1

2

Table of Contents

Introduction Into Historical------------------------------------------------------------------ 3

Historical Background------------------------------------------------------------------------ 4-6

Officer Biographies---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7-10

Possible Solutions------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 11-13

Questions to Consider-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14-15

Works Cited-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16-17

3

Introduction to Historical

This year’s Historical Committee will test delegates in a different way then they may

have been taught in the past. Each delegate will represent an important figure in the outcome of

the Iranian Hostage Crisis of the 1980’s. Delegates should prepare in the best way they can by

researching the policies and portfolio powers of the person they intend to represent. Be sure to

stick to these policies the best way you can.

In addition to representing a person rather than a country, there will be no resolutions

passed in this committee. This committee will solely be run with the use of Directives. Directives

are short and to the point. There is no need for the use of preambulatory clauses in directives.

Simply state what you intend to get done and send it up to the chair where a simple majority is

needed for it to pass. In addition to directives, press releases will be available for delegates to

create in order to get information to the “general public.” There will be a crisis staff where

delegates can send notes and ask questions if any information is needed.

This brings up the last thing you need to know about the Historical Committee this year.

This committee will be crisis oriented. Be prepared to handle any crisis thrown your way during

debate. The best way to handle crises is to know your person inside and out. Become that person,

and you will find that it will be easier for you to figure out what he or she would have done.

Also, please be aware that in your position papers, plagiarism will not be tolerated. Do your

research and follow your policies and this year’s debate will be one to never forget. Good Luck!

-Historical Committee Chairs

4

Historical Background

The Iranian Hostage Crisis, which lasted from 1979 to 1981, was the first time the

United States dealt with Islamic terrorism. The crisis had its roots in tension between Iran and

the U.S over an intense conflict over oil. American and British corporations controlled most of

Iran’s petroleum reserves since their discovery. This was an arrangement that the Western

powers refused to change. However, in 1951 Iran’s new prime minister, a European-educated

nationalist named Muhammad Mossadegh, announced his plan to nationalize the country’s oil

industry. In response to Mossadegh’s plan, the American C.I.A. and British intelligence devised

a plan to overthrow the Prime Minister and replace him with someone more focused in Western

interests.

In 1953, the American C.I.A. staged "Operation Ajax," which ousted the elected prime

minister and reinstated Mohammed Reza Pahlavi as Iran's traditional shah or monarch. This coup

agreement required that, in exchange for military/economic aid to Iran, there would a continuous

supply of oil to the U.S. The Shah’s government was secular, anti-communist and pro-Western,

and for that, Western powers such as the United States and Great Britain supported his regime.

Problems with the Shah

The coup was bitterly viewed by many Iranians as American intervention in their affairs.

American resentment grew since the shah turned out to be a brutal, unpredictable dictator; his

secret police (known as the SAVAK) tortured and executed thousands of the Iranian people. This

all occurred as the Iranian government spent billions of dollars on American-made weapons

while the Iranian economy suffered. The shah's wealth grew, and he acceded to the enticement of

a western lifestyle, which angered the Iranian people, especially the clergy, which began to

preach against the shah and his queen. This caused the masses to revolt and the shah was forced

to abdicate the throne again and leave the country for Egypt in January of 1979. By February 1st

1979, Ayatollah Khomeini returned to Iran after 14 years in exile, to lead the country.

The Crisis

After the exiled shah was diagnosed with lymphoma, he requested to be treated by

American doctors. His request was granted. This enraged Iranians so much that on November 4th

5

1979, after the Shah entered New York, a group of pro-Ayatollah students stormed the American

embassy in Tehran. Ayatollah Khomeini issued a statement of support for the students' actions.

Once inside, the students detained 66 hostages, mostly diplomats and embassy employees.

Thirteen hostages were released, mainly women, African-Americans, and citizens of countries

other than the U.S. (A 14th hostage developed health problems and was released on July 11th

1980, making the hostage count 52 by mid-summer).

President Carter applied economic pressure by ceasing oil imports from Iran and freezing

Iranian assets in the United States. Carter also tried several diplomatic initiatives to free the

hostages, all of which failed. In February 1980, Iran issued a list of demands for the hostages'

release. They included: the Shah's return to Iran, an apology for American involvement in Iran

(including the coup in 1953), and a promise to keep out of Iranian affairs in the future. From the

president's perspective, those demands couldn’t be met. On April 24th 1980, the United States

attempted a rescue mission that failed (the operation was known as “Eagle Claw”). After three of

eight helicopters were damaged in a sandstorm, the operation was aborted; eight people were

killed. Secretary of State Cyrus Vance, who had opposed the operation, resigned after the

mission's failure.

