Valentine's Day Gifts

Advertisement: Jewelry, Medical Supplies and Equipment
Coronavirus Updates, Luxury Eyewear
Tools and Fashion Accessories, Cell Phone and Accessories
Outdoor and Sports Fitness, Medical Supplies and Equipment

Showing posts with label Iran – United States relations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iran – United States relations. Show all posts

Friday, January 14, 2011

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Israel

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the podium
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Israel refers to the relations between Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the State of Israel, characterized by contentious speeches and statements, including what many commentators perceive to be calls to destroy the country.

2005 "World Without Zionism" speech

On October 26, 2005, IRIB News, an English-language subsidiary of the state-controlled Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB), filed a story on Ahmadinejad's speech to the "World Without Zionism" conference in Asia, entitled: Ahmadinejad: Israel must be wiped off the map. The story was picked up by Western news agencies and quickly made headlines around the world. On October 30, The New York Times published a full transcript of the speech in which Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying:
Our dear Imam (referring to Ayatollah Khomeini) said that the occupying regime must be wiped off the map for great justice and this was a very wise statement. We cannot compromise over the issue of Palestine. Is it possible to create a new front in the heart of an old front. This would be a defeat and whoever accepts the legitimacy of this regime has in fact, signed the defeat of the Islamic world. Our dear Imam targeted the heart of the world oppressor in his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no doubt that the new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in the Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the Islamic world.
Ahmadinejad said that the issue with Palestine would be over "the day that all refugees return to their homes [and] a democratic government elected by the people comes to power", and denounced attempts to normalise relations with Israel, condemning all Muslim leaders who accept the existence of Israel as "acknowledging a surrender and defeat of the Islamic world."
The speech indicated that he considered Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip to be a trick, designed to gain acknowledgment from Islamic states. In a rally held two days later, Ahmadinejad declared that his words reflected the views of the Iranian people, adding that Western world was free to comment, but its reactions were invalid.

Translation controversy
Many news sources repeated the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting statement by Ahmadinejad that "Israel must be wiped off the map", an English idiom which means to "cause a place to stop existing", or to "obliterate totally", or "destroy completely".
Ahmadinejad's phrase was " بايد از صفحه روزگار محو شود " according to the text published on the President's Office's website.
The translation presented by the official Islamic Republic News Agency has been challenged by Arash Norouzi, who says the statement "wiped off the map" was never made and that Ahmadinejad did not refer to the nation or land mass of Israel, but to the "regime occupying Jerusalem". Norouzi translated the original Persian to English, with the result, "the Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time." Juan Cole, a University of Michigan Professor of Modern Middle East and South Asian History, agrees that Ahmadinejad's statement should be translated as, "the Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem (een rezhim-e eshghalgar-e qods) must [vanish from] the page of time (bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad). According to Cole, "Ahmadinejad did not say he was going to 'wipe Israel off the map' because no such idiom exists in Persian." Instead, "he did say he hoped its regime, i.e., a Jewish-Zionist state occupying Jerusalem, would collapse." The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) translated the phrase similarly, as "this regime" must be "eliminated from the pages of history."
Iranian government sources denied that Ahmadinejad issued any sort of threat. On 20 February 2006, Iran's foreign minister Manouchehr Mottaki told a news conference: "How is it possible to remove a country from the map? He is talking about the regime. We do not recognize legally this regime."
Shiraz Dossa, a professor of Political Science at St. Francis Xavier University in Nova Scotia, Canada, also believes the text is a mistranslation.
Ahmadinejad was quoting the Ayatollah Khomeini in the specific speech under discussion: what he said was that "the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time." No state action is envisaged in this lament; it denotes a spiritual wish, whereas the erroneous translation—"wipe Israel off the map"—suggests a military threat. There is a huge chasm between the correct and the incorrect translations. The notion that Iran can "wipe out" U.S.-backed, nuclear-armed Israel is ludicrous.
The Guardian columnist and foreign correspondent Jonathan Steele published an article based on this line of reasoning.
In a June 11, 2006 analysis of the translation controversy, New York Times editor Ethan Bronner stated:
[T]ranslators in Tehran who work for the president's office and the foreign ministry disagree with them. All official translations of Mr. Ahmadinejad's statement, including a description of it on his website, refer to wiping Israel away. Sohrab Mahdavi, one of Iran’s most prominent translators, and Siamak Namazi, managing director of a Tehran consulting firm, who is bilingual, both say “wipe off” or “wipe away” is more accurate than "vanish" because the Persian verb is active and transitive.
Bronner continued: "..it is hard to argue that, from Israel's point of view, Mr. Ahmadinejad poses no threat. Still, it is true that he has never specifically threatened war against Israel. So did Iran's president call for Israel to be 'wiped off the map'? It certainly seems so. Did that amount to a call for war? That remains an open question." This elicited a further response from Jonathan Steele, who noted that Bronner agreed that "map" or any other place noun had not been used and criticized this Wikipedia entry (as it was on June 14, 2006) for "claiming falsely" that Ethan Bronner had "concluded that Ahmadinejad had in fact said that Israel was to be wiped off the map".

Clarifying comments
At a news conference on January 14, 2006, Ahmadinejad stated his speech had been exaggerated and misinterpreted. "There is no new policy, they created a lot of hue and cry over that. It is clear what we say: Let the Palestinians participate in free elections and they will say what they want." Speaking at a D-8 summit meeting in July 2008, he denied that his country would ever instigate military action. Instead he claimed that "the Zionist regime" in Israel would eventually collapse on its own. 
Asked if he objected to the government of Israel or Jewish people, he said that "creating an objection against the Zionists doesn't mean that there are objections against the Jewish". He added that Jews lived in Iran and were represented in the country's parliament.
In a September 2008 interview Ahmadinejad was asked: "If the Palestinian leaders agree to a two-state solution, could Iran live with an Israeli state?" He replied:
If they [the Palestinians] want to keep the Zionists, they can stay ... Whatever the people decide, we will respect it. I mean, it's very much in correspondence with our proposal to allow Palestinian people to decide through free referendums.
Interviewer Juan Gonzalez called the reply "a tiny opening".Another observer however dubbed it an "astonishing" admission "that Iran might agree to the existence of the state of Israel," and a "softening" of Ahmadinejad's "long-standing, point-blank anti-Israeli stance". Australian-born British human rights activist Peter Tatchell asked whether the statement reflected opportunism on Ahmadinejad's part, or an openness by Iran "to options more moderate than his reported remarks about wiping the Israeli state off the map."

Interpretation as call for genocide
The speech was interpreted by some as a call for genocide. Canada's then Prime Minister Paul Martin said, "this threat to Israel's existence, this call for genocide coupled with Iran's obvious nuclear ambitions is a matter that the world cannot ignore."
In 2007, more than one hundred members of the United States House of Representatives co-sponsored a bill "Calling on the United Nations Security Council to charge Ahmadinejad with violating the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and the United Nations Charter because of his calls for the destruction of the State of Israel."
Cole interprets the speech as a call for the end of Jewish rule of Israel, but not necessarily for the removal of Jewish people:
His statements were morally outrageous and historically ignorant, but he did not actually call for mass murder (Ariel Sharon made the "occupation regime" in Gaza "vanish" last summer [sic]) or for the expulsion of the Israeli Jews to Europe.
On 'Qods Day' in 2007, Iranian government IRIB News in English reported that the president 'repeated an earlier suggestion to Europe on settlement of the Zionists in Europe or big lands such as Canada and Alaska so they would be able to own their own land.'
Gawdat Bahgat, a professor of political science at Indiana University of Pennsylvania, said: "The fiery calls to destroy Israel are meant to mobilize domestic and regional constituencies. Iran has no plan to attack Israel with its nuclear arsenal and powerful conventional military capabilities. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khameni summed up his country’s stand on the Arab-Israeli conflict by stressing, '[The] Palestine issue is not Iran’s jihad.'" In fact, Bahgat says that according to most analysts a military confrontation between Iran and Israel is unlikely.
Ahmadinejad gave the examples of Iran under the Shah, the Soviet Union and Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq as examples of apparently invincible regimes that ceased to exist, using them to justify his belief that the United States and the State of Israel can also be defeated: "They say it is not possible to have a world without the United States and Zionism. But you know that this is a possible goal and slogan."
[edit]Interpretation as call for referendum
Ahmadinejad has repeatedly called for a referendum in Palestine. Most recently in an interview with Time magazine in 2006:
TIME: You have been quoted as saying Israel should be wiped off the map. Was that merely rhetoric, or do you mean it?
Ahmadinejad: [...] Our suggestion is that the 5 million Palestinian refugees come back to their homes, and then the entire people on those lands hold a referendum and choose their own system of government. This is a democratic and popular way.

International reaction
The White House stated that Ahmadinejad's rhetoric showed that it was correct in trying to halt Iran's nuclear program. United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan said he was dismayed by the comments, and reiterated Iran's obligations and Israel's right of existence under the UN Charter.
EU leaders issued a strong condemnation of these remarks: "[c]alls for violence, and for the destruction of any state, are manifestly inconsistent with any claim to be a mature and responsible member of the international community." On November 17, the European Parliament adopted a resolution condemning Ahmadinejad's remarks and called on him to retract his bellicose comments in their entirety and to recognise the state of Israel and its right to live in peace and safety. Then Prime Minister of Canada Paul Martin also condemned the comments on several occasions.
On June 20, 2007, the United States House of Representatives called upon United Nations Security Council to charge Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with violating the 1948 Convention on Genocide and the United Nations Charter. Congressman Dennis Kucinich attempted to include in the Congressional record independent translations of the speech from The New York Times and the Middle East Media Research Institute that translated the phrase as "the regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time" saying "The resolution passed by the House today sets a dangerous precedent in foreign affairs. A mistranslation could become a cause of war. The United States House may unwittingly be setting the stage for a war with Iran". Members of the House objected and inclusion of the independent translations were blocked.
In July 2008, United Kingdom Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, told the Knesset: "To those who believe that threatening statements fall upon indifferent ears we say in one voice - it is totally abhorrent for the president of Iran to call for Israel to be wiped from the map of the world." 

Israeli responses
The day after Ahmadinejad's remarks, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon called for Iran to be expelled from the United Nations[citation needed] and Israel's Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom called for an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council. In that meeting, all fifteen members condemned Ahmadinejad's remarks.
On May 8, 2006, Shimon Peres told Reuters that "the president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map," Army Radio reported.

