Memories are short, and only a few recall that in 1951, in open democratic elections, the popular Mohammad Mossadegh was elected as Prime Minister of Iran. Soon after, by government decree he nationalized the Anglo-Iranian oil company (known today as British Petroleum). Totally unacceptable by the British, as their Empire was rapidly coming to an end, and supported by the Americans, in a CIA led coup, Mossadegh was expelled from office and the Shah, Reza Pahlavi returned from exile.

In the following 26 years, the Shah became notoriously corrupt and heavy handed with the population, who in turn increased their hostility and hate towards him. By 1978 evidence of the Islamic Revolution became apparent, and in January the following year the Shah fled the country. Shortly after, the country was declared to be an Islamic Republic headed by the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. With the memory early on of the 1953 coup, relations between the new Iranian administration and the Washington have in the past 30 years remained tense. Over 55 years passed before President Barack Obama, acknowledged in his Cairo University speech on June 6, 2009 that “in the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government”. But the damage caused has yet to be mended.

Only a few, even among those who are worried about the threat of an Iranian use of a nuclear device against Israel, are aware of the fact that compared to other priority targets the Moslem Republic has, Israel is not first among them. The Iranian leaders remember well that in the eight year war initiated by Iraq in the summer of 1980, chemical warfare was used against them. Add that to the conventional warfare casualties and estimates are that Iran suffered many hundred of thousand of dead.

Both the Russians and the Americans were aware of the Iraqi use of chemical (an illegal mode of) warfare, yet like the UN and the rest of the world took no concrete steps to deter them. More aggravating to the Iranian Government, having learnt that the Americans had taken the position that they will prevent the downfall of the Saddam Hussein administration, they were also aware of the fact that the US was providing moderate support in intelligence and more to the Iraqis.

When in May 1987, an Iraqi plain attacked the USS Stark and caused 37 US casualties, the American rebuttal was minor, and that encouraged Saddam Hussein to believe himself stronger. Sometime later in April 1988, the American launched the most powerful combat operation naval planes neutralized the Iranian Sassan and Siri oil platforms and sank an Iranian battleship. Sometime later, the International Court of Justice rejected the Iranian demand for reparations but noted that the American attack was not justifiable. Then in July 1988, a missile launched from the USS Vincennes shot down a commercial Iranian Airbus plane, killing the 290 passengers on board.

In spite of the deep Moslem Republic leaders suspicions, dislike and apparent criticism of the United States over the past thirty years, the Administration in Washington, and the other leading Western Government never seriously attempted to gradually establish trust and ultimately cordial relations with Tehran that might contribute to reducing the evident long term regional tensions.

Although it has not quite clear when the Iranian leadership decided to proceed and develop the nation’s nuclear warfare capabilities, it was most probably taken after experiencing the momentous casualties they suffered when the Iraqis, applied with international impunity, chemical warfare against them. It was then that the Iranian leaders took the decision that in any future confrontation, they would not be caught as helpless, and instructed their specialists to proceed and produce their own weapons of mass destruction.

At this time, it is unclear in what way will the Iranians apply their newly gained power, once they have achieved their aim of producing nuclear weapons. Iran can clearly sense that it is encircled by a number of, mainly neighboring, countries that could threaten it. And they are obviously suspicious of the threats made by the Israeli Prime when Minister and other Israeli leader, when addressing this new power that could endanger Israel’s very being. The war-mongering statements made by the Iranian President Ahmadinajad have been a cause of worry and concern not only to Israel but also to Western leaders. These so made, have certainly not contributed to Iran’s security.

In the longer term prognosis it would be encouraging to keep in mind that in recent generations Iran never initiated hostile acts against its neighbors. Also, more than nearby nations, Iran has an impressive and civilized history of culture and achievements. Iranians are a people proud of their history and in their way eager to be recognized as such by the West. It would be advisable if the US, Europe and Israel, recognize these qualities and seek ways to enhance co-existence, cooperation and instruments that will ensure friendship and peace between the parties.

The exchanges in recent weeks between Iran and the West have been extensive and so far inconclusive. It may be hoped that the Washington will find a way to convince Tehran that it is sincere in its commitment to ameliorate tensions and that to do so it will find a way to address the Iranian leadership with the full respect they are entitled to expect.