Release of the Hostages

On January 28th 1980, six American embassy employees, who avoided capture and hid in the

homes of Canadian Embassy officers, fled Iran. This was known as the Canadian Caper (by

1997 it was revealed that, along with the Canadian government, the CIA made the escape

achievable). On July 27th 1980, the Shah died of cancer in Egypt after returning there in March.

By September 12th 1980, the Iranian leader Ayatollah Khomeini set new terms for the hostages'

release, including the return of the Shah's wealth and the unfreezing of Iranian assets. Thus, a

deal was struck between the United States and the Iranian terrorists holding the hostages. The

United States would unfreeze Iranian assets in the U.S. in exchange for the hostages’ freedom.

Finally, on January 20th 1981, after 444 days in captivity, the American hostages were freed.

Effects on the International Community

The November 4th date holds significance for both sides of the conflict. Supporters of the

Islamic regime saw the capture of the U.S. embassy as a fundamental event in the rise of the

6

Islamic Republic and an unprecedented success against the United States. It remains a source of

pride which fuels the belief that a sovereign Iran can be strong and independent in the face of

Western domination. The Iran hostage crisis was a severe blow to U.S. morale and prestige,

coming in the aftermath of the Vietnam War. The U.S. - Iran relationship has become the world's

most dysfunctional relationship. No other two countries have been at each other’s throats so

intensely for so long. For most Americans, the story of U.S.-Iran relations began and ended with

the hostage crisis. Not to Iranians. For many, the hostage crisis was just one of many long-term

effects of the event that defined this complicated relationship: the 1953 coup. Iranians saw it as

the moment when the West robbed them of democracy and set them on the path toward brutal

dictatorship. Obviously the Iranian Hostage Crisis affected both Iran and the U.S., and with a

superpower involved, it’s made peace between the two nations troublesome.

7

Officer Biographies

1. Admiral Thomas B. Hayward - Chief of State of the United States Navy

Thomas B. Hayward has been a strengthening asset the U.S Navy, serving as a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and as the principal adviser to the President, Secretary of Defense and the National Security Council on all that dealt with the Navy. Hayward is the highest ranking member of the member of the U.S. Naval forces. As member of the U.S. Naval force his role was mostly administrative, which meant it does not involve operational authority over any naval forces. However, housed strategic methods to coordinate with naval leaders in future deployment.

2. General Lew Allen Jr. - Chief of Staff of the Air Force

Lew Allen Jr. is a United States Air Force four star general who is also the tenth Chief of State of the U.S. Air Force. As chief of staff, he serves as the senior uniformed Air Force officer responsible for the administration, training and equipping of a combined active duty. He also serves as a military adviser to the Secretary of Defense, the National Security Council and the President.

3. Kenneth M. Curtis - U.S. Ambassador to Canada

Kenneth M. Curtis severs as the U.S. Ambassador to Canada, he was the former two- term Governor of Maine. Throughout this crisis Canada will play an important role because the U.S. and Canada are in good relations and Canada may offer aid and security to this crisis. Ambassador Curtis’ role in crisis mainly includes relaying important information between the two countries. Also, he can negotiate with the Canadian government to inquire important information and find out about the pressing issues on the ground in Iran. He also has the power to influence the Canadian government to act during the crisis this can be very beneficial to the United States.

4. Kingman Brewster Jr. - U.S. Ambassador to United Kingdom

Kingman Brewster Jr. has been an asset to both the U.S. and U.K. From 1963 to 1977, Brewster was the President of Yale, after serving as president he became the U.S. Ambassador to the U.K. With this title Brewster has done a lot of compromises and negotiation to smooth relations between the U.S. and the U.K. As a result, the U.S. has close ties with the U.K. Embassy and they may provide aid and security within committee. Brewster’s main contribution to this crisis would include relaying important information between the two countries. He also has the power to influence the British government to act in this crisis.

5. Tip O’Neill - Speaker of the House

Tip O’Neill is a powerful person in this crisis. O’Neill has served as congressman for 34 years and was elected to the U.S. House of Representative in 1952 and later became Speaker of the House in 1977. He is known for his unique character for being outspoken and liberal. As the speaker of the house, his motto and political creed was “all politics are local”. O’Neill’s powers

8

in this crisis consists of introducing and advancing legislation as well as wielding considerable influence over his party, the Democrats, in the House.