Palestinian responses
Saeb Erekat, member of the Palestinian Legislative Council, stated: "Palestinians recognise the right of the state of Israel to exist and I reject his comments. What we need to be talking about is adding the state of Palestine to the map, and not wiping Israel from the map."

Iranian responses
Iranian Ambassador to the European UnionAli Ahani called the response in Europe "unrealistic and premature," complaining about the discriminatory treatment of the international community, which Iran feels has continued to ignore the threats of Israel and its "organized campaign to provoke others into attacking Iran's facilities and infrastructure". Referring to Israel's support of an American attack on Iran. Hassan Hanizadeh, an editorialist for the Tehran Times, claimed that the criticism of Ahmadinejad's statement by the United States and other Western countries is an attempt to divert attention from "the ever-increasing crimes the Zionists are committing against the innocent Palestinians."
Former president Khatami stated "those words have created hundreds of political and economic problems for us in the world." Others in Iran have said that there is nothing new about his statements and that the West has overreacted in order to try to smear Iran's international image.

2005 Al-Alam interview

In an interview on Iran's Arabic channel 'Al-Alam', Ahmadinejad said that if Germany and Austria feel responsible for the massacre of Jews during World War II, they should host a state of Israel on their own soil. Speaking at a news conference on the summit sidelines, Ahmadinejad said most Jews in Israel "have no roots in Palestine, but they are holding the destiny of Palestine in their hands and allow themselves to kill the Palestinian people." The summit condemned terrorism and extremism, stressing the themes of moderation and tolerance.
“Some European countries insist on saying that during World War II, Hitler burned millions of Jews and put them in concentration camps. Any historian, commentator or scientist who doubts that is taken to prison or gets condemned. Although we don't accept this claim [of the holocaust], if we suppose it is true... If the Europeans are honest they should give some of their provinces in Europe -- like in Germany, Austria or other countries -- to the Zionists and the Zionists can establish their state in Europe. You offer part of Europe and we will support it."

Reactions
German Chancellor Merkel was said to “condemn Ahmadinejad’s words”, without specifying which words. And she said: “We shall do everything to make clear that Israel’s right to exist is not imperiled in any way”. Austrian Chancellor Schüssel said: "these remarks are “an outrageous gaffe, which I want to repudiate in the sharpest manner.” British Foreign Secretary Straw: “I condemn [the comments] unreservedly. They have no place in civilised political debate”. BBC: these comments “come as Iran is mired in controversy over its nuclear programme (etc.)”. NRC Handelsblad: “with suchlike remarks” Ahmadinejad has “in recent months set Iran on a ramming course with the West”.
White House spokesman McClellan said Ahmadinejad’s comments “further underscore our concerns about the regime” in relation to its “ability to develop nuclear weapons”. A U.S. Foreign Office spokesman called some (unspecified) remarks of Ahmadinejad’s “baffling and objectionable” and said they “do not inspire hope in anyone of us in the international community that Iran´s government is prepared to behave as a responsible member of that community”.
Israel’s foreign ministry spokesman Regev said the Iranian president has again ”expressed the most outrageous ideas concerning Jews and Israel”. Israel´s Foreign Minister Shalom said that some of these remarks “should awaken all of us in the world”. “This country (…) will do anything to destroy the state of Israel”.
Secretary-General Kofi Annan was “shocked” at some of Ahmadinejad´s remarks. Saudi, Turkish and Iranian officials criticized Ahmadinejad´s speech because it "marred a Mecca summit dedicated to showing Islam's moderate face".

2005 Zahedan remarks

On 14 December 2005, in Zahedan, Iran, Ahmadinejad said: ‘People in Palestine are getting killed every day by the new rulers of Palestine. As a consequence of the Holocaust, the Europeans took land from the Palestinians for a Jewish state. I don’t care whether the Holocaust took place or not, but it is illogical to give a piece of Palestine for compensation. Some people make an awful fuss about that Holocaust, make a myth of it. (…) Countries that themselves have nuclear, chemical and biological weapons should not raise an outcry when Iran wants access to peaceful nuclear technology.’

International reactions
Israel, the U.S., the European Commission and several European countries reacted with shock and indignation.Israeli foreign ministry spokesman Mark Regev said, the Iranian regime holds a “perverse vision of the world”. Germany’s foreign minister called Ahmadinejad’s remarks “shocking and unacceptable”. The White House spokesman said, the comments underline the need to “keep Iran from developing nuclear weapons”. A European Commission spokeswoman called the comments “completely unacceptable”.
Khaled Meshaal, the Damascus-based political leader of ruling Hamas party, has supported Ahmadinejad's stance towards Israel calling Ahmadinejad's remarks "courageous". He has said that "Just as Islamic Iran defends the rights of the Palestinians, we defend the rights of Islamic Iran. We are part of a united front against the enemies of Islam."

Iranian reactions
Iran´s Interior Minister Pourmohammadi said:
Actually the case has been misunderstood. (Ahmadinejad) did not mean to raise this matter. [He] wanted to say that if others harmed the Jewish community and created problems for the Jewish community, they have to pay the price themselves. People like the Palestinian people or other nations should not pay the price (for it).
The head of Iran's Jewish community, Haroun Yashayaei, sent a letter to Ahmadinejad in early 2006 that read: "How is it possible to ignore all of the undeniable evidence existing for the exile and massacre of the Jews in Europe during World War Two? Challenging one of the most obvious and saddening events of 20th-century humanity has created astonishment among the people of the world and spread fear and anxiety among the small Jewish community of Iran."
In February 2006, Mohammad Khatami called the Holocaust a "historic fact".
Khamenei's main advisor in foreign policy, Ali Akbar Velayati, refused to take part in the Holocaust conference. In February 2007, he said that the Holocaust was a genocide and a historical reality.
In 2008, Ahmadinejad's statements on the Holocaust were criticized by cleric Mahdi Karroubi. 

Holocaust denial

In August 2006, the ‘Deutsche Welle’ citing AFP reported that Ahmadinejad had written a letter to German Chancellor Angela Merkel suggesting that the victorious Allied powers in World War II may have invented the Holocaust to embarrass Germany. "Is it not a reasonable possibility that some countries that had won the war made up this excuse to constantly embarrass the defeated people ... to bar their progress," Ahmadinejad reportedly wrote in the letter. Merkel indicated that she would not formally respond to the letter, saying it contained "totally unacceptable" criticism of Israel and the Jewish state's right to exist.
In a September 2006 interview with NBC Nightly News Anchor Brian Williams, Ahmadinejad said that when he called the Holocaust a myth he was merely trying to communicate that it was not just Jews that died, but millions of people and he wants to know why it is the Palestinian people that have to pay for the Nazis' slaughter of the Jewish people.
In the second World War, over 60 million people lost their lives. They were all human beings. Why is it that only a select group of those who were killed have become so prominent and important? Do you think that the 60 million who lost their lives were all at the result of warfare alone? There were two million that were part of the military at the time, perhaps altogether, 50 million civilians with no roles in the war — Christians, Muslims. They were all killed. The second and more important question that I raised was, if this event happened, and if it is a historical event, then we should allow everyone to research it and study it. The more research and studies are done, the clearer the issue gets. We still leave open to further studies absolute knowledge of science or math. Historical events are always subject to revisions, and reviews and studies. We're still revising our thoughts about what happened over thousands of years ago. Why is it that researchers are jailed? Why is researching this issue prohibitited? Where as we can openly question God, the prophet, concepts such as freedom and democracy? And the third question that I raised in this regard: assuming that this happened, where did it happen? Did the Palestinian people have anything to do with it? Why should the Palestinians pay for it now? Five million displaced Palestinian people is what I'm talking about. Over 60 years of living under terror. Losing the lives of thousands of dear ones. And homes that are destroyed on a daily basis over people's heads. You might argue that the Jews have the right to have a government. We're not against that. But where? At a place where their people were — several people will vote for them, and where they can govern.
At a Holocaust conference at Sharif University of Technology in Tehran on January 27, 2009, Ahmadinejad stated:
For 60 years they allowed no one to question and cast doubt on the logic of the Holocaust and its very essence - because if the truth were to be exposed, nothing would remain of their logic of liberal democracy. It is the very advocates of liberal democracy who defend the Holocaust, who have sanctified it to the point where none may enter. Breaking the padlock of the Holocaust and reexamining it will be tantamount to cutting the vital arteries of the Zionist regime. It will destroy the philosophical foundation and raison d'être of this regime...I invite the dear researchers, intellectuals, young people and students, who are the trailblazers, to reexamine not only the Holocaust, but also its consequences and aftermath and inform others of their studies and research. Let us not forget that more than ever before, the Zionist network, which came up with the issue of the Holocaust, must be exposed, and be presented to the peoples as it really is.
In early June 2009, Ahmadinejad described Israel as "the most criminal regime in human history" and spoke about the "great deception of the Holocaust" in a speech quoted by IRIB.
At the September 2009 Quds Day ceremonies in Tehran, he stated Israel was created on "a lie and a mythical claim,"that the Western powers "launched the myth of the Holocaust. They lied, they put on a show and then they support the Jews" — what the New York Times considered his "among his harshest statements on the topic," and one immediately condemned by the US, UK, French and German governments.

Accusations of anti-Semitism

The U.S. Senate unanimously agreed to a resolution condemning Ahmadinejad’s "harmful, destructive, and anti-Semitic statements."
The Iranian government responded that "the Western media empire is trying to portray Iran as an anti-Semitic country". Currently, 40,000 Jews live in Iran and have representation in the Iranian parliament in the form of a Jewish MP, Maurice Mohtamed. Their treatment is a matter of great debate, some stating that the Jews are treated better than other religious minorities in Iran.
In addition Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has stated that "Jews are respected by everyone, by all human beings ... some people think if they accuse me of being anti-Jew they can solve the problem. No, I am not anti-Jew ... I respect them very much ... We love everyone in the world — Jews, Christians, Muslims, non-Muslims, non-Jews, non-Christians".
Shiraz Dossa, a professor at St. Francis Xavier University, wrote in June 2007 that "Ahmadinejad has not denied the Holocaust or proposed Israel’s liquidation; he has never done so in any of his speeches on the subject (all delivered in Persian). As an Iran specialist, I can attest that both accusations are false... What Ahmadinejad has questioned is the mythologizing, the sacralization, of the Holocaust and the “Zionist regime’s” continued killing of Palestinians and Muslims. He has even raised doubts about the scale of the Holocaust. His rhetoric has been excessive and provocative. And he does not really care what we in the West think about Iran or Muslims; he does not kowtow to western or Israeli diktat."

