American and Western leaders often criticize Iran for its supposed untrustworthiness and aggressive behavior. They argue that Iran is unlikely to make or uphold agreements. However, it’s essential to remember that Iran has a rich history of diplomacy that spans over five thousand years. While negotiations with Iran can be challenging, a significant reason for this difficulty may be Iran’s skepticism regarding the United States, given its history of breaking agreements.
In 1945, the U.S. signed the United Nations Charter, emphasizing the importance of state sovereignty, and Iran was also a signatory. Yet, just eight years later, in 1953, the CIA, in collaboration with British intelligence, orchestrated Operation Ajax. This operation led to the overthrow of Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister, Mohammed Mossadegh, and reinstated Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, who had been deposed during World War II. This intervention violated the principles outlined in the UN Charter. Furthermore, the U.S. trained and equipped the Shah’s secret police, known as Savak, to suppress dissent, often labeling opposition as Soviet-backed.
In 1979, the Iranian people, frustrated with the Shah’s oppressive regime, overthrew him, leading to the establishment of a theocratic government. The aftermath of this revolution was tumultuous, and much of the information we receive about Iran is often filtered through a Western lens, which can exaggerate or misrepresent the situation.
In 1980, Iraq, with U.S. support, invaded Iran, igniting a brutal eight-year war that resulted in millions of casualties. Despite the use of chemical weapons by Iraq, the U.S. continued to back Saddam Hussein’s regime. The U.S. had previously signed multiple treaties prohibiting the use of chemical weapons, yet it disregarded these agreements during the conflict.
Following the Shah’s overthrow, the U.S. took aggressive actions against Iran, including seizing its foreign assets and imposing sanctions. These actions were carried out with little regard for international law. In 2003, Iran’s supreme leader declared a fatwa against nuclear weapons, a stance that has remained consistent. However, critics in the U.S. argue that Iran might eventually abandon this position, reflecting a broader distrust.
The Obama administration attempted to address these tensions by negotiating the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015. This agreement aimed to limit Iran’s nuclear capabilities in exchange for lifting sanctions and returning confiscated assets. However, the U.S. did not fully comply with the agreement and withdrew in 2018 under the Trump administration, reimposing sanctions on Iran.
In contrast, Israel has developed a nuclear arsenal without facing similar scrutiny or consequences. The U.S. has consistently supported Israel while condemning Iran, leading to perceptions of hypocrisy. U.S. intelligence reports have indicated that Iran is not actively pursuing nuclear weapons, yet the narrative around Iran remains fraught with suspicion.
The U.S. has also shown a pattern of disregarding treaties and international law, as seen in its treatment of detainees and its support for violent actions in the Middle East. This has contributed to a growing distrust among nations like Iran, which view U.S. foreign policy as aggressive and self-serving.
As tensions continue, many in Iran remain wary of making agreements with the U.S., given its history of broken promises and military interventions. This skepticism is compounded by the perception that the U.S. often prioritizes its interests over international norms and human rights. The result is a complex and fraught relationship that poses challenges for any future negotiations.