converts yellowcake into uranium hexafluoride; contains a
Zirconium Production Plant, ZPP), Karaj (intended for agricultural research and nuclear medicine),
Laskar Abad (isotope separation; uranium enrichment using laser isotope separation technique; [15] shut
down in 2003 due to IAEA inspection; allegedly resumed in 2006), Lavizan-Shian (demolished in 200304, Washington accused Tehran of sanitizing the site prior to an IAEA inspection during which no proof
of radiation was found), Natanz (100,000 square feet facility, 8 meters underground, protected by a 2.5
meters thick concrete wall, another concrete wall on top of the first one, and 22 meters of earth; contains
7000 centrifuges used to produce low-enriched uranium), Parchin (used for manufacturing conventional
explosives), Qom (allegedly located in a mountain, 3,000 centrifuges; pilot fuel enrichment plant),
Saghand (site of Irans ore mines, contains 3,000-5,000 tons of uranium oxide), Tehran Nuclear Research
Center TNRC (produces plutonium), Yazd radiation Processing Center (equipped with a Rhodotron
TT200 accelerator; used for geophysical research, analyzes mineral deposits, expected to support the
medical and polymer industries).

13
When Negotiations Fail
In a hearing before the Senate Armed Services committee, Lt. Gen. Ronald Jr., director of the defense
Intelligence Agency, and Gen. James E. Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff, reported
that Iran may be able to produce the fuel necessary for a bomb within a year; however it would need two
to five years to manufacture a full-scale atomic bomb. Even though Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff cautioned that a military strike would have limited results, he also added that,
should the president call for military options, we must have them ready. [13]. Edwin Black, an award
winning New York Times and international investigative author, in an address at Case Western Reserve
University in November 2009 said that neither the U.S. nor Israel have neither conventional nor mininuclear missiles that can penetrate deep enough underground to inflict damage to the underground Iranian
nuclear sites, [6] because many of these sites have been buried deeply underground with the assistance of
North Koreas world-scale tunneling technology. Furthermore, some reactors, such as the one in Bushehr,
are already loaded with nuclear fuel, so any air strike has the potential to cause large collateral civilian
and economic damage. He added that an air strike would be extremely hard to execute bearing in mind
Irans enhanced protection of its nuclear facilities. He concluded by saying that Israels number one
weapon in these perilous times is misinformation. [14] Therefore, it is in Israels best interest to keep the
IDF intelligence on Irans program concealed. Another Western official reported that in order to obstruct
Irans nuclear program and prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons, at least four critical nuclear sites
must be wiped out. The facilities, however, are located in tunnels fortified by barriers more than 60 feet
thick [] Breaking through the thick shell would require, at minimum, several bunker-buster bombs
striking precisely at the same spot. [16]
U.S. Sanctions
Manouchehr warns that the U.S. and European countries should not overlook the clerics deeds and
intentions by continuing to pursue appeasement policies and commercial deals with terrorist states,
especially not the regime of Iran (Ganji ix). In this course, several U.S. Laws and Legislative Acts have
sought to weaken Irans regime, stop its support for terrorism, its anti-U.S. and anti-Israel policy, and
curb the nuclear proliferation by targeting Irans economy. While the United Nations have mainly focused
on curtailing the supply of weapons and proliferation related technology to Iran, the U.S. Legislative acts
targeted Irans energy sector, as 80% of all government revenues are dependent on oil revenues and
foreign investment. [17] The U.S. has succeeded in executing sanctions against several large American and
European companies; nevertheless, Asian companies, over which the U.S. has been able to extend only
limited amount of sanctioning influence, have been more than eager to fill the void space left behind by
sanctioned competitors on the Iranian market.
Executive Order 12957, March 15, 1995
The first U.S. Sanction on Iran was imposed by President Bill Clintons Executive Order 12957 on March
15, 1995 which was aimed to prohibit investment in Irans energy sector and outlaw transactions with
respect to the development of Iranian Petroleum Resources. President Clinton found that the actions and
policies of the Government of Iran constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security,
foreign policy, and economy of the United States, and thereby declared a national emergency to deal
with the threat.[18]