2006 reaction to Ariel Sharon's stroke

On January 4, 2006, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon suffered a massive haemorrhagic stroke and was reported to be dead or near death. The next day Ahmadinejad told Shi'a clerics in Qom:
Hopefully, the news that the criminal of Sabra and Shatila has joined his ancestors is final.
The United States condemned Ahmadinejad's comment as "hateful and disgusting" and U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack called Ahmadinejad's remarks "part of a continuing stream of hateful invective that has come from this president."

Reaction to 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict

On July 15, 2006, Ahmadinejad compared the actions of Israel in launching an offensive against Lebanon to that of Nazi Germany. "Hitler sought pretexts to attack other nations," Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying by the ISNA students news agency at the inauguration of a Tehran road tunnel. "The Zionist regime is seeking baseless pretexts to invade Islamic countries and right now it is justifying its attacks with groundless excuses," he added.
On Aug 3rd, 2006, in a speech during an emergency meeting of Muslim leaders, Ahmadinejad called for "the elimination of the Zionist regime". While some media outlets immediately interpreted his words as another threat to "destroy Israel",such interpretations have again been challenged. In the speech, Ahmadinejad said, "although the main solution is for the elimination of the Zionist regime, at this stage an immediate cease-fire must be implemented". He stated that the Middle East would be better off "without the existence of the Zionist regime". He called Israel an "illegitimate regime" with "no legal basis for its existence" and accused the United States of using Israel as a proxy to control the region and its oil resources; "The Zionist regime is used to reach this objective. The sole existence of this regime is for invasion and attack."

December 2006 Conference on Holocaust

 International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust
On December 11, 2006, at the "International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust" in Tehran, Ahmadinejad said: “The Zionist regime will be wiped out soon the same way the Soviet Union was, and humanity will achieve freedom”, and elections should be held among “Jews, Christians and Muslims so the population of Palestine can select their government and destiny for themselves in a democratic manner”.

2008 statements on Israel's 60th birthday

On Israel's 60th birthday, Ahmadinejad said:
Those who think they can revive the stinking corpse of the usurping and fake Israeli regime by throwing a birthday party are seriously mistaken. Today the reason for the Zionist regime's existence is questioned, and this regime is on its way to annihilation."
Ahmadinejad also stated that Israel "has reached the end like a dead rat after being slapped by the Lebanese." Later, he said: "The Zionist regime is dying," and "The criminals imagine that by holding celebrations (...) they can save the Zionist regime from death." Ahmadinejad also stated that "They should know that regional nations hate this fake and criminal regime and if the smallest and briefest chance is given to regional nations they will destroy (it)".

2008 statement on anniversary of Khomeini's death

At a gathering of foreign guests marking the 19th anniversary of the death of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Ahmadinejad said:
"You should know that the criminal and terrorist Zionist regime which has 60 years of plundering, aggression and crimes in its file has reached the end of its work and will soon disappear off the geographical scene."
The Iranian presidential website states: that "the Zionist Regime of Israel faces a deadend and will under God's grace be wiped off the map," and "the Zionist Regime that is a usurper and illegitimate regime and a cancerous tumor should be wiped off the map."

Statement at UN Summit on Global Food Security

At the United Nations summit on global food security in June 2008, Ahmadinejad stated:
"People like my comments, because people will save themselves from the imposition of the Zionists. European peoples have suffered the greatest damage from Zionists and today the costs of this false regime, be they political or economic costs, are on Europe's shoulders."
Ronald S. Lauder, president of the World Jewish Congress, complained to the United Nations and the Italian government about Ahmadinejad's presence at the conference, stating that "It is deplorable that a leader like him, who is failing both his own people and the international community, is allowed to hijack the agenda of this important FAO conference."

2008 UN General Assembly

In an address to the United Nations General Assembly on September 23, 2008, Ahmadinejad stated that Zionists are criminals and murderers, are "acquisitive" and “deceitful,” and dominate global finance despite their “minuscule” number. He further stated that “It is deeply disastrous to witness that some presidential nominees have to visit these people [Zionists], take part in their gatherings and swear their allegiance and commitment to their interests in order to win financial or media support. These nations are spending their dignity and resources on the crimes and threats of the Zionist network against their will.”Ahmadinejad stated the “Zionist regime” was on the path to collapse and that the "underhanded actions of the Zionists" as among the causes of the recent unrest in the former Soviet republic of Georgia. In a subsequent interview with the Los Angeles Times, Ahmadinejad stated that "The [Zionist] regime resembles an airplane that has lost its engine and is kind of going down. And no one can help it," he said. “This will benefit everyone.”
Ahmadinejad's speech was denounced as "blatant anti-Semitism" by German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier.

2008 statement that "smaller Israel" is dead

In a speech broadcast on IRINN on September 18 and 23, 2008, Ahmadinejad stated, in regard to the idea of Greater Israel being dead, that:
I would like to declare that the idea of "smaller Israel" is also dead. The very notion of Israel is dead, but they are lagging behind the times. Just like the idea of Greater Israel died 30 years ago, and they did not realize this, and have continued to perpetrate crimes for 30 years... Today, I say to them: The idea of smaller Israel is dead.

Description of Israel as a germ

In a public address on IRINN TV on June 2, 2008, Ahmadinejad stated:
The Zionist regime has lost its raison d'être. Today, the Palestinians identify with your name Khomeini, your memory, and in your path. They are walking in your illuminated path and the Zionist regime has reached a total dead end. Thanks to God, your wish will soon be realized, and this germ of corruption will be wiped off.

Allegations that Zionists have taken over the world

In a speech broadcast on IRINN on September 18 and 23, 2008, Ahmadinejad stated:
The Zionists are crooks. A small handful of Zionists, with a very intricate organization, have taken over the power centers of the world. According to our estimates, the main cadre of the Zionists consists of 2,000 individuals at most, and they have another 8,000 activists. In addition, they have several informants, who spy and provide them with intelligence information. But because of their control of power centers in the U.S. and Europe, and their control of the financial centers and the news and propaganda agencies, they spread propaganda as if they were the entire world, as if all the peoples supported them, and as if they were the majority ruling the world.
At a Holocaust conference at Sharif University of Technology in Tehran on January 27, 2009, Ahmadinejad stated:
"Today the Zionists dominate many of the world's centers of power, wealth, and media. Unfortunately, they have ensnared many politicians and parties, and they are plundering the wealth and assets of nations in this way, depriving peoples of their freedoms and destroying their cultures and human values by spreading their nexus of corruption."

Statement on Holocaust Remembrance Day

At a Holocaust conference at Sharif University of Technology in Tehran on January 27, 2009, Ahmadinejad stated:
"The illegitimate Zionist regime is an outcome of the Holocaust... a political and power-seeking network claimed to be the advocate for one group of the victims, and sought reparations for their blood. [This network] ruled that the survivors of this particular group of victims must receive compensation - and part of this compensation was to establish the Zionist regime in the land of Palestine. On this pretext, they attacked Palestine and, after massacring the [indigenous] people and driving them from their homes, they occupied their homeland and created the Zionist regime - in order to ensure that no regional power would emerge in the Islamic lands except for the West, [because] Islamic civilization and culture have the dynamic potential to threaten their interests, which were based on oppression and thirst for power. These principles and philosophy comprise the Zionist regime.

Statement on 9/11 attacks

In an interview with IRINN on January 28, 2009, Ahmadinejad stated:
"An incident known as 9/11 occurred. It is not yet clear who carried it out, who collaborated with them, and who paved the way for them. The event took place, and - like in the case of the Holocaust - they sealed it off, refusing to allow objective research groups to find out the truth. They invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, using 9/11 as a pretext."

Statement on Gaza flotilla raid

At an Asian security summit in Istanbul, Turkey on June 8, 2010, Ahmadinejad stated that the Israeli raid on a flotilla attempting to break the blockade in Gaza (in which nine people were killed):
"showed violence and hatred and war-mongering attitudes. The devilish sound of the uncultured Zionists was coming out from their deceit. ... They were holding up the flag of the devil itself... [The raid] has actually rung the final countdown for its existence. It shows that it has no room in the region and no one is ready to live alongside it. Actually, no country in the world recognizes it, and you know that the Zionist regime is the backbone of the dictatorial world order...The Zionist regime, with what it has done, it actually stopped its possibility to exist in the region anymore."

2010 criticism of peace talks with Israel

On al-Quds Day in September 2010, Ahmadinejad criticized the Palestinian Authority for agreeing to renew direct peace talks with Israel. He called the talks "stillborn" and "doomed to fail," and urged Palestinians to continue armed resistance. Nabil Abu Rudeineh, a spokesman for the PA, responded that Ahmadinejad "does not represent the Iranian people,... is not entitled to talk about Palestine, or the President of Palestine."

Rumours of Jewish ancestry

In 2009, The Daily Telegraph wrote that according to his identity papers, which were photographed in his hands during the Iranian elections, Ahmadinejad was once called "Sabourjian," a well known Jewish name in Iran". The article claims that Sabourjian means "weaver of the Sabour," the name for the Jewish tallit in Persia. The article also claimed that the family converted to Islam and changed the family name after Ahmadinejad was born, though no information was printed on Ahmadinejad's mother. Ahmadinejad has admitted that his family name was changed to "Ahmadinejad" but did not comment further. The article cites an expert who says that Ahmadinejad's Jewish roots, if true, would explain his hostility toward Judaism and Israel: "Every family that converts to a different religion takes a new identity by condemning their old faith."
According to Iranian experts interviewed by the Guardian, "There is no such meaning for the word 'sabour' in any of the Persian Jewish dialects, nor does it mean Jewish prayer shawl in Persian," the name actually means "thread painter," both of Ahmadinejad's ancestors are known to have been Muslims, and Ahmadinejad's relatives say he adopted the new surname upon moving to Tehran, to avoid discrimination based on his rural roots. Besides this, there is no clear consensus on what the family name printed on the identity papers, with a biography claiming it reads "Sabaghian."
Karmel Melamed, said it was a tactic common in Iranian politics to try to cast doubt on someone's loyalty by insinuating Jewish ancestry.

