With support from the University of Richmond

History News Network puts current events into historical perspective. Subscribe to our newsletter for new perspectives on the ways history continues to resonate in the present. Explore our archive of thousands of original op-eds and curated stories from around the web. Join us to learn more about the past, now.

Con Coughlan: Why Iran hates Britain so much

[Con Coughlan is the author of 'Khomeini's Ghost: Iran Since 1979', published by Macmillan.]

Not so long ago, Britain was held in such low esteem in Iran that it was simply dismissed as the "little Satan". So far as the ayatollahs were concerned, the real enemy was America, the "great Satan", whose love of liberty and free market capitalism was thought to pose the gravest threat to the Islamic revolution's survival.

It was for this reason that the American embassy, rather than the British, was occupied by the Revolutionary Guards in Tehran soon after Ayatollah Khomeini seized power in 1979, and its 66 staff held hostage. The expansive grounds of Britain's diplomatic mission, which hosted Winston Churchill during the Tehran conference in 1943, were briefly occupied by the Guards during Iran's revolutionary turmoil, but then evacuated because the mullahs did not regard Britain as being of sufficient importance to hold it to ransom.

But 30 years later it seems all that has changed as it is now Britain, rather than America, that finds itself on the receiving end of the ayatollahs' ire. After initiating last week's tit-for-tat diplomatic expulsions, which saw two middle-ranking British diplomats expelled from Tehran for allegedly fomenting anti-government demonstrations, the Iranian authorities have arrested a further nine British embassy employees. Although some of the workers have since been released, there has been no let-up in the regime's anti-British rhetoric.

After Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader, launched the initial anti-British tirade by denouncing Britain as the "most treacherous" of the regime's enemies, there has been no shortage of prominent Iranians lining up to denounce the "devious" British. At the heart of the dispute is Tehran's insistence that British spies have been responsible for stirring up the worst street protests Iran has experienced since 1979. Manouchehr Mottaki, Iran's Foreign Minister, even went so far as to accuse Britain of sending planes filled with agents to Iran "with special intelligence and security ambitions".

In the past, Iran's purges and executions have been directed against those accused of spying for America or Israel. But the emergence of Britain as the mullahs' latest bête noire suggests Anglo-Iranian relations are about to undergo another period of intense strain.

To some extent the decision by the Iranian regime to direct its anger against Britain is a consequence of President Barack Obama's impact on the international scene. During the Bush administration, when Washington regarded Iran as part of the "axis of evil" of rogue states, Tehran had no hesitation about denouncing Washington's attempts to undermine the Islamic revolution.But Mr Obama's arrival at the White House has signalled a new start in Washington's approach to Iran,
with the American President offering to conduct face-to-face talks with Tehran if the regime agrees to "unclench its fist".

Similarly, Mr Obama's Cairo speech earlier this month, in which he spoke of a new beginning between the US and Muslims around the world, has already made a deep impression on the Middle East. The result of Lebanon's general election, in which the moderate, pro-Western parties defeated the radical, Iran-backed Hizbollah Islamic group, has been attributed to the "Obama effect".

Although the hardline conservatives who run Iran would be loath to admit it, Tehran is also starting to feel the pressure from the Obama administration, particularly over
its nuclear programme. Soon Washington will seek to establish a dialogue with Iran to resolve the nuclear crisis, and the Iranian government is well aware that it will be far harder to say "no" to Mr Obama than it was to spurn Mr Bush.

The removal of America as the focal point of Iran's anti-Western rhetoric makes Britain, which remains America's closest ally in Europe, a ready-made replacement. And whereas the hostility between Iran and the US only goes back three decades – to Khomeini's revolution, to be precise – the climate of mutual suspicion, recrimination and antipathy that exists between London and Tehran dates back centuries...
Read entire article at Telegraph (UK)