14
Executive Order 12959, May 6, 1995
On May 7, 1995, President Clinton issued Executive Order 12959, where he prohibited importation of
any goods and services of Iranian origin, as well as exportation of items from the United States to Iran,
the Government of Iran, or any entity owned or controlled by the Government of Iran. [19]
Iran-Libya Sanctions Act of 1996, House Resolution 3107
On June 18, 1996, the House of Representatives passed the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act which imposes
sanctions on persons exporting goods or technology that might enhance Irans petroleum sector, i.e. its
ability to explore for, extract, refine, or transport by pipeline petroleum resources. [20] In this 1996 piece
of legislation, the Congress also made the finding that the effort of the Government of Iran to acquire
weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them and its support of acts of international
terrorism endanger the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States and those
countries with which the United States shares common strategic and foreign policy objectives.
The Iran-Libya Sanctions Act (ILSA) was introduced in a period during the Clinton administration
characterized by declining U.S. Iranian relations. The goal of the executive orders and the sanctions Act
was to curb the threat from Iran by targeting its energy sector which generates 20% of Irans GDP and is
in need for reconstruction due to its aging infrastructure. [21] Iran is exporting raw oil and natural gas only;
any investment in its energy sector may help its refining capabilities and boost its economy. Under this
Act, any company investing in or collaborating with Irans energy and petroleum sector was to be
imposed two out of seven possible sanctions: (reproduced exactly as found in the Act):
1. Denial of Export-Import Bank of the United States assistance;
2. Denial of export licenses for exports to the violating company;
3. Prohibition on loans or credits from U.S. financial institutions of over $10 million in any 12-month
period;
4. Prohibition on designation as a primary dealer for U.S. government debt instruments;
5. Prohibition on serving as an agent of the United States or as a repository for U.S. government funds;
6. Denial of U.S. government procurement opportunities (consistent with World Trade Organization
obligations); and
7. Ban on all or some imports of the violating company.
Iran Sanctions Act, September 30, 2006
The ILSA was renewed on August 3, 2001, where the sanctions on Libya were lifted (after Libya agreed
to yield to trial the Pan Am 103 suspects) and the legislation became the Iran Sanctions Act (ISA).
Toward the end of President Clintons presidential term, U.S. Iranian relations slightly improved under
Mohammad Khatemis moderate regime; however, any withdrawal from the sanctions wouldve been
perceived as concession, and therefore the act was extended.
Iran Freedom Support Act
The Iran Freedom Support Act was put into force on April 27, 2006 with the purpose of supporting a
transition to democracy in Iran, and appropriating $10 million to be spent in support of groups opposed to
Irans government.
Iran Refined Petroleum Sanction Act of 2009 (IRPSA), H.R. 2194
Passed House: December 15, 2009; Passed Senate: March 11, 2010

15
The Iran refined Petroleum Sanctions Act is the latest legislation passed which sanctions Irans energy
sector. The act is intended to strengthen global efforts in preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons
capability, persuading it to halt its uranium enrichment activities, as well as engage Tehran in serious
negotiations. Being a crude oil exporter, Iran imports 25-40% of its refined petroleum needs. The IRPSA
imposes sanctions on any company that supplies refined petroleum to Iran, helps Iran in the expansion of
its domestic refining capability, provides shipping services to deliver petroleum to Iran, provides
insurance for, finances or brokers such activity. [22] Then-Senator Barack Obama evaluated the
restrictions, saying If we can prevent them from importing the gasoline that they need that starts
changing their cost-benefit analysis. That starts putting the squeeze on them.
Companies that violate the IRPSA will be barred from doing business in the United Stated by prohibiting
it from carrying out any financial transactions in U.S. dollars, freezing of assets the entities may have in
the United States, and prohibiting them from receiving U.S. government contracts.

UN Sanctions
While the U.S. has been strict and determined in targeting Irans energy sector and economy, the broader
international community is reluctant to impose economic sanctions and has instead focused on banning
nuclear proliferation-related technologies from being imported to Iran.
The United Nations Security Council Resolution 1696 of July 31, 2006, demands that Iran
suspends all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and
development.
The United Nations Security Council Resolution 1737 of December 23, 2006, bans the supply of
nuclear-related technology and materials and freezes the assets of key individuals and companies
related to the enrichment program.
The United Nations Security Council Resolution 1747 of March 24, 2007, offers a package of
economic incentives in exchange for Iran to give up permanently the uranium enrichment
program.
The UN Security Council Resolution 1803 of March 3, 2008, requires Iran to cease all uranium
enrichment and any research and development associated with uranium enrichment.