Israeli incitement to assassinate Ahmadinejad

During Ahmadinejad's visit to Lebanon in October 2010, one of Knesset members, Arieh Eldad, said:
"History would have been different if in 1939 some Jewish soldier would have succeeded in taking Hitler out. If Ahmadinejad will be in the crosshairs of an IDF rifle when he comes to throw rocks at us, he must not return home alive."


(source:wikipedia)

Iran – United States relations


American–Iranian relations
United States Iran
Iran USA Locator.png
  Iran
Political relations between Iran and the United States began in the mid-to-late 19th century but had small importance or controversy until the post-World War II era of the Cold War and of petroleum exports from the Persian Gulf. Since then, an era of close alliance between Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi's regime and the American government was followed by a dramatic reversal and hostility between the two countries after the 1979 Iranian Revolution.
Opinions differ over what has caused the decades of poor relations. Iranian explanations include everything from the natural and unavoidable conflict between the Islamic Revolution on the one hand, and American arrogance and desire for global hegemony on the other. Other explanations include the government's need for an external bogeyman to furnish a pretext for domestic repression against pro-democratic forces and to bind the government to its loyal constituency.
Since 1995, the United States has had an embargo on trade with Iran.

Early relations

Political relations between Persia and the United States "began when the Shah of Persia, Nassereddin Shah Qajar, officially dispatched Persia's first ambassador, Mirza Abolhasan Shirazi, to Washington D.C. in 1856." In 1883, Samuel Benjamin was appointed by the United States as the first official diplomatic envoy to Iran, however; Ambassadorial relations were not established until 1944.
The first Persian Ambassador to the United States of America was Mirza Albohassan Khan Ilchi Kabir. Americans had been traveling to Iran since the early-to-mid 1880s, even before political relations existed between the two. Justin Perkins and Asahel Grant were the first missionaries to be dispatched to Persia in 1834 via the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions.
Amir Kabir, Prime Minister under Nasereddin Shah, also initiated direct contacts with the American government in Washington. By the end of the 19th century, negotiations were underway for an American company to establish a railway system from the Persian Gulf to Tehran.
Until World War II, relations between Iran and the United States remained cordial. As a result, many Iranians sympathetic to the Persian Constitutional Revolution came to view the U.S. as a "third force" in their struggle to break free of British and Russian dominance in Persian affairs. American industrial and business leaders were supportive of Persia's drive to modernize its economy and free itself from British and Russian influence.



In 1909, during the Persian Constitutional Revolution, Howard Baskerville, an American, died in Tabriz while trying to help the constitutionalists in a battle against royalist forces. After the Iranian parliament appointed American financial consultant Morgan Shuster as appointed Treasurer General of Persia in 1911, an American was killed in Tehran by henchmen thought to be affiliated with Russian or British interests. Shuster became even more active in supporting the Constitutional revolution of Persia financially.When Iran's government ordered Shu'a al-Saltaneh (شعاع السلطنه), the Shah's brother who was aligned with the goals of Imperial Russia in Persia, to surrender his assets, Shuster moved to execute the seizure. Imperial Russia immediately landed troops in Bandar Anzali, demanding a recourse and apology from the Persian government. Russia's General Liakhoff shelled Iran's parliament in Tehran, and Morgan Shuster was forced to resign under British and Russian pressure. Shuster's book The Strangling of Persia is a recount of the details of these events and is critical of Britain and Imperial Russia.
The American Embassy first reported to the Iran desk at the Foreign Office in London about the popular view of Britain's involvement in the 1921 coup that brought Reza Shah to power. A British Embassy report from 1932 admits that the British put Reza Shah "on the throne". At that time, Persia did not view the United States as an ally of Britain.
Morgan Shuster was soon followed by Arthur Millspaugh, who was appointed Treasurer General by Reza Shah, and Arthur Pope, who was a main driving force behind the Persian Empire revivalist policies of Reza Shah. The friendly relations between the United States and Iran lasted until the 1950s.


Current relations
Iran maintains an interests section at the Pakistani embassy in Washington, D.C., while the United States since 1980 maintains an interests section at the Swiss embassy in Tehran.


Mohammad Reza Pahlavi reign

Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi maintained close ties with America during most of his reign, which lasted from 1941 until he was overthrown by the Islamic Revolution in 1979. He pursued a Westernizing, modernizing economic policy, and a strongly pro-Western foreign policy; he also made a number of visits to America, where he was regarded as a friend.
Iran's long border with America's Cold War rival, the Soviet Union, and its position as the largest, most powerful country in the oil-rich Persian Gulf, made Iran a "pillar" of American foreign policy in the Middle East. Prior to the Iranian Revolution of 1979, many Iranian students resided in the United States.


Premier Mossadeq and his overthrow
In 1953, Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadeq was overthrown by a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)-organized coup, in what has been called "a crucial turning point both in Iran's modern history and in U.S. Iran relations." Many Iranians argue that "the 1953 coup and the extensive U.S. support for the shah in subsequent years were largely responsible for the shah's arbitrary rule," which led to the "deeply anti-American character" of the 1979 revolution.
Until the outbreak of World War II, the United States had no active policy toward Iran. When the Cold War began, the United States was alarmed by the attempt by the Soviet Union to set up separatist states in Iranian Azerbaijan and Kurdistan, as well as its demand for military rights to the Dardanelles in 1946. This fear was enhanced by the "loss of China" to communism, the uncovering of Soviet spy rings, and the start of the Korean War.
In 1952 and 1953, the Abadan Crisis took place when Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadeq began nationalization of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC). Established by the British in the early 20th century, the company shared profits (85% for Britain, and 15% for Iran), but the company withheld their financial records from the Iranian government. By 1951, Iranians supported nationalization of the AIOC, and Parliament unanimously agreed to nationalize its holding of, what was at the time, the British Empire’s largest company. The British retaliated with an embargo on Iranian oil, which was supported by international oil companies. Over the following months, negotiations over control and compensation for the oil were deadlocked, and Iran's economy deteriorated.
American President Truman pressed Britain to moderate its position in the negotiations and to not invade Iran. American policies created a feeling in Iran that the United States was Mosaddeq's side and optimism that the oil dispute would soon be settled with "a series of innovative proposals to settle" the dispute, giving Iran "significant amounts of economic aid". Mosaddeq visited Washington, and the American government made "frequent statements expressing support for him." 
At the same time, the United States honored the British embargo and, without Truman's knowledge, the CIA station in Tehran had been "carrying out covert activities" against Mosaddeq and the National Front "at least since the summer of 1952".


1953 Iranian coup d'état
As the cold war intensified, oil negotiations stalled, and the President Dwight D. Eisenhower replaced Democrat Truman, the United States helped destabilize Mosaddeq on the theory that "rising internal tensions and continued deterioration ... might lead to a breakdown of government authority and open the way for at least a gradual assumption of control" Iran's well organized Tudeh communist party. In spring and summer 1953, the United States and Britain, through a covert operation of the CIA called Operation Ajax, conducted from the American Embassy in Tehran, helped organize a coup d'état to overthrow the Mossadeq government. The operation initially failed, and the Shah fled to Italy, but a second attempt succeeded, and Mosaddeq was imprisoned.
According to a study of the coup headed by Mark J. Gasiorowski and Malcolm Byrne, intended "to resolve" the "controversy" over who and what were responsible, "it was geostrategic considerations, rather than a desire to destroy Mosaddeq's movement, to establish a dictatorship in Iran or to gain control over Iran's oil, that persuaded U.S. officials to undertake the coup." 


Post-coup
Following the coup, the United States helped build up the Shah's regime. In the first three weeks, the American government gave Iran $68 million in emergency aid, and an additional $1.2 billion over the next decade.
During his reign, the Shah received significant American support, frequently making state visits to the White House and earning praise from numerous American presidents. The Shah's close ties to Washington and his Westernization policies soon angered some Iranians, especially the hardline Islamic conservatives.
In America, the coup was originally considered a triumph of covert action but is now considered by many to have left "a haunting and terrible legacy." In 2000, U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, called it a "setback for democratic government" in Iran. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei condemned the admission as "deceitful", complaining that it "did not even include an apology".


Cultural relations
Relations in the cultural sphere remained cordial. Pahlavi University, Sharif University of Technology, and Isfahan University of Technology, three of Iran's top academic universities were all directly modeled on American institutions, such as the University of Chicago, MIT, and the University of Pennsylvania. The Shah was generous in awarding American universities with financial gifts. For example, the University of Southern California received an endowed chair of petroleum engineering, and a million dollar donation was given to the George Washington University to create an Iranian Studies program.


Growth of oil revenues
In the 1960s and 1970s, Iran's oil revenues grew considerably. Starting in the mid-1960s, this "weakened U.S. influence in Iranian politics" while strengthening the power of the Iranian state vis-a-vis the Iranian public. According to scholar Homa Katouzian, this put the United States "in the contradictory position of being regarded" by the Iranian public because of the 1953 coup "as the chief architect and instructor of the regime," while "its real influence" in domestic Iranian politics and policies "declined considerably".


1977-1979: Carter administration



The Iranian Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi meeting with Alfred Atherton,William H. Sullivan, Cyrus Vance, President Jimmy Carter, and Zbigniew Brzezinski, 1977.

Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, Shah of Iran, shakes hands with a US Air Force general officer prior to his departure from the United States.

In the late 1970s, American President Jimmy Carter emphasized human rights in his foreign policy, including the Shah's regime, which by 1977 had garnered unfavorable publicity in the West for its human rights record. That year, the Shah responded to Carter's "polite reminder" by granting amnesty to some prisoners and allowing the Red Cross to visit prisons. Through 1977, liberal opposition formed organizations and issued open letters denouncing the Shah's regime.
At the same time, Carter angered anti-Shah Iranians with a New Years Eve 1978 toast to the Shah in which he said:
'Under the Shah’s brilliant leadership Iran is an island of stability in one of the most troublesome regions of the world. There is no other state figure whom I could appreciate and like more.'
Observers disagree over the nature of United States policy toward Iran under Carter as the Shah's regime crumbled. According to historian Nikki Keddie, the Carter's administration followed "no clear policy" on Iran. The American ambassador to Iran, William H. Sullivan, recalled that the U.S. National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski “repeatedly assured Pahlavi that the U.S. backed him fully". On November 4, 1978, Brzezinski called the Shah to tell him that the United States would "back him to the hilt." At the same time, high-level officials in the State Department believed the revolution was unstoppable. After visiting the Shah in summer of 1978, Secretary of the Treasury W. Michael Blumenthal complained of the Shah's emotional collapse, reporting, "You've got a zombie out there." Brzezinski and Energy Secretary James Schlesinger were adamant in their assurances that the Shah would receive military support.
Another scholar, sociologist Charles Kurzman, argues that, rather than being indecisive or sympathetic to the revolution, the Carter administration was consistently supportive of the Shah and urged the Iranian military to stage a "last-resort coup d'etat" even after the regime's cause was hopeless. In addition, some Iranian supporters of the Shah believe Carter betrayed the Shah.