6. Cyrus Vance - Secretary of States

In 1977, Cyrus Vance was appointed as Secretary of State. He has a unique way when approaching foreign policy. He emphasizes the importance of diplomatic resolution. He was the general of the Department of Defense and the Secretary of the Army, under Kennedy’s administration. With the title of Secretary of State comes a lot of power. Vance holds the power of being the head of the Department of State, and has the ability to conduct and negotiate diplomatic relations with other countries. He also advises the administration on foreign policy matter and diplomacy. Vance also serves as a foreign relations adviser to the President making him an important figure in this crisis.

7. Donald McHenry - U.S. Ambassador to the U.N.

As the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, McHenry represents the important issues and interests of the United States at the U.N. headquarters in New York City. McHenry is also frequently in contact with the President which he resorts and informs the President of pressing issues. Formally known as the Permanent Representative of the United States of America to the United Nations and Representative of the United States of America in the Security Council of the United Nations, the Ambassador is responsible for advocating and executing US Policy in the General Assembly, Security Council, and all of the UN’s other constituent organizations. Since the U.S. is a member of the permanent 5 states in the Security Council (P5), the Ambassador has veto power over any resolutions presented to the Council. This power has helped influence and operate the U.N.

8. Bernard Roger - Supreme Allied Commander of Europe

The Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) is one of NATO’s two strategic commanders and is the head of Allied Command Operations (ACO). He is responsible to NATO’s highest military authority, the Military Committee, for the conduct of all NATO military operations. Bernard Roger is the commanding officer of ACO and the Commander of the U.S. Europe Command. Typically he oversees all alliance operations and oversee ACO activities. He also has to power if needed to make NATO invade Iran. With this position comes a lot of responsibility and reason. Roger can command all NATO military operations that may take place however, he must first get the consent of other NATO members before any action takes place. This position is very vital for a crisis like the Iranian hostage crisis.

9. Hoosier Fardoust - Deputy Head of Savak

As a childhood friend of the last Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Hossein Fardoust had a lot of responsibilities as Deputy. He held the position of Deputy Head of Savak the feared Iranian intelligence agency for 10 years. With this title came a lot of important duties and authority, Fardoust was responsible to run daily affairs of the security and intelligence bureau. He also headed the Special Intelligence Bureau of Iran. Fardoust is one of the few generals in the Iranian military who did not fleet the country or was arrested after the regime collapsed during

9

the 1979 revolution which is very interesting due to all his efforts. Despite the termination of Savak, he somehow maintains many contacts in Iran. With these contacts Fardoust can obtain information and with the help of some organizations, may be capable of pulling off larger operations.

10. William H. Sullivan - U.S. Ambassador of Iran

William H. Sullivan served as the United States Ambassador to Iran from 1977 to 1979. He had also served as representative to Laos and the Philippines. Before his post in the Embassy, he joined the Navy after graduating high school and served as a gunnery officer on a destroyer, USS Hambleton. Very close with the Shah, Sullivan played an important part at the time of the crisis. He may have been the only key the United States held to free the hostages.

11. Thomas J. Watson, Jr - Soviet Ambassador

Thomas J. Watson Jr was the son of Thomas J Watson Sr. founder of International Business Machines Corporation. During World War II, Watson flew planes to Siberia on a lend-lease basis. After the war, he went back to his father’s company as chief officer. President Carter brought Watson back to government service by naming him the United States Ambassador to the Soviet Union. The big bumps in his period of service was due to the difficult relationship of the United States and Soviet Union caused by the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the United States boycott of the Moscow Olympics.

12. Frank Church - Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations

Frank Church played a key role in American foreign policy and foreign relations during the 1970s. Before becoming the Chairman of the Senate committee, Frank Church lost to Jimmy Carter in the Democratic presidential primary election in 1976. He has served as a senator from Idaho since 1957 and was appointed as Chairman of the Senate committee on foreign relations since 1979. At first, his career didn't seem to bright due to a few failed elections. But eventually, his career got right on track. He was commissioned to be the head of the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations from 1979 to 1981. This was the ultimate test of how far the United States would go in their foreign policy. Church is able to use his position in the Senate to encourage its members, especially the Democrats, to vote on laws. Together with the Speaker of the House, Frank Church exercises the power and influence to make Congress pass legislation regarding this crisis.

