After the fall of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi in 1979, Iran underwent a transformation under Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who established the Islamic Republic. Despite Khomeini’s public anti-Israel rhetoric, a covert relationship persisted between Israel and Iran, particularly during the Iran-Iraq War.
Israel’s Strategic Perspective
Israel viewed its security strategy as necessitating alliances with non-Arab states in the Middle East to counterbalance Arab states. Iran, with its military strength and access to oil, became a key partner. Although the Shah’s regime had strategic ties with Israel, the 1979 revolution brought a vehemently anti-Israel government to power. Despite the ideological divide, the geopolitical landscape, characterized by threats from Arab states and the Soviet Union, remained unchanged. Israel quickly capitalized on this by offering military aid to Iran, which found itself in dire need of support after the revolution.
The Iran-Iraq War and Israeli Assistance
The Iran-Iraq War, initiated by Iraq’s invasion of Iran in September 1980, saw both nations embroiled in a prolonged and devastating conflict. Despite Iran’s anti-Western stance, Israel provided substantial military support to Iran. This included clandestine sales of military equipment and dispatching military instructors, which proved crucial in helping Iran withstand Saddam Hussein’s forces.
The war began due to historical, political, and territorial disputes, central to which was the Shatt al-Arab waterway. Saddam Hussein sought to capitalize on Iran’s internal turmoil post-revolution, aiming to weaken Iran and settle territorial disputes in Iraq’s favor. The clash between Iran’s Shi’ite theocracy and Iraq’s secular Ba’athist regime further intensified hostilities. These factors culminated in Iraq’s invasion, starting a protracted war that lasted eight years, resulting in significant loss of life and economic damage for both nations.
The Motivations and Impacts
Israel’s support for Iran was driven by multiple factors. Strategically, strengthening Iran served as a counterbalance to Iraq, which was perceived as a significant threat. Additionally, Israel aimed to re-establish connections with Iran, a critical ally lost with the Shah’s overthrow. This clandestine relationship also facilitated Jewish emigration from Iran, ensuring the safe passage of Persian Jews to Israel and the United States.
The Arms Deals and Their Aftermath
The logistics of the arms deals were extensive. The first major transaction occurred in early 1980, involving the sale of F-4 Phantom fighter jet tires. As the war intensified, Israel increased its support, providing vital military supplies to Iran, which was under an arms embargo. Notable shipments included spare parts for F-4 jets, helicopters, and missile systems. These shipments were dispatched through various European channels, ensuring that Iran received the necessary equipment to sustain its military efforts.
One notable example of this covert cooperation was the intelligence Iran provided to Israel, aiding in the execution of Operation Opera, the 1981 airstrike that destroyed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor. This operation was crucial in hindering Iraq’s nuclear ambitions, demonstrating the strategic depth of the Israel-Iran relationship during this period.
Despite the difference of “ideas”, Israel became one of Iran’s primary suppliers of military equipment. This relationship extended beyond mere arms sales. Jerusalem also sent military instructors to Iran and, in return, received vital intelligence that proved instrumental in its own military operations.
Khomeini’s Pragmatic Approach
Despite Khomeini’s public stance against Israel, he pragmatically accepted Israeli support during the war. This pragmatic approach was reflected in his response to his generals securing arms from Israel, emphasizing the importance of obtaining necessary weapons regardless of the source. Khomeini’s acceptance of Israeli support highlights the complexities of international relations, where pragmatic needs often override ideological stances.
Khomeini’s close advisers recounted how, despite the arms embargo, they managed to secure significant arms shipments from Israel. Khomeini’s response to these transactions was pragmatic, viewing the acquisition of necessary weapons as paramount, regardless of the supplier’s identity. This pragmatic approach underlined the strategic necessities that shaped Iran’s foreign policy during the war.
The Reagan Administration and Continued Support
The Reagan administration’s tacit approval allowed Israel to continue its support for Iran, despite public opposition. This continued until the Iran-Contra Affair, which highlighted the complexity of Israel’s involvement with Iran. The scandal revealed the depth of covert operations and resulted in significant political repercussions for the Reagan administration. Despite the public opposition, the clandestine support persisted, driven by mutual strategic interests.
The Carter administration initially opposed the arms sales, exerting pressure on Israel to halt future transactions while the US negotiated for the release of American hostages. However, with Reagan’s ascendancy to the presidency in 1981, the dynamic shifted. Israel sought and received covert consent to continue supplying Iran with American-made military equipment despite the Reagan administration’s public opposition to such sales.
The Iran-Contra Affair
From 1985 to 1986, Israel’s role in the Iran-Contra Affair highlighted the complexity of its involvement with Iran. High-level discussions between Israeli and Iranian representatives sought to open an arms channel with the United States. The affair was a significant political scandal during the Reagan administration. It involved the secret sale of arms to Iran, despite the arms embargo, with the aim of securing the release of American hostages held by Hezbollah in Lebanon. Proceeds from these sales were then illegally diverted to support the Contra rebels in Nicaragua, fighting the socialist Sandinista government. This was in direct violation of the Boland Amendment, which prohibited US aid to the Contras.
The scandal came to light in November 1986, leading to extensive media coverage and congressional hearings. The hearings revealed the depth of the administration’s involvement in the covert operations and resulted in several indictments and convictions, although many were later overturned or those guilty were pardoned.
Just as the Iran hostage crisis hurt the Carter administration, the Iran-Contra Affair had significant political repercussions for the Reagan administration, damaging its reputation and raising questions about presidential oversight and the conduct of foreign policy.
The End of the War and Aftermath
The Iran-Iraq War dominated much of Khomeini’s decade in power. It was a bloody conflict, marked by the use of chemical weapons, child soldiers, and significant war crimes. About half a million people are thought to have died in the conflict, and relations between Iran and Iraq remained strained until the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003. Khomeini died in 1989, but his successor, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, continued his policy of hostility towards Israel, regularly stating how Israel should be “wiped off the map.”
In the Israeli mindset, the belief persisted that a relationship with Iran would be geopolitically advantageous, especially with Saddam Hussein still powerful. However, the geopolitical landscape shifted dramatically after the Gulf War and the collapse of the Soviet Union. These changes led Israel to focus on making peace with surrounding Arab states.
Conclusion
The covert relationship between Israel and Iran post-1979 exemplifies the intricate and often contradictory nature of international relations. Despite public antagonism, pragmatic cooperation driven by mutual strategic interests persisted. The legacy of these secret dealings continues to influence the region’s geopolitics, highlighting the complexities and pragmatic necessities that shape international alliances. As the region evolves, the historical ties between Israel and Iran serve as a reminder of the nuanced dynamics that underlie global politics.