The 1979 revolution

The 1979 Iranian Revolution, which ousted the pro-American Shah and replaced him with the anti-American Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini, surprised the United States government, its State Department and intelligence services, which "consistently underestimated the magnitude and long-term implications of this unrest". Six months before the revolution culminated, the CIA had produced a report, stating that “Persia is not in a revolutionary or even a "prerevolutionary" situation”
The Islamic revolutionaries wished to extradite and execute the ousted Shah, and Carter refused to give him any further support or help return him to power. The Shah, suffering from cancer, requested entry into the United States for treatment. The American embassy in Tehran opposed the request, as they were intent on stabilizing relations between the new interim revolutionary government of Iran and the United States.
Despite agreeing with the staff of the American embassy, Carter agreed after pressure from Kissinger, Rockefeller, and other pro-Shah political figures. The move was used by the Iranian revolutionaries to justify their claims that the former monarch was an American puppet, and this led to the storming of the American embassy by radical students allied with the Khomeini faction.


The 1979 Iran hostage crisis
 Iran hostage crisis


Interests Section of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the United States



Walls of the American embassy covered in anti-American mural

Vice President George H. W. Bush and other VIPs wait to welcome the former hostages to Iran home

Families wait for the former hostages to disembark the plane.
On November 4, 1979, the revolutionary group Muslim Student Followers of the Imam's Line, angered that the recently deposed Shah had been allowed into the United States, occupied the American embassy in Tehran and took American diplomats hostage. The 52 American diplomats were held hostage for 444 days.
In Iran, the incident was seen by many as a blow against American influence in Iran and the liberal-moderate interim government of Prime Minister Mehdi Bazargan, who opposed the hostage taking and resigned soon after. The hostage takers felt that their action was connected to the 1953 American-backed coup against the government of Prime Minister Mosaddeq.
"You have no right to complain, because you took our whole country hostage in 1953.”
said one of the hostage takers to Bruce Laingen, chief U.S. diplomat in Iran at the time. Some Iranians were concerned that the United States may have been plotting another coup against their country in 1979 from the American embassy.
In the United States, the hostage-taking was seen as a violation of a centuries-old principle of international law that granted diplomats immunity from arrest and diplomatic compounds sovereignty in the territory of the host country they occupy.
The United States military attempted a rescue operation, Operation Eagle Claw, on April 24, 1980, which resulted in an aborted mission and the deaths of eight American military men. The crisis ended with the signing of the Algiers Accords in Algeria on January 19, 1981. On January 20, 1981, the date the treaty was signed, the hostages were released. The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal (located in The Hague, Netherlands) was established for the purpose of handling claims of American nationals against Iran and of Iranian nationals against the United States. American contact with Iran through The Hague covers only legal matters.
The crisis led to lasting economic and diplomatic damage. On April 7, 1980, the United States broke diplomatic relations with Iran, a break which has yet to be restored. On April 24, 1981, the Swiss Government assumed representation of American interests in Tehran via an interests section. Iranian interests in the United States are represented by the Iranian Interests Section of the Pakistani Embassy in Washington, D.C.


Economic consequences of the Iran hostage crisis
See also: Sanctions against Iran
Before the Revolution, the United States was Iran's foremost economic and military partner. This facilitated the modernization of Iran's infrastructure and industry, with as many as 30,000 American expatriates residing in the country in a technical, consulting, or teaching capacity. Some analysts argue that the transformation may have been too rapid, fueling unrest and discontent among an important part of the population in the country and leading to the Revolution in 1979.
After the 1979 seizure of the American Embassy in Tehran, the United States froze about $12 billion in Iranian assets, including bank deposits, gold and other properties. According to American officials, most of those were released in 1981 as part of the deal to release the hostages. Some assets—Iranian officials say $10 billion, U.S. officials say much less—remain frozen, pending resolution of legal claims arising from the Revolution.
Commercial relations between Iran and the United States are restricted by American sanctions and consist mainly of Iranian purchases of food, spare parts, and medical products as well as American purchases of carpets and food. Sanctions originally imposed in 1995 by President Bill Clinton were renewed by President Bush, who cited the "unusual and extraordinary threat" to American national security posed by Iran. The 1995 executive orders prohibit American companies and their foreign subsidiaries from conducting business with Iran, while banning any "contract for the financing of the development of petroleum resources located in Iran". In addition, the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996 (ILSA) imposed mandatory and discretionary sanctions on non-American companies investing more than $20 million annually in the Iranian oil and natural gas sectors.
The ILSA was renewed for five more years in 2001. Congressional bills signed in 2006 extended and added provisions to the act; on September 30, 2006, the act was renamed the Iran Sanctions Act (ISA), as it no longer applied to Libya, and extended until December 31, 2011.




1980s: Reagan administration

Iran–Iraq War
United States support for Iraq during the Iran–Iraq war
Then-American Secretary of State Alexander Haig may have stated that the United States gave Iraqi President Saddam Hussein approval to attack Iran:
"It was also interesting to confirm that President Carter gave the Iraqis a green light to launch the war against Iran through Prince Fahd" of Jordan." 
When Iraq invaded Iran, Carter called Iranian charges of American complicity "patently false". Carter's memoir, Keeping Faith, briefly mentioned this accusation: “Typically, the Iranians accused me of planning and supporting the invasion."Journalist Said K. Aburish claimed that Hussein visited to Amman, Jordan before the war, where he may have met with King Hussein three CIA agents. Aburish believes that there is "considerable evidence that he discussed his plans to invade Iran with the CIA agents". The records of the meeting that occurred on this date between American officials and King Hussein suggest that Saddam Hussein was not present and that the border disputes between Baghdad and Tehran were not discussed, but that joint efforts between Jordan and the United States to oppose Iran were discussed. Others have opposed this view; Eric Alterman in The Nation has called the charge a “slander” and argued there is no credible evidence to back it up. Adam Tomkins wrote: "There were no diplomatic relations between the US and Iraq for seventeen years, until president Reagan restored them in 1984".
American intelligence and logistical support played a crucial role in arming Iraq in the Iraq-Iran war, although Bob Woodward states that the United States gave information to both sides, hoping "to engineer a stalemate. According to the American Senate Banking Committee, the administrations of Presidents Reagan and George H. W. Bush authorized the sale to Iraq of numerous dual use items, including poisonous chemicals and deadly biological viruses, such as anthrax and bubonic plague.
According to senior military officers, the United States provided battle planning assistance to Iraq at a time when American intelligence agencies knew that Iraqi commanders would employ chemical weapons in waging the war.American officials publicly condemned Iraq's employment of mustard gas, sarin, VX and other poisonous agents, especially after Iraq attacked Kurdish villagers in Halabja in March 1988. Sixty Defense Intelligence Agency officers were secretly providing detailed information on Iranian deployments, tactical planning for battles, plans for airstrikes and bomb-damage assessments for Iraq, however. In contrast, Secretary of Defence Frank C. Carlucci said: "My understanding is that what was provided" to Iraq "was general order of battle information, not operational intelligence". "I certainly have no knowledge of U.S. participation in preparing battle and strike packages," he said, "and doubt strongly that that occurred." He added, "I did agree that Iraq should not lose the war, but I certainly had no foreknowledge of their use of chemical weapons." Secretary of State Colin Powell, through a spokesman, said the officers' description of the program was "dead wrong," but declined to discuss it. According to reports of the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs of the U.S. Senate, the United States sold chemical weapons, including anthrax, VX nerve gas, West Nile fever and botulism to Iraq until March 1992. The chairman of the Senate committee, Don Riegle, said: "The executive branch of our government approved 771 different export licences for sale of dual-use technology to Iraq. I think its a devastating record." In 2000, U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright expressed regret for that support.


1983: Hezbollah bombings
The United States contends that Hezbollah has been involved in several anti-American terrorist attacks, including the April 1983 United States Embassy bombing which killed 17 Americans, the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing which killed 241 U.S. peace keepers in Lebanon, and the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing. An American district court judge ruled in 2003 that the April 1983 United States Embassy bombing was carried out with Iranian support.
United States District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth declared that the Islamic Republic of Iran was responsible for the 1983 attack in a 2003 case brought by the victims' families. Lamberth concluded that Hezbollah was formed under the auspices of the Iranian government, was completely reliant on Iran in 1983, and assisted Iranian Ministry of Information and Security agents in carrying out the operation. An American federal court has also found that the Khobar Towers bombing was authorized by Ali Khomeini, then ayatollah of Iran.


Iran-Contra Affair

In 1986, members of the Reagan administration helped sell weapons to Iran, using the profits to fund anti-communist Contras militants in Nicaragua. Documents relating to the affair were destroyed or withheld from investigators by Reagan administration officials. In November 1986, President Ronald Reagan issued a televised statement that the arms sales did not occur. One week later, Reagan confirmed that weapons had been transferred to Iran. He denied that they were part of an exchange for hostages.


United States attack of 1988
In 1988, the United States launched Operation Praying Mantis against Iran, claiming that it was retaliation for the Iranian mining of areas of the Persian Gulf as part of the Iran-Iraq war. The American attack was the largest American naval combat operation since World War II.American action began with coordinated strikes by two surface groups that neutralized the Sassan oil platform and the Sirri oil platform of Iran. Iran lost one major warship and a smaller gunboat. Damage to the oil platforms was eventually repaired. Iran sued for reparations at the International Court of Justice, stating that the United States breached the 1955 Treaty of Amity. The court dismissed the claim but noted that "the actions of the United States of America against Iranian oil platforms on October 19, 1987 (Operation Nimble Archer) and April 18, 1988 (Operation Praying Mantis) cannot be justified as measures necessary to protect the essential security interests of the United States of America." The American attack helped pressure Iran to agree to a ceasefire with Iraq later that summer.