Anti-Zionism and Holocaust Denial

Quotes by Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad:
The annihilation of the Zionist regime will come Israel must be wiped off the map And God
willing, with the force of God behind it, we shall soon experience a world without the United
States and Zionism. [32]

They have invented the myth that the Jews were massacred and place this above God, religions
and prophets. [32]

There is no doubt that the new wave (of attacks) in Palestine will wipe off this stigma (Israel)
from the face of the Islamic world.
As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map,

16
On Israels 60th birthday: Those who think they can revive the stinking body of the usurping and
fake Israeli regime by throwing a birthday party are seriously mistaken. Today the reason for the
Zionist regimes existence is questioned, and this regime is on its way to annihilation. [33]

Ahmadinejad vs. Mir-Hossein

The reelection of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for president instead of peoples preferred candidate, MirHossein Mousavi Khameneh, in the June 2009 obscure elections finally sprouted the over the years
amassed discontent with the regime. The morning when the election results were announced, the people
felt such a great disappointment that millions massively got out on the streets and protested. The protests
lasted for months and the Green Revolution, also known as the Persian Awakening, was born. It is a
movement of the generally younger population that calls for taking down the radical regime and
establishment Mousavi as the countrys leader. Mir-Hossein Mousavi takes a lot less radical standpoint on
many issues, for example he condemns Ahmadinejad for denying the Holocaust, and he has also
condemns the killing of Jews in the Holocaust.

Psychological Approach to Foreign Policy Analysis

The psychological approach points to the disproportion of the applied punishment vs. the nature and
driving motives of Irans regime. Material sanctions are being applied to a spiritual ideology. Irans
leadership and those fractions of the population in support of the current regime perceive the economic
crisis as a mere material uncomfortableness in the earthly world in exchange for a great heavenly and
spiritual award waiting for them in heaven. Therefore, they are willing to suffer economic degradation
and have decaying infrastructure in exchange for what they perceive as preserved honor, national pride,
and religious award. This is, however, a viewpoint of a diminishing percentage of the Iranian population.

Iran Fact Book

Population, GDP, Human Development Index
The Islamic Republic of Iran, Jomhuri-ye Eslami-ye Iran, has a population of 66.4 million of which 98%
is Muslim and 2% is Zoroastrian, Jewish, Christian, or Bahai. Fifty-one percent of Iranians are Persian,
24% Azeri, 8% Gilaki and Mazandarani, 7% Curd, and 3% are Arab. The dominant spoken language is
Persian, while a quarter of the population speaks Turkic.

Iran Flag
Irans economy relies heavily on the oil sector, which provides the majority of state revenues. The
economic activity is primarily controlled by the government, and the private sector is limited to

17
workshops, farming and small-scale services. A private-sector-led growth is limited by price controls and
subsidies. Irans double digit unemployment and underemployment has caused a brain-drain of about 4
million, mostly educated Iranians leaving the country since 1979 (Manouchehr).
Iranian GDP (purchasing power parity) was $876 billion in 2009, and the GDP per capita is $12,900.
10.9% of the GDP comes from the agriculture sector, 45.2% from industry, and 43.9% from services. The
unemployment rate is 11.8%, while the labor force in which there is shortage of skilled labor is 25.02
million. The human development index rose from 0.565 in 1975 to 0.732 in 2002.
The flag is composed of three horizontal bands of green (the color of Islam), white (honesty and peace)
and red (bravery and martyrdom), with the national emblem of representation of the word Allah in the
shape of a tulip, a symbol of martyrdom, in the middle. A white inscription of ALLAH AKBAR (God
is Great) is repeated 11 times along the bottom edge of the green band and 11 times along the top edge of
the red band.

Gas and Oil Reserves

Iran produces 3.71 million bb/day of oil, consumes 1.49, exports 2.21, and imports 0.16 million bb/day. It
has the third largest reserve of oil, with about 10% of world oil reserves. Iran produces 116.3 billion cu m
of natural gas, consumes 119, exports 4.25 and imports 7.05 billion cu m of natural gas. Its proved
reserves are 29.61 trillion, which makes it one of the countries in possession of worlds largest natural gas
reserves, being second only to Russia.
Oil Refineries
The National Iranian Oil Refining and Distribution Company (NIORDC), founded in 1992, is part of the
Ministry of Petroleum of Iran. It refines crude oil and produces 250 million liters of oil products per day,
provides the industry, agriculture and power plants with fuel, and supplies the petrochemical industry and
the transportation sector (more than 7 million vehicles) with their daily oil.
Iran has a refining capacity of 1.64 Mbbl/d, and its major refineries are Abadan, Isfahan, Bandar Abbas,
Tehran, Arak, Tabriz, Kermanshah, Shiraz and Lavan Island. The Ministry of Oil reports that the Iranian
refining industry needs a $15 billion investment for development. Iran has plans to invest in two new oil
refineries in Bandar Abbas and Abadan, as well as a gas condensate plant in Bandar Abbas.
Gas Pipelines
The ISA was interpreted to include sanctions on parties that invest in construction of energy routes
through or to Iran as these help develop its petroleum sector. In 2005 the U.S. successfully promoted an
alternative route from Baku, Azerbaijan, to Ceyhan, Turkey, thus circumventing Iran. In a 1997 project
Turkey and Iran built a natural gas pipeline, each on their side of the border, which was supposed to
supply Turkey with gas originating from Turkmenistan. This was not sanctioned under the ISA. However,
Turkey started importing gas directly from Iran in 2001, and a contract was signed in 2007 for the
construction of a second similar pipeline intended for Iranian exports of gas to Europe through Turkey.
There are proofs that in February 2009 the National Iranian Gas Export Company formed a joint venture
with a Turkish firm to export 35 billion cubic meters of gas per year to Europe. [31] Another pending
contract is a $7 billion project of an Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) Pipeline. The U.S. deemed the IPI pipeline
unacceptable and outright stated it would be sanctioned.

