Word: americans
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1970-1979
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...point of the conflict remained the occupied American embassy in Tehran. Inside the compound, 600 members of the "Muslim Students of the Imam Khomeini Line" split the hostages into two groups. Half were in the ambassador's residence, half in two yellow bungalows near by. The treatment of the hostages was believed to have improved somewhat, though some of the men still had their hands tied. The women were guarded by chador-clad girls clutching automatic rifles. Early in the week the captors released a taped message from one of the Marine prisoners, Kevin Hermening, complaining that he didn...
...three British members of an NBC television crew were arrested near the embassy, but were quickly released. On another occasion, a deeply distraught American woman, apparently the relative of a hostage, appeared at the gates with a child in hand. She suddenly began to shout obscenities at the guards. In an instant the mob started to surge toward her, but photographers provided a distraction, and in the confusion she was quickly led away. Behind her, the crowd kept murmuring, "Kill her, kill her." Said a Western diplomat: "The crowd now represents a 'third force,' and it has to be reckoned...
...West German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt and British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, in particular, had strongly supported Carter. Schmidt told colleagues: "The West must show unity. We must back the U.S." If the Europeans were restrained, it was probably because 1) it was a time for "cool professionalism," as an American diplomat put it; 2) the U.S. had not asked for or expected stronger public support; and 3) Iran supplies 9% of West Germany's oil imports and 20% of Britain...
Perhaps the trickiest question about U.S. policy is whether or not the Administration should have allowed the Shah to come to New York, the act that brought about the seizure of the American embassy. This was a serious Carter mistake, believes Richard Bulliet, a member of Columbia University's Middle East Institute, who thinks the decision reinforced Iranians' fears that the U.S. planned to restore the Shah to power, as it did in 1953. Says he: "Those currently running Iran could only interpret the decision as hostile. The admission of the Shah to this country sort of confirms...
...however. Three times the Bazargan government assured the Administration that it could protect the embassy against attack. One of the assurances came after the Shah was admitted to the U.S. and the demonstrators started shouting in Tehran's streets. There was an encouraging precedent. Last February when anti-American protesters seized the embassy, Iran's government moved quickly and efficiently to bring them under control. But the U.S. should have been more aware of how frail the Bazargan government was. The Administration was simply too optimistic, and it did not have sound enough intelligence information...