1988: Iran Air Flight 655 tragedy
 Iran Air Flight 655
On July 3, 1988, near the end of the Iran–Iraq War, the U.S. Navy guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes shot down Iranian Airbus A300B2, which was on a scheduled commercial flight in Iranian airspace over the Strait of Hormuz. The attack killed 290 civilians from six nations, including 66 children. USS Vincennes was in the Persian Gulf as part of Operation Earnest Will. The United States initially contended that flight 655 was a warplane and then said that it was outside the civilian air corridor and did not respond to radio calls. Both statements were untrue, and the radio calls were made on military frequencies to which the airliner did not have access. According to the Iranian government, the attack was an intentional and unlawful act. Iran refused to accept the idea of mistaken identification, arguing that this constituted gross negligence and recklessness amounting to an international crime, because the aircraft was not on a trajectory that threatened the Vincennes and had not aimed radar at it. The United States has expressed regret for the loss of innocent life but has not apologized to the Iranian government.


1990s: Clinton administration

In April 1995, a total embargo on dealings with Iran by American companies was imposed by Bill Clinton. This ended trade, which had been growing following the end of the Iran–Iraq War. The next year, the American Congress passed the Iran-Libya Sanctions act, designed to prevent other countries from making large investments in Iranian energy. The act was denounced by the European Union as invalid, but it blocked some investment for Iran.


Khatami and Iranian reformers
In January 1998, newly elected Iranian President Mohammad Khatami called for a "dialogue of civilizations" with the United States in a CNN interview. In the interview, Khatami invoked Alexis de Tocqueville's Democracy in America to explain the similarities between American and Iranian quests for freedom. American Secretary of State Madeleine Albright responded positively, and the countries exchanged of wrestling teams. This also brought freer travel between the countries as well as an end to the American embargo of Iranian carpets and pistachios. Relations then stalled due to opposition from Iranian conservatives and American preconditions for discussions, including changes in Iranian policy on Israel, nuclear energy, and support for terrorism.


Inter-Parliamentary (Congress-to-Majlis) informal talks
On August 31, 2000, four United States Congress members, Senator Arlen Specter, Representative Bob Ney, Representative Gary Ackerman, and Representative Eliot L. Engel held informal talks in New York City with several Iranian leaders. The Iranians included Mehdi Karroubi, speaker of the Majlis of Iran (Iranian Parliament); Maurice Motamed, a Jewish member of the Majlis; and three other Iranian parliamentarians.


2001-2004

Concerns of Iranian and American governments

Anti US mural, Tehran
In 2003, Jahangir Amuzegaran, Finance Minister and Economic Ambassador in Iran's pre-1979 government, identified several obstacles to "resumption of relations" between the two countries from the American perspective:
Iranian state sponsorship of international terrorism
Pursuit of weapons of mass destruction
Threats to neighbors in the Persian Gulf
Repeated statements by the Iran's highest government officials that they wish "Death to America" and for Israel to "Vanish from the pages of time"
Opposition to the Arab-Israeli peace process
Violations of human rights
He noted that "in recent years, the last two issues seem to have lost some of their potency and are now only infrequently raised. On the other hand, a new accusation of Iran's harboring of al Qaeda operatives has recently been added to the list".
Iran's original post-revolutionary list of demands required the United States to :
Accept the legitimacy of the 1979 revolution
Not interfere in Iran's internal affairs
Deal with the Iranian regime on the basis of "respect and equality"
Amuzegaran noted subsequent demands by Iran:
Lifting American economic sanctions,
Releasing frozen Iranian assets in the United States
Ending the American military presence in the neighboring countries of Iraq and Afghanistan
Removing the U.S. Navy from the Persian Gulf
Ending perceived one-sided support for Israel
Formally apologizing for intervention in Iran, including the CIA-backed overthrow of Mohammed Mossadegh in the 1950s
Paying reparations for:
American companies' assistance in developing Iraq's chemical weapons facilities during the Iran-Iraq war
American support for anti-Iranian organizations (i.e. the People's Mujahedin of Iran [MEK]);
USS Vincennes shooting down Iran Air Flight 655
Economic damage caused by American sanctions and political pressure
American unmanned aerial vehicle flights over Iran violating Iranian airspace since 2003
America's human rights record


Bush administration, first term
"Axis of evil" speech
On January 29, 2002, American President George W. Bush gave his "Axis of evil" speech, describing Iran, along with North Korea and Iraq, as an axis of evil and warning that the proliferation of long-range missiles developed by these countries constituted terrorism and threatened the United States. The speech caused outrage in Iran and was condemned by reformists and conservatives.
Since 2003, the United States has been flying unmanned aerial vehicles, launched from Iraq, over Iran to obtain intelligence on Iran's nuclear program, reportedly providing little new information. The Iranian government has described the surveillance as illegal. In January 2006, James Risen, a New York Times reporter, stated in his book State of War that the CIA carried out a Clinton-approved operation in 2000 (Operation Merlin) intended to delay Iran's nuclear energy program. According to Risen, the United States fed Iran flawed blueprints missing key components, but the plan backfired and may have aided Iran, as the flaw was likely corrected by the former Soviet nuclear scientist who headed the delivery operation.


"Grand Bargain" proposal

A tractor-trailer from Virginia's Fairfax County Urban Search and Rescue Team loaded aboard a C-5 Galaxy heading for Bam, Iran
In 2003, prior to the Iraq War, the Bush administration reportedly received overtures from the Iranian government. With help from the American Iranian Council, Iran purportedly proposed a "grand bargain", which would have resolved outstanding issues between the United States and Iran, including Iran's nuclear program and support for Hamas and Hezbollah. Bush administration officials, including Richard Armitage, thought the Khatami government and the Swiss ambassador in Tehran were "promising more than it could deliver". Others, such as Vali Nasr and Gary Sick consider the lack of an American response to be a missed opportunity. According to Trita Parsi, author of Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran and the United States, Lawrence Wilkerson, Colin Powell's chief of staff, said that "it was Cheney and Rumsfeld who made sure that Washington dismissed Iran's May 2003 offer to open up its nuclear program, rein in Hezbollah and cooperate against al-Qaeda".


2003: Border incursions begin
Several claims have been made that the US has violated Iranian territorial sovereignty since 2003, including drones,soldiers, and provocations and bombings by former or current members of the MEK and the Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan (PEJAK). An American RQ-7 Shadow and a Hermes UAV have crashed in Iran. In June 2005, Scott Ritter stated that American attacks on Iran had already begun through the use of drones. Seymour Hersh stated that the United States has also been penetrating eastern Iran from Afghanistan in a hunt for underground installations developing nuclear weapons.


Divide between public opinion and state policy
An American Reuters/Zogby opinion poll published on September 28, 2006, found 70 percent of respondents opposed to any attack on Iran, 9 percent in favor of "air strikes on selected military targets", and 26 percent supportive of the use of ground forces. In a separate poll, 47 percent were opposed to Israeli intervention. An opinion poll in 2003 asking Iranians if they supported resuming government dialogue with the United States found 75% in favor. The pollsters were jailed, and at least one spent several years in prison.
Although anti-American billboards can be found in Iran and the slogan "death to America" is heard in Friday prayers, some have noted that Iran "just might" have the "least anti-American populace in the Muslim world". Following the September 11 attacks, Iranians gathered in the Maidan-e-Mohseni shopping area in northern Tehran in a candlelit vigil for the victims of the attack. These vigils were violently broken up by Ansar-e-Hezbollah hardliners.


2005-2008: Bush administration, second term

American journalist Seymour Hersh stated in January 2005 that U.S. Central Command had been asked to revise the military's war plan, providing for a maximum ground and air invasion of Iran. He said that the "hawks" in the American government wished to act if EU3 negotiations did not succeed. He stated that a former intelligence official told him, "It's not if we're going to do anything against Iran. They're doing it."
Scott Ritter, former UN weapons of mass destruction inspector in Iraq, stated in June 2005 that The Pentagon was told to be ready to launch an aerial attack to destroy the Iranian nuclear program. He added that the American military was preparing a "massive military presence" in Azerbaijan that would foretell a major land-based campaign designed to capture Tehran. He also claimed that the American attack on Iran had "already begun".
In August 2005, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad became Iran's president, giving Iran a religious and conservative president. The following month, the U.S. State Department was accused of refusing to issue visas for Iran’s parliamentary speaker, Mousa Qorbani, and a group of senior Iranian officials to participate in a meeting held by the United Nations (UN). According to UN rules, the United States must grant visas to senior officials from any UN member states to take part in UN meetings, irrespective of their political views.
In 2006, the Pentagon created the Iranian Directorate to handle intelligence regarding Iran.
In March 2006, Joseph Cirincione, director for non-proliferation at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote that "some senior officials have already made up their minds: They want to hit Iran" and that there "may be a coordinated campaign to prepare for a military strike on Iran."Stephen Zunes, Professor at the University of San Francisco and Middle East editor for the Foreign Policy in Focus Project, also believes that a military attack on Iran is being planned.
On 8 May 2006, Ahmadinejad sent a personal letter to President Bush to propose "new ways" to end Iran's nuclear dispute. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley both dismissed it as a negotiating ploy and publicity stunt that did not address American concerns about Iran's nuclear program. Ahmadinejad later said that "the letter was an invitation to monotheism and justice, which are common to all divine prophets".
Bush insisted in August 2006 that "there must be consequences" for Iran's continued enrichment of uranium. He said that "the world now faces a grave threat from the radical regime in Iran." Ahmadinejad invited Bush to a debate at the UN General Assembly, which was to take place on September 18, 2006. The debate was to be about Iran's right to enrich uranium. The invitation was promptly rejected by White House spokesman Tony Snow, who said "There's not going to be a steel-cage grudge match between the President and Ahmadinejad".