18
Latest News
U.S. Warns Iran
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in a recent address to AIPAC, the American-Israeli Public Affairs
Committee, warned Iran and Syria on Israel. She stressed the strong, unshakeable ties between Israel and
the United States, and warned that such actions as the recent transfers of weapons from Syria to
Hezbollah could spark a new conflict in the region. She also added that nuclear-armed Iran would
profoundly destabilize the Middle East. [12]
Harvard Divestment
Seventeen U.S. Congress members sent a letter to Harvard University urging a Harvard divestment from
holdings in companies conducting business in Irans energy sector. The congress members point out that
the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act, H.R. 1327, calls on states, local governments, educational institutions
and private institutions to divest from companies in Iran that are associated with Irans nuclear industry.
As one of the preeminent educational institutions in the United States, Harvard University should be the
vanguard of such divestment, as it was in 2007 for divestment from companies affiliated with genocide in
Darfur, says the letter. [31]

19
Recommended Further Readings

Books:

Iran and the Bomb. Deplech, Therese. 2006

Iran & Post 9/11 World Order: Reflections on Iranian Nuclear Programme. Anwar Alam. 2009
Iran. A view from within: Political Analysis. Siamak Khatami. 2004
China and Iran. John W. Garver. 2006
China and Iran: Parallel History, Future Threat? Edward Burman. 2009
Conversations in Tehran. Lafond & Reed. 2006
After Khomeini. Said Amir Arjomand. 2009
The Struggle for Iran. Christopher de Bellaigue. 2007
Ahmadinejad: The Secret History of Irans Radical Leader. Kasra Naji. 2008

Articles:
Irans strategic culture and weapons of mass destruction: Implications for US Policy, Anthony
C. Cain, Lieutenant Colonel, USAF. Air War College, Air University. April 2002
Iran Sanctions, Kenneth Katzman, specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs. December 24, 2009.
Congressional Research Service Report for Congress
The Iran Sanctions Act (ISA), Kenneth Katzman, CRS Report for Congress
The Iran-Libya Sanctions Act (ILSA), Katzman, CRS Report
Impacts of the US Trade and Financial Sanctions on Iran, Akbar E. Torbat, California State
University, 2005
Documentaries:

Showdown with Iran

Why the Hate?
Iran. Fault lines: The Search for Political and Religious Links
Struggles and Solutions in the Middle East: Islam vs. Islam

20
Works Cited

Ganji, Manouchehr. Defying the Iranian Revolution: From a Minister to the Shah to a Leader of
Resistance. Praeger. Westport, CT. 2000
[1]

Seliktar, Ofira. Failing the Crystal Ball Test: The Carter Administration and the Fundamentalist
Revolution in Iran. Praeger Publishers. Westport, CT. 2000.
[2]

Kissinger H. 1981. For the record: Selected statements, 1977-1980. Boston: Little Brown.

