Iran appears to have reversed its stand on an early meeting of the UN Security Council. Last Monday Iranian officials in Teheran welcomed the UN Secretary-General, Mr Kurt Waldheim’s initiative in this regard and wondered why the United States has withdrawn its earlier opposition to a meeting of the council. On Tuesday Teheran radio broadcast a statement issued by Ayatollah Khomeini questioning the council’s right to “appraise the case of the hostages whose espionage has been proven to our nation” as well as that of the Shah on the ground that such an appraisal was possible only in Iran because “the evidence of the crimes is in Iran and cannot be transferred abroad.” This about-turn provides some confirmation, even if an indirect one, for the view that the revolutionary council is divided between the hawks, who are not interested in an early resolution of the crisis resulting from the seizure of the American embassy, and the doves, who are looking for a way out, and that the Ayatollah finally leans on the side of the former because he is so possessed by hatred for the United States and the Shah that he is unable to appreciate the risks involved, and that a new anti-American wave is sweeping everything before it in Iran. No one can be sure that this view is justified because so little is known about what is happening in the revolutionary council. But if it is, the world is in for a long impasse between the United States and Iran. For, on this reckoning, even the proposed departure of the Shah from New York in a week or so may not satisfy the Islamic radicals and persuade them to release the hostages.
Apparently the Ayatollah and his aides have convinced themselves that while America can flex its muscles and maintain a powerful task force in the Gulf region, it cannot resort to military intervention partly because it cannot possibly rescue the hostages and partly because it cannot be sure that such an action on its part will not lead to the widespread closure and sabotage of oil fields in the area. They may well be right in their assessment, though American administrations have shown themselves capable of thoroughly irrational acts in the past, the invasion of Kampuchea in 1970 being an outstanding example. But the Iranian ruling group cannot possibly ignore other developments for long. Iran is beginning to be isolated even within the Muslim world. It did not get much support at the recent Arab League summit at Tunis. Indeed, even the Palestinian Liberation Organisation, which the Ayatollah has tried to befriend, was rather lukewarm towards Teheran. And on top of it comes the report that something like an alliance is shaping up between the radical Iraqi government and the pro-US conservative Saudi rulers against Iran. The report is credible at least to the extent that both feel threatened by the Ayatollah’s fundamentalism.
The Times of India, 29 November 1979