Columbia University students protesting against the university's decision to invite Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to the university campus
In November 2006, Ahmadinejad wrote an open letter to the American people, stating that dialogue was urgently needed because of American activities in the Middle East and that the United States was concealing the truth about relations.
In April 2007, Michael T. Klare stated that President Bush had already taken the decision to attack Iran. He said that Bush's references to Iran in major televised speeches on January 10, January 23 and February 14, 2007, established that he "has already decided an attack is his only option and the rest is a charade he must go through to satisfy his European allies". Klare said that Bush had developed a casus belli in order to prepare public opinion for an attack, focused on claims that Iran supports attacks on American troops in Iraq, claims that Iran has a nuclear weapons program, and claims that Iran could become a dominant power in the region and destabilise pro-American governments in Israel, Jordan, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia, thereby endangering oil supplies.
Wikinews has related news: Iranian President Ahmadinejad speaks at Columbia University
In September 2007, Ahmadinejad addressed the UN General Assembly. Prior to this, he gave a speech at Columbia University, where university president Lee Bollinger used his introduction to portray the Iranian leader as "astonishingly uneducated" and as a "cruel and petty dictator". Ahmadinejad answered a query about the treatment of gays in Iran by saying: "We don't have homosexuals like in your country. We don't have that in our country. We don't have this phenomenon; I don't know who's told you we have it". An aide later stated that he was misrepresented and was actually saying that "compared to American society, we don't have many homosexuals". Ahmadinejad was not permitted to lay a wreath at the World Trade Center site. He stated, "Many innocent people were killed there. Some of those people were American citizens, obviously...We obviously are very much against any terrorist action and any killing. And also we are very much against any plots to sow the seeds of discord among nations. Usually, you go to these sites to pay your respects. And also to perhaps to air your views about the root causes of such incidents." When told that Americans believed that Iran exported terrorism and would be offended by the "photo op", he replied, "Well, I'm amazed. How can you speak for the whole of the American nation?...You are representing a media and you're a reporter. The American nation is made up of 300 million people. There are different points of view over there".
In an April 2008 speech, Ahmadinejad described the September 11 attacks as a "suspect event", saying that all that happened was that "a building collapsed". He stated that the death toll was never published, that the victims' names were never published, and that the attacks were used subsequently as pretext for the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. That October, he expressed happiness about the 2008 global economic crisis and what he called "collapse of liberalism". He said the West has been driven to a dead-end and that Iran was proud "to put an end to liberal economy". The previous month, he had told the UN General Assembly, "The American empire in the world is reaching the end of its road, and its next rulers must limit their interference to their own borders".

U.S. military revises plans
In March 2005, the United States revised its Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations to include preemptive or possibly preventive use on non-nuclear states.
In August 2005, Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, stated that American Vice President Dick Cheney had instructed STRATCOM to prepare "a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States... a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons...not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States". Tactical nuclear weapons were specified because the targets are "hardened or are deep underground" and would not be destroyed by non-nuclear warheads.In 2006, Jorge Hirsch, Michel Chossudovsky, the Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran and Seymour M. Hersh also stated that the United States planned to use nuclear weapons against Iran.
On April 18, 2006, a journalist asked Bush, "Sir, when you talk about Iran, and you talk about, how you have to have diplomatic efforts, you often say all options are on the table. Does that include, the possibility of a nuclear strike, is that something that your administration has plans about?" Bush replied, "All options are on the table".
The Iraq War has hurt American willingness to accept another war. A June 2006 CBS poll showed that 21 percent of Americans supported military action against Iran. 55 percent favored diplomacy, and 19 percent said Iran was not a threat to the United States. Some groups have organized opposition to an attack on Iran.

Iran's nuclear program
 Nuclear program of Iran
y
Since 2003, the United States has alleged that Iran has a program to develop nuclear weapons. Iran has maintained that its nuclear program is aimed only at generating electricity. The United States's position is that "a nuclear-armed Iran is not acceptable",but officials have denied that the United States is preparing for an imminent strike. The United Kingdom (UK), France and Germany have also attempted to negotiate a cessation of nuclear enrichment activities by Iran.
In June 2005, Condoleezza Rice said that International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) head Mohamed ElBaradei should either "toughen his stance on Iran" or not be chosen for a third term as IAEA head. Both the United States and Iran are parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The United States and other countries were alleged during the May 2005 NPT meeting to be in violation of the NPT through Article VI, which requires them to disarm. The IAEA has stated that Iran is in violation of a Safeguards Agreement related to the NPT, due to insufficient reporting of nuclear material, its processing and its useUnder Article IV, the treaty gives non-nuclear states the right to develop civilian nuclear energy programs. From 2003 to early 2006, tensions mounted between the United States and Iran while IAEA inspections of sensitive nuclear industry sites in Iran continued.
On March 8, 2006, American and European representatives noted that Iran has enough unenriched uranium hexafluoride gas to make ten atomic bombs, adding that it was "time for the Security Council to act".The unenriched uranium cannot be used either in the Bushehr reactor, which is a pressurized water reactor, nor in atomic bombs, unless it becomes enriched.

Bush's "wave of democracy"
George W. Bush has claimed that his administration's goal in Iraq was to bring democracy to countries in the Middle East and to oppose islamofascism. The anti-Iraq War World Tribunal on Iraq and others doubted the sincerity of this motive, pointing to what they believe to be an American campaign against academia in Iraq. Robert Dreyfuss, author of Devil's Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam, stated that American actions in the region support islamofascism rather than oppose it.

Iran fears of attack by the U.S.
Paul Pillar, the former CIA official who led the preparation of all National Intelligence Estimates (NIEs) on Iran from 2000 to 2005, told the InterPress Service that all NIEs on Iran during that period "addressed the Iranian fears of U.S. attack explicitly and related their desire for nuclear weapons to those fears". He added, "Iranian perceptions of threat, especially from the United States and Israel, were not the only factor, but were in our judgment part of what drove whatever effort they were making to build nuclear weapons". Another former CIA official, Ellen Laipson, said that "the Iranian fear of an attack by the United States has long been a standard element in NIEs on Iran". In 2005, the United States passed the Iran Freedom and Support Act, which appropriated millions of dollars for human rights Non-governmental organization (NGOs) working in Iran. Several politicians in both countries have claimed the Act is a "stepping stone to war", although the Act prohibits the use of force against Iran.
In May 2007, Iran's top diplomat Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki stated that Iran is "ready to talk" to the United States.That month, Iran announced willingness, under certain conditions, to improve its relations with the United States despite having passed up the opportunity for direct talks at the Iraq conference in Sharm El-Sheikh on May 3, 2007. The conference had been seen by the Americans as an opportunity to get closer to the Iranians and exchange gestures in a public forum.
[edit]U.S. military operations inside Iran
See also: People's Mujahedin of Iran#Alleged MEK Activity In Iran, Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan, and Jundullah
Scott Ritter has stated that CIA-backed bombings had been undertaken in Iran by the MEK, an opposition group included in the U.S. State Department list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations.[81] In April 2006, a blog called The Raw Story cited an unnamed UN source "close to" the UN Security Council, stating that the United States had used former MEK members as proxies in Iran for "roughly a year". The blog said that the proxies were made to "swear an oath to Democracy and resign from the MEK" before being incorporated into American military units and trained for their operations in Iran.
In March 2006, the Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan (PEJAK), an opposition group closely linked to the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) killed 24 members of the Iranian security forces. The PEJAK is linked to the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), which is listed by the U.S. State Department as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. Dennis Kucinich stated in an April 18, 2006, letter to Bush that PEJAK was supported and coordinated by the United States, since it is based in Iraq, which is under the de facto control of American military forces. In November 2006, journalist Seymour Hersh in The New Yorker supported this claim, stating that the American military and the Israelis are giving the group equipment, training, and targeting information in order to create internal pressures in Iran.
Global intelligence company Stratfor stated that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps was attacked in early 2007: "this latest attack against IRGC guards was likely carried out by armed Baloch nationalists who have received a boost in support from Western intelligence agencies". On April 3, 2007, the American Broadcasting Company (ABC) stated that the United States had supported Jundullah since 2005. The Washington Times has described Jundullah as a militant Islamic organization based in Waziristan, Pakistan and affiliated with Al-Qaeda that has claimed to kill approximately 400 Iranian soldiers.
The United States has escalated its covert operations against Iran, according to current and former military, intelligence, and congressional sources.They state that Bush sought up to $400,000,000 for these military operations, which were described in a secret Presidential Finding and are designed to destabilize Iran's religious leadership. The covert activities involve support of the minority Ahwazi Arab and Baluchi groups and other dissident organizations. United States Special Operations Forces have been conducting cross-border operations from southern Iraq, with Presidential authorization, since 2007. The scale and the scope of the operations in Iran, which involve the CIA and the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), have been significantly expanded in 2008.
The United States claims that Iran is backing Shiite militias in Iraq and supplying them with arms in order to wage a proxy war on America. The United States said that 170 Americans have died in this proxy war, but Iran denies these charges. Iraqi prime minister Nouri Maliki has praised Iran for its providing security and fighting terrorism in Iraq. In May 2008, the Los Angeles Times reported that both American military spokesmen and Iraqi officials backed off from some of the accusations against Iran when American experts examined weapons and munitions recovered from Shiite militias and found that they did not originate in Iran. American and Iranian ambassadors in Iraq have engaged in direct talks, but tensions remain high over this issue.
A former Iranian diplomat, Nosratollah Tajik, was accused by the United States of smuggling arms. He was set to appear in court on April 19, 2007.

2006 sanctions against Iranian institutions
 Sanctions against Iran, Current international tensions with Iran, and United Nations Security Council Resolution 1747
Pushing for international sanctions against Iran because of its nuclear program, the United States accused Iran of providing logistical and financial support to Shi'a militias in Iraq. Iran denied this claim. The American government imposed sanctions on an Iranian bank on September 8, 2006, barring it from direct or indirect dealings with American financial institutions. The move against Bank Saderat Iran was announced by the undersecretary for treasury, who accused the bank of transferring funds for terrorist groups, including $50,000,000 to Hezbollah. While Iranian financial institutions are barred from directly accessing the American financial system, they are permitted to do so indirectly through banks in other countries. He said the United States government would also persuade European financial institutions not to deal with Iran.

