US and Iran Conflict: Social Sciences Research Paper

US and Iran Conflict
Name
Subject
Professor
Date
US and Iran Conflict
Terrorism has always been a major challenge and a cause of economic crisis across the globe. America, for instance, has been in the spotlight over Terrorist attacks over decades. Acts of terror are barbaric actions that terrorists use by causing havoc to push their agenda through. Terrorism not only works because it causes fear in the masses, but because such actions trigger governments and targeted people to react in the ways that the terrorists intended. For instance, the Republicans Army of Irish bombed cars, parks, and pubs in the United Kingdom since their leadership knew that such attacks would prompt the British government to relinquish Northern Ireland. The Al-Qaeda similarly targeted the Pentagon and the world trade as a strategy to raise the American costs for supporting Saudi Arabia and Israel, and as a way to provoke America to respond with their military in order to mobilize Muslims around the globe. In most cases, a much-targeted government ended up responding to the terrorist's demands, which demands an understanding of the cause and means that terrorists make governments accept their cause. America and Iran conflict present the latest related conflict between terrorists and governments. Terrorism is an act of malice, and targeted governments should never comply with their demands. Understanding the theoretical framework that prompts terrorist acts is an approach that helps in the general analysis of terror acts. This analytical essay will therefore give an analysis of the conflict between Iran and America by;
* Analyzing their historical background of America and Iran
* Analyzing the Bargaining model to the conflicts
* Analyzing domestic politics as an argument for the conflicts
Historical Background
The conflict between America and Iran traces back to when the Central Intelligence Agency masterminded the overthrowing of the Prime minister of Iran in 1953, to the increased tension right after President Trump killed Suleiman, Iran's general through an airstrike. Troubled relations between America and Iran take over 65 years. The crisis began right in 1953 when the CIA orchestrated an overthrow of Prime Minister Mossadeq, who had vowed to nationalize its oil industry. It followed the Iranian revolution in 1979. The Americans backed Shah, and Mohamed Reza Pahlevi fled the country following continued strikes and demonstrations against his reign orchestrated by his religious and secular opponents. In 1981, the American embassy in Tehran was seized by protesters, which saw American hostages being held for a record 444 days. 52 hostages were finally released upon the inauguration of Ronald Regan as President. The other six Americans who had escaped got smuggled off Iran by soldiers posing as filmmakers. This events were well dramatized in film Argo an American Oscar-winning film. The Iran-contra scandal in 1986 where weapons were secretly shipped to Nicaragua instead of Hezbollah militants who had American hostages, it was a crisis that saw great political crisis for Reagan. The 1988 shooting of an Iranian passenger plane mistaken for a jet was another event that escalated conflicts between America and Iran. Nuclear tension and sanctions after Iran announced to be developing nuclear weapons saw America impose a sanction against Iran, which had their currency lose its value. In 2019, President Trump abandoned the Obamas administration's nuclear deal and reinstated sanctions against Iran and those who buy its oil. This saw the Iranians shoot an American drone and the gulf war. The recent tensions came up after Trump assassinated top Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani in Iraq, and Iran vowed to retaliate by severe revenge, which saw them abandon the nuclear accord in 2015.[Kydd, Andrew H., and Barbara F. Walter. "The strategies of terrorism." International Security 31, no. 1 (2006): 45]
America and Iran Conflict
Since Washington and Tehran openly exchanged fires, it is no doubt that the conflict between these two nations will continue right where it has always been for the last 40 years. The revolutionary guard of Iran still seeks to take on their revenge after killing their top general commander. But right after the killing of Soleimani, Iran understands that any launch of attack against any of their proxies could equally trigger a similar or worse strike by the Americans. The high stakes raised on this matter effectively restored a deterrence of the 'big stick' that allies and enemies of America have started to doubt because Trump never responded with military action to the Iranians' increased aggression. Critics of Trump see his actions to have equally ushered a new era that targets every American for assassination and kidnapping in the Middle East.
Trump was satisfied that Iran had learned their lesson and that he was ready for peace talks; this was after Iranians fired ballistic missiles on American bases in Iran, a move to avenge the killing of Soleimani. The supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, defined the strike as a slap in the Americans' face and so reiterated his long-term mission to ouster the American forces in Iran. State Department of United States refused to talk on whether there was a heads up on the missile attack. The spokesman of Iran had denied reports from foreign media suggesting possible coordination from the United States and Iran before the attack was made and the bases evacuated. Although Iran and America are more than willing to take a step back from war, the prevailing conditions still are as volatile as never. Iranian and American forces operate in very close proximity throughout the Middle East in regions such as Syria, Iraq, Bahrain, and Yemen, places where any miscalculation of an attack could lead to increased tensions again.[Lohmann, Sascha. "The convergence of transatlantic sanction policy against Iran." Cambridge Review of International Affairs 29, no. 3 (2016): 931]
The attack was a mere claim by Iran that was an attempt to distance itself from actions of retaliation. Since Iran are unable to take on American forces head-on, the Revolutionary Guard of Iran has therefore spent years developing militias in the tumultuous region. These fighters, trained, funded, and supplied by Iran, gives them an asymmetric advantage over the Americans and some plausible deniability whenever such attacks are carried out by. Islamic experts in militarism viewed such public attacks by Iran to be a demonstration of strength to suggest that Iran plays its audience. These attacks were coordinated by forces backed by Iran such as Asab al-Haq, who launched rocket attacks on the American troops in Iran bases, killing an American contractor and injuring other service members. These proxy groups were also responsible for protest in the American embassy in Iraq.[Ahsan, Syed Junaid. "Iran and US Relations: The Nuclear Quagmire." Defence Journal 21, no. 11 (2018): 14]
President Trump administration demonstrated how such actions and events were the ones that pushed America towards war, although members who briefed on the killing of Soleimani never supported such claims that the attacks were initiated to avoid an imminent attack in Iraq on American forces. American forces in Iraq remain at risk because militias in the region are set to attack at any time whenever American troops are sanctioned. Possible attacks could be taken by small and hard to combat drones, which is a technology provided by the Iranian government. The killing of Soleimani is an event that once again has seen an escalated tension and conflict between these two regions. Military officials are afraid that Iran may strategically design a lethal attack on American citizens as retaliation against the assassination of their top general by President Trump in 2020. It is a threat that not only points to American forces but also their allies.[]
The Bargaining Model of war
The biggest puzzle to understanding war is that wars are always very costly but always recur....