13. Eugene F. Tighe - Director of Defense Intelligence ō

Tighe was a decorated Air Force General that assisted President Carter in making decisions regarding military intelligence. The big involvement Tighe had was regarding military involve to in order to retrieve the hostages back to American soil. Tighe’s options and strategies could have taken this entire crisis in a totally different direction.

10

14. Gary Sick -U.S. Contact with Iraq

Gary Sick was President Carter's "special assistant" in the crisis with Iran due to his expert knowledge. He had advised the United States that any aggressive form of involvement with Iran would lead to the worsening of the situation. If there was to be any involvement, everything would have to be done diplomatically. In this way, Gary Sick became the middle man in between the United States and Iran.

15. Edward Meyer - Army Chief of Staff

General Meyer is the highest ranking officer in the Army. Due to his high rank, he is also advisor to multiple defense and intelligence communities and also President Carter. Even though he is such a high ranking officer, he did not have consent over military action. His main goal was to integrate diplomatic and combative policies together. Along with that, General Meyer also provided assistance to President Carter for military and diplomatic decisions.

11

Possible Solutions

The Iranian Hostage Crisis was a historical event without any true modern precedents,

so the powers involved needed to account for both the new methods of dealing with foreign

enemies and the power of improved espionage. One method the United States heavily

considered and acted upon was military intervention. The first and only plan used by the

United States Armed Forces was termed, “Operation Eagle Claw.” The original plan for

Operation Eagle Claw was to land helicopters and American soldiers in an uninhabited

Iranian desert, then attack the captive embassy through trucks and airlift the hostages out of

Iran.

Everything failed, however, when a Persian sandstorm known as a haboob grounded

all of the helicopters planned to man the assault. Plans were made to man another assault on

the embassy, but nothing came of it. The entire occurrence could have been easily avoided,

however, if only the American forces had paid more attention to the local environment or

chosen suitable vehicles for the assault. Similarly, the use of advanced radar equipment

would have helped identify the sandstorm that ended the mission.

Apart from the military operations, the Carter administration and its international

accomplices used diplomacy complementarily with military might. During the hostage crisis,

the United States imposed sanctions on Iran, limiting trade and contact between the newly

founded Islamic State and the reigning world superpower. With Iran’s neighbor Afghanistan

being invaded by the USSR, the loss of an international supporter and trade partner would’ve

only sealed a similar fate for Iran. This use of sanctions and economic threats would’ve help

to bring the radical Iranian authorities in line with the reality of the situation. Submission to

the west, however, would’ve also lain out Iran’s demise as well, but this time from within. If

12

the Iranian authorities had bowed to the west and released the hostages at the implication of

sanctions, they would’ve be no better in the eyes of the people than the puppet imperial

regime of the Shah, and public dissatisfaction would’ve been commonplace. As such,

tightening or loosening sanctions on Iran would’ve both had their benefits and detriments.

Other options lay within the field of diplomacy that the United States and her allies

had tried or were willing to try. In the famed Canadian Caper, the Canadian government and

the CIA had retrieved six escaped hostages through the embassy of Canada in Tehran.

Popularized in the movie Argo, the operation was the rare example of optimism and success

in the crisis. Intermediaries were also used in the conflict to reduce the loss of prestige by

either state, with countries like Algeria becoming middle-men to return the hostages and

resolve financial problems between the two countries. By increasing the amount of covert

operations in Tehran to evacuate the hostages silently, bloodshed could have been avoided

and the hostages could’ve been saved.

If a covert operation failed, however, hostages would’ve likely been harmed and the

tensions between the two countries could’ve risen. In this manner, espionage and the use of

undercover rescuers could’ve decided the lives of the hostages. In an opposite manner, the

governments of the United States and Iran may have also sought a third-party mediator, not

dissimilar to the actual use of Algeria in the crisis. Neutrally aligned countries in the region

could have negotiated for the release of hostages and the easing of sanctions, and in this

fashion a mediator could’ve also decided the fate of the hostages and of the crisis as a whole.

In all, the fate of the hostages and the relations between the Islamic State of Iran and

the west lies in the actions of those in the Carter cabinet. Whether the approach is military

13

intervention and covert operations or international mediation and sanctioning, there is no

definitive answer to the hostage crisis other than the one that actually happened. Each plan

and action has its benefits and its drawbacks, and it’s the duty of those with the power to

make a change to decide which path to take.