[3]

Conference hosted by the Petro-Hunt Corporation and the Institute for the Study of Earth and Man,
Southern Methodist State University, Dallas, Texas, Spring 1996.
[4]

The Text of the Agreement Between Iran and the Agency for the Application of Safeguards in
Connection with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Information Circular.
International atomic Energy Agency. 13 December 1974.
<http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/Others/infcirc214.pdf>
[5]

Risky Business: Why Attacking Iran is a Bad Idea. The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation
. 12 April 2007. Web. 07 May 2010.
<http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/policy/iran/articles/risky_business_attacking_iran_bad_idea/>
Phillips, James. An Israeli Preventive Attack on Irans Nuclear sites: Implications for the U.S.
Heritage. The Heritage Foundation. 15 January 2010. Web. 07 May 2010
<http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/01/An-Israeli-Preventive-Attack-on-Iran-Nuclear-SitesImplications-for-the-US>
[6]

Chemical Weapons. Weapons of Mass Destruction. Global Security. Web. 07 May 2010.
<http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/cw.htm>
[7]

[8]

Biological Capabilities. Iran Profile. Nuclear Threat Initiative. Web. 07 May 2010.
<http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Iran/Biological/capabilities.html>
[9]

Missile Capabilities. Capabilities. Iran Profile. Nuclear Threat Initiative. Web. 07 May 2010.
<http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/iran/missile/3367_3396.html>
Dareini, Ali Akbar. Iran Test-Fires Missile that can Avoid Radar. The San Diego Union-Tribute. 1
April 2006. Web. 07 May 2010.
<http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20060401/news_1n1iran.html>
[10]

Man Behind Karine A Arms Ship Sentenced to 20 Years in Jail. Haaretz. 30 august 2009. Web. 07
May 2010. <http://www.haaretz.com/news/man-behind-karine-a-arms-ship-sentenced-to-20-years-in-jail1.282928>
[11]

US warns Iran, Syria on Israel. News24. 30 April 2010. Web. 07 May 2010.
<http://www.news24.com/World/News/US-warns-Iran-Syria-on-Israel-20100430>
[12]

Gates Says U.S. Lacks Policy to Thwart Iran. New York Times. 17 April 2010. Web. 07 May 2010.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/18/world/middleeast/18iran.html?pagewanted=2&hp>
[13]

[14]

Edwin Black. Iran and the Nuclear Dynamic. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azOI2b3Q60M>

21
[15]

Written Answers. UK Parliament.

<http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/vo060116/text/60116w26.htm#60116w2
6.html_wqn7>
[16]

Irans Nukes Too deep. Newsweek. 25 October 2008. <http://www.newsweek.com/id/165667>

[17]

Katzman, Kenneth. Iran Sanctions. CRS Report for Congress. Congressional Research Service.
December 24, 2009
[18]

<http://www.iraniantrade.org/12957.htm>

[19]

<http://www.iraniantrade.org/12959.htm>

[20]

<http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1996_cr/h960618b.htm>

[21]

<http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RS20871.pdf>

[22]

<http://www.aipac.org/Publications/AIPACAnalysesBillSummaries/Bill_Summary_IRPSA.pdf>

[23]

<http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/legal/unsc1696.html>

[24]

Van Den Bos, Matthijs. Mystic Regimes: Sufism and the State in Iran, from the Late Qajar Era to the
Islamic Republic. Brill. Boston. 2002.
[25]

Milani, Mohsen M. The Making of Iran's Islamic Revolution: From Monarchy to Islamic Republic.
Westview Press. Boulder, CO. 1994. p.n. 26.
[26]

Lambton, Ann. "The Impact of the West on Persia", International Affairs, 33, 1 ( January 1957), p. 23.

[27]

Amuzegar , Jahangir. The Dynamics of the Iranian Revolution: The Pahlavis' Triumph and Tragedy.
State University of New York Press. Place of Publication: Albany, NY. 1991. p.n. 37.
[28]

Gary Sick ( 1985)

[29]

Wright, In the Name of God (1989), p. 126.

[30]

<http://jta.org/news/article/2010/04/27/2394528/congressmen-urge-harvard-divestment-from-iran>

[31]

Katzman, Kenneth. Iran Sanctions. CRS Report for Congress. Congressional Research Service.
December 24, 2009
Recognizing Iran as a Strategic Threat: An Intelligence Challenge for the United States. Staff Report.
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. U.S. House of Representatives. August 18, 2006
[32]

[33]

<http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5ix-viVGAnfS1RHJGzZHSGjnzDIXg>

[34]

Djerejian, Edward P. The Radical Legacy of 1979. Wall Street Journal. January 1, 2010.

Retrieved from Striking it Right. Airforce Technology. Web. 07 May 2010. <http://www.airforcetechnology.com/features/feature1992/feature1992-7.html>
[35]

Retrieved from Iran Country Profile. The Nations Online Project. One World Nations Online. Web.
07 May 2010.
[36]

22
Retrieved from Broad, William J.s article on Iran Shielding Its Nuclear Efforts in Maze of Tunnels.
The New York Times. 5 January 2010. Web. 07 May 2010.
[37]