THE PRESS WEDNESDAY, APRIL 9, 1980. U.S. reaction to Iran

Press, 9 April 1980, Page 18

THE PRESS WEDNESDAY, APRIL 9, 1980. U.S. reaction to Iran

If the Government of Iran had taken charge, of the.- '49 American hostages from 'the .American .Embassy, an important step towards their release would have been taken. By rejecting the idea; the Iranian religious leader, Ayatollah Khomeiny, has prolonged the crisis which is stretching the limits of. American tolerance. President Carter had to make some response and the severing of diplomatic relations was. one of the more restrained moves he could have taken. The extent to which that move, and the moves to restrict exports to Iran, will affect other countries will show in time. Economic sanctions db not work quickly, though Iran’s wish to get the United States to declare that it would not take further actions against Iran is an indication that the Government of Iran, at least, is not indifferent to American sanctions. • A rasher , man than President Carter might have attempted. to use force before, now to bring about the, release of the hostages held by the students. .Teheran is a sprawling city and it would have proved impossible to' carry ,out a raid similar to that mounted by the Israelis on Entebbe to free airliner passengers. The lives of the hostages would have been seriously endangered.

President Carter has made the safe return of the hostages one of his first concerns. If he holds to his. present course he is unlikely to try to use force unless the lives of the hostages are already threatened, as they might be if the Iranians put them on trial and face them, with the possibility of a death sentence or harsh treatment if found guilty. An attempt to uphold American honour or simply punish Iran might then take precedence over the safety of the hostages.

Even then, the Americans would have to calculate whether the use of force would be justified. It would certainly unite the Iranian people against the United States. That would, be one disadvantage. The Soviet Union might argue that the United States was intervening in Iranian affairs and might even argue that it had a right to intervene itself under those circumstances because Iran shares a border with the Soviet Union. Such a reaction from the Soviet Union would have incalculable results.

The reaction of the rest of the Islamic world and of the non-aligned world generally could easily be strongly against the United States action. At present the Soviet Union is in disfavour with the non-aligned countries because of the invasion of Afghanistan. That does not bring the United States into favour, but American force in Iran would provide . a focus which would take -away the attention on Afghanistan.

Almost certainly the Soviet Union was surprised and even shocked by the depth of feeling'it aroused in the nonaligned world over the invasion of Afghanistan and this in itself is a restraint. The United States would think twice about throwing away this advantage over the Soviet Union for the sake of an ineffectual rescue attempt or the punishment of Iran.

There is some hint that the economic sanctions already- applied will get tougher. A blockade in the Gulf might disrupt trade, but in the present state of relations between, the Soviet Union and the United States, it is not likely that President Carter would get the unqualified support he would need to make a blockade work' over land borders as well. Such a blockade would certainly have a considerable impact. It might include exports from Iran as well. This would help to starve Iran of foreign exchange but it would also starve the world of about two million barrels of oil a day, and the resulting high prices would make the oil exporters grow richer and the rest of the world all the more desperate for fuel. This course is unlikely to commend itself to President Carter..

New Zealand is going to be affected in one way or another. Although the resolution on sanctions, vetoed by the Soviet Union in the Security Council on January 13, specifically excluded food and medicines, as did the American announcement soon afterwards, food exports may be reconsidered. New Zealand’s important exports of lamb might receive attention. In any event New Zealand exports wool to Iran; it is used in Carpets, which are Iran’s biggest non-oil export. How much will the United States demand of New Zealand and how much should New Zealand give?

President Carter made 'a mistake in not gaining international support before seeking a boycott of the Olympic Games and may consult widely this time before he announces a policy and expects all friends to follow' America’s lead. New Zealand’s trade interests in Iran are considerable. Yet the. humanitarian importance of seeing the hostages returned safely cannot be lightly set aside. The action of Ayatollah Khomeiny in leaving the hostages in the hands of the students is irresponsible and is no kind of encouragement to any thought of good and secure diplomatic relations with Iran. . New Zealand should be doing everything it can through its own representation in Iran to help free the hostages. New Zealand will • undoubtedly put its own concerns about trade high on the list, of its priorities but it should not neglect to press for the hostages’ release while it can maintain reasonable relations with the Iranians.