14

Questions to consider when writing the position paper

1. With a feeble Iranian government and the incitement of Western powers, especially the

United States and its allies, this situation might escalate into a war within the region.

How can members of the Historical Security Council effectively use solidarity,

diplomacy, and negotiation to diffuse the situation and arrive at a peaceful solution?

2. Will the United States entertain the demands the Iranian authorities may have?

3. How will this crisis affect relations between the United States and the Middle East?

4. How will the United States take action against Khomeini’s Iran if they are considered

responsible for the takeover of the hostages?

5. How does this crisis affect the global image of the United States?

Questions to consider when making directives

1. Impact of the Shah – How has the Shah impacted the crisis and how should or shouldn’t

the United States entertain the demands given by the Iranian government in regards to

returning the Shah?

2. Intervention in Iran – To free the innocent hostages as soon as possible, how should

intervention, either through military action, diplomatic pressure, or economic sanctions

be considered?

3. Iranian-American relationship – Because the future of United States foreign policy

regarding Iran is a significant effect of the hostage crisis, how should the restoration or

discontinuation of these ties be handled?

15

4. Future prevention of such crises – Considering the multifaceted nature of the crisis, how

should the body go about preventing the responsible factors in the future? America’s

stance in the Middle East, relations with Iran, and the right of intervention will be

debated.

5. What can be done about the public response to the crisis?

16

Works Cited

31 July 2014. <http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/15/world/meast/iran-hostage-crisis-fast-facts/>.

"A Classic Case of Deception." Central Intelligence Agency. Central Intelligence Agency, 27 June 2008. Web. 1 Aug. 2014. <https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/winter99-00/art1.html>.

"Algiers Accords." ParsiTimes. N.p., n.d. Web. 1 Aug. 2014. <http://www.parstimes.com/history/algier>.

Bowden, Mark. Guests of the Ayatollah: the first battle in America's war with militant Islam. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 2006. Print.

Bowden, Mark. "The Desert One Debacle." The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 1 May 2006. Web. 1 Aug. 2014. <http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2006/05/the-desert-one-debacle/304803/>.

CNN Library. "Iran Hostage Crisis Fast Facts." CNN. Cable News Network, 17 Mar. 2014. Web.

"Desert One and its Disorders." Journal of Military History. N.p., n.d. Web. 1 Aug. 2014. <https://muse.jhu.edu/journals/journal_of_military_history/v067/67.1cogan.html>.

Gendron, Chad. "Argo and the Canadian Caper." canadianculturething.com. N.p., 18 Mar. 2013. Web. 1 Aug. 2014. <http://canadianculturething.com/>.

"General Article: The Iranian Hostage Crisis." PBS. PBS, n.d. Web. 30 July 2014. <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/carter-hostage-crisis/>.

History.com Staff. "Iran Hostage Crisis." History.com. A&E Television Networks, n.d. Web. 28 July 2014. <http://www.history.com/topics/iran-hostage-crisis>.

"Iran hostage crisis." Infoplease. 2000–2014 Pearson Education, n.d. Web. 30 July 2014. <http://www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/history/iran-hostage-crisis.html>.

17

"Ken Taylor and the Canadian Caper." Government of Canada, Foreign Affairs Trade and Development Canada, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Communications, E-Communications Communications Products and Services. N.p., n.d. Web. 1 Aug. 2014. <http://international.gc.ca/history-histoire/people-gens/ken_taylor.aspx?lang=eng&view=d>.

Kinzer, Stephen. "Time to Get Over the Iran Hostage Crisis." The Daily Beast. Newsweek/Daily Beast, 19 Jan. 2011. Web. 1 Aug. 2014. <http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/01/19/iran-hostage-crisis-anniversary-is-time-to-get-over-it.html>.

"Modern Warfare: Special Operations, Operation Eagle Claw || kuro5hin.org." Modern Warfare: Special Operations, Operation Eagle Claw || kuro5hin.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 1 Aug. 2014. <http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/6/30/141359/710>.

The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica. "The aftermath." Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Encyclopedia Britannica, 6 June 2014. Web. 1 Aug. 2014. <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/272687/Iran-hostage-crisis/248559/The-aftermath>.

"UMBC Center For History Education | Teaching American History Lesson Plans." Center for History Education Online Lessons. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 July 2014. <http://www.umbc.edu/che/tahlessons/lessondisplay.php?lesson=70>.