2007 US raids Iran Consulate General

In 2007, American armed forces raided the Iranian Consulate General located in Erbil, Iraq and arrested five staff members. Sources[who?] said that American forces landed their helicopters around the building, broke through the consulate’s gate, disarmed the guards, confiscated documents, arrested five staff members, and left for an undisclosed location. People living in the neighborhood were told they could not leave their homes. Three people who left their homes were arrested, and a wife of one of these men confirmed her husband's arrest.
Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Mikhail Kamynin said that the raid was an unacceptable violation of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. The Kurdistan Regional Government also expressed their disapproval.
At a hearing on Iraq on January 11, 2007, United States Senator Joseph Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told Rice that the Bush Administration did not have the authority to send American troops on cross-border raids. Biden said, "I believe the present authorization granted the president to use force in Iraq does not cover that, and he does need congressional authority to do that. I just want to set that marker". Biden sent a follow-up letter to the White House asking for an explanation on the matter.
The same day, Iran's foreign ministry sent a letter to Iraq's foreign ministry, asking Iraq to stop the United States from interfering with Iraq-Iran relations. The official said, "We expect the Iraqi government to take immediate measures to set the aforesaid individuals free and to condemn the US troopers for the measure. Following up on the case and releasing the arrestees is a responsibility of primarily the Iraqi government and then the local government and officials of the Iraqi Kurdistan".
On November 9, American forces released two Iranian diplomats after 305 days, as well as seven other Iranian citizens. The officials were captured in the raid, and the others had been picked up in different parts of the country and held for periods ranging from three months to three years. American officials said, "The release followed a careful review of individual records to determine if they posed a security threat to Iraq, and if their detention was of continued intelligence value". American forces still hold 11 Iranian diplomats and citizens.

IRGC terrorist designation
The United States has opposed the activities of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) based on "the group's growing involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as its support for extremists throughout the Middle East". The United States branded the IRGC a terrorist organization, and Iran responded by declaring the CIA and U.S. Army to be terrorist organizations. The Iranian resolution cited American involvement in dropping nuclear bombs in Japan in World War II, using depleted uranium munitions in the Balkans, bombing and killing Iraqi civilians, and torturing terror suspects in prisons.
President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan has argued that Iran is "a helper and a solution" for Afghanistan, and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki of Iraq stated that Iran has a "positive and constructive" role in helping the Iraqi government improve security in his wartorn nation. When asked if Iran is supplying weapons to the Taliban by Voice of America, a U.S.-funded outlet, Ahmadinejad said the United States does not want Iran to be friends with Afghanistan: "What is the reason they are saying such things?"
Joseph Cirincione, a nuclear proliferation expert at the Center for American Progress, said that "the only way you could get a nuclear deal is as part of a grand bargain, which at this point is completely out of reach". Michael Rubin, a senior research fellow with the American Enterprise Institute, said he feared the IRGC designation "might exculpate the rest of the regime when, in reality, the IRGC's activities cannot be separated from the state leadership of Supreme Leader Khamenei or President Ahmadinejad". The Iranian newspaper Kayhan quoted the commander of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards as threatening to deal heavier blows against the United States in response to the designation.Mohammad Khatami, former Reforms Front Iranian President hoped to "remind those in the U.S. Congress or elsewhere working for the benefit of the American nation to stand against these measures or the wall between the two countries grow taller and thicker".
This is the first time that official armed units of sovereign states are included in a list of banned terrorist groups.Kaveh L. Afrasiabi, a former consultant to the UN's program of Dialogue Among Civilizations, stated in Asia Times Online that the move has possible legal implications: "Under international law, it could be challenged as illegal, and untenable, by isolating a branch of the Iranian government for selective targeting. This is contrary to the 1981 Algiers Accord's pledge of non-interference in Iran's internal affairs by the US government".News leaks about the prospective designation worried European governments and private sector firms, which could face prosecution in American courts for working with the IRGC.

2008 Naval dispute

2008 US-Iranian naval dispute
The American government has stated that naval stand-offs between Iranian speedboats and American warships occurred in the Strait of Hormuz in December 2007 and January 2008. American officials accused Iran of harassing and provoking their naval vessels, but Iran denied the claim. The United States presented audio and video footage of the incident, which included threats made to the Americans. Iranians have told The Washington Post that the accent in the recording does not sound Iranian. Iran has accused the United States of creating a "media fuss" and has released its own abridged video recording of the incident, which does not contain threats. There has been significant confusion as to the source of the threatening radio transmissions. According to the newspaper Navy Times, the incident could have been caused by a locally famous heckler known as the "Filipino Monkey".

Covert action against Iran
In 2008, New Yorker reporter Seymour Hersh detailed American covert action plans against Iran involving the CIA, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), and Special Forces. He also stated that the United States was supporting several groups that are performing acts of violence inside Iran. He wrote, "The use of Baluchi elements, for example, is problematic, Robert Baer, a former C.I.A. clandestine officer who worked for nearly two decades in South Asia and the Middle East, told me. 'The Baluchis are Sunni fundamentalists who hate the regime in Tehran, but you can also describe them as Al Qaeda,' Baer told me." He also states that the United States was supporting Jundallah, a Sunni and Salafi group; the People's Mujahedin of Iran; and the PJAK.
Journalist David Ignatius of the Washington Post asserted that American covert action "appears to focus on political action and the collection of intelligence rather than on lethal operations". Iranian commentator Ali Eftagh stated that the covert actions are being made public by the American government as a form of psychological warfare.

Other 2008 events
A meeting in Baghdad between Iranian and American diplomats was "the first formal direct contact after decades during which neither country has been willing to talk to the other." Asia Times commentator Kaveh L Afrasiabi noted that success in United States-Iran nuclear negotiations depends on Iranian perception of American respect.
Congressional Resolution 362 calls for a naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. As of June 2, 2008, the resolution had 146 co-sponsors. In January 2009, The New York Times reported that the United States had rejected a 2008 appeal from Israel to attack Iran's main nuclear complex.

Panel's message to Obama
A panel of 20 Americans, who include academics and former ambassadors, warned against a military attack on Iran and called for unconditional negotiations, saying that dialogue was the only viable option to break "a cycle of threats and defiance". The panel included former special envoy to Afghanistan James Dobbins, former ambassador to the UN Thomas Pickering, and Middle East scholars from American universities. They called on the United States to replace calls for regime change with a long-term strategy, allow Iran a "place at the table" in shaping the future of Iraq and Afghanistan, offer security assurances in the nuclear talks, and re-energize the Arab-Israeli peace process.

Obama Administration

Two days after Barack Obama was elected president in November 2008, Ahmadinejad issued the first congratulatory message to a newly elected American president since 1979: "Iran welcomes basic and fair changes in U.S. policies and conducts. I hope you will prefer real public interests and justice to the never-ending demands of a selfish minority and seize the opportunity to serve people so that you will be remembered with high esteem".
In his inaugural speech, President Obama said:
To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West — know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.
Ahmadinejad issued a list of grievances, including the 1953 coup, support for Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq war, and the Iran Air Flight 655 incident. In March 2009, an official delegation of Hollywood actors and filmmakers met with their Iranian counterparts in Tehran as a symbol of United States-Iran relations, but Javad Shamghadri, the Arts Adviser to Ahmadinejad, rejected it and said, "Representatives of Iran’s film industry should only have an official meeting with representatives of the academy and Hollywood if they apologize for the insults and accusations against the Iranian nation during the past 30 years".
On March 19, 2009, the beginning of the festival of Nowruz, Obama spoke directly to the Iranian people in a video saying, "The United States wants the Islamic Republic of Iran to take its rightful place in the community of nations. You have that right—but it comes with real responsibilities".

Roxana Saberi and detained diplomats
In April 2009, Iranian-American journalist Roxana Saberi was sentenced to eight years in prison after being convicting of spying for the United States. She was accused of possessing a classified document but denied the charge. After spending four months in prison, she was released in May, and the charge was dropped.
On July 9, 2009, the United States released five Iranian diplomats (Mohsen Bagheri, Mahmoud Farhadi, Majid Ghaemi, Majid Dagheri and Abbas Jami), who had been held since January 2007.Some analysts[who?] believe this was a part of hostage exchange deal between the countries. The U.S. State Department said the release was not part of a deal with Iran but was necessary under an American-Iraqi security pact.

Iranian presidential elections 2009
ranian presidential election, 2009
On June 12, 2009, Obama said of the Iranian presidential election: "We are excited to see what appears to be a robust debate taking place in Iran".Ahmadinejad's landslide win, which led to fraud allegations and widespread protests, received little comment from the United States. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs stated, "Like the rest of the world, we were impressed by the vigorous debate and enthusiasm that this election generated, particularly among young Iranians. We continue to monitor the entire situation closely, including reports of irregularities".
Vice President Joe Biden said, "It sure looks like the way they're suppressing speech, the way they're suppressing crowds, the way in which people are being treated, that there's some real doubt". On June 15, State Department spokesman Ian Kelly declared that the US was "deeply troubled by the reports of violent arrests and possible voting irregularities".

Detention of U.S. Hikers over Kurdish Border
Three American hikers were arrested on July 31, 2009, in Iran after they crossed into Iranian territory. Reports say the hikers accidentally crossed into Iran while hiking between Halabja and Ahmad Awa in the Kurdish Region of Iraq.

Al-Qaeda Prisoners
Since the beginning of the War in Afghanistan, the United States believes that Al-Qaeda operatives have snuck into Iran. The United States has expressed concern about Iran possibly letting these prisoners leave the country, in violation of a UN treaty.

New Iran Sanctions

This article is outdated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. Please see the talk page for more information. (July 2010)
In April 2010, the United States increased pressure to impose a new round of sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program. Turkey and Brazil opposed new sanctions. Some think-tanks, such as the CEE Council, have argued that the Iranian nuclear crisis could deepen the Turkey-European Union rift and trigger a new arms race in the Persian Gulf. Obama signed the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010 on July 1, 2010.

Strict enforcement of currency embargo
In the case of United States v. Banki, on June 5, 2010, a U.S. citizen was convicted of violating the Iran Trade Embargo by failing to request Iranian currency transfer licenses in advance from the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC).
[edit]Disappearance of Shahram Amiri
Iranian nuclear scientist Shahram Amiri disappeared in May 2009, and Iran accused the United States of abducting him. On the July 13, 2010, the BBC reported that Amiri had taken refuge in the Iranian interests section of Pakistani Embassy in Washington, D.C. and sought help to reach Iran.
Economic relations

Trade between Iran and the United States reached $623 million in 2008. According to the United States Census Bureau, American exports to Iran reached $93 million in 2007 and $537 million in 2008. American imports from Iran decreased from $148 million in 2007 to $86 million in 2008. This data does not include trade conducted through third countries to circumvent the trade embargo, but it does include the nearly 10,000 special licenses granted by the United States Treasury Department to American companies over the past decade.
American exports to Iran include cigarettes ($73 million), corn ($68 million); chemical wood pulp, soda or sulphate ($64 million); soybeans ($43 million); medical equipment ($27 million); vitamins ($18 million); and vegetable seeds ($12 million). In 2010, American exports to Iran dropped by 50% to $281.8 million.

(source:wikipedia)