The 1979/80 Iran Hostage Crisis and Its Potential Aftermath

The 1979/80 Iran hostage crisis remains one of the most significant geopolitical events of the late 20th century. If the Iranian authorities had continued with their extreme measures, such as executing hostages one by one through a televised, public execution, it's crucial to understand the potential response from the US and the wider international community. Given the historical context and strategic considerations, the US response would likely have been drastic and wide-ranging.

US Government’s Potential Response

The response from the US government would have been severe if Iran had continued with such inhumane and provocative measures. One likely scenario is that for every hostage executed, the US would have retaliated with a major airstrike targeting Iran’s strategic infrastructure. This could include:

Oil wells Transportation hubs Ports and airports Any other critical infrastructure essential for a modern nation to function

The strategic significance of these targets is in providing the infrastructure that allows a country to maintain basic services for its people. The objective would be to disrupt Iran's economic and military capabilities, thereby weakening their regime's ability to continue the crisis.

The Shah and the Iranian Revolution

It's important to note that the Shah of Iran succumbed to cancer in 1979, nearly coinciding with the beginning of the hostage crisis. The Iranian 'revolutionaries' were hesitant to believe the news initially, but once they accepted his death, their demands became less urgent. The crisis was more of a political and ideological battle, driven by spite and a desire to maintain control rather than any specific policy demands.

If the hostages had not been freed by the time President Ronald Reagan was inaugurated, the US would have engaged in an all-out effort to oust the Iranian regime. The mere act of killing a single hostage would likely have pushed for an even more decisive response. The regime’s power would have been systematically dismantled, with the goal of installing a government palatable to the US and its allies.

The Public’s Demands and Historical Precedents

The American public would have demanded a more aggressive response from their government. It's likely that President Jimmy Carter, though cautious in his approach, would have faced immense public pressure to act. Both Presidents Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan would have been far less hesitant, as reflected in their historical records.

The Iranian clerics would have understood the dire consequences of escalating such a crisis. The impact would have been severe, not just for Iran but for the entire international community. Every nation has an expectation from the host government to protect its diplomats, and the US could have rallied international support to enact a widespread response.

A precedent can be drawn from a similar incident in East Iran, where an Iranian Ayatollah publicly displayed the burned corpses of Marine Corps personnel. Instead of capitulating, the US government took a strong stance, highlighting the potential for a robust and united response to acts of violence against diplomats and Americans.

In summary, the potential for a more severe and aggressive response from the US government cannot be overstated. The hashtag #IranHostageCrisis highlights the historical significance and the potential for more aggressive retaliation if hostage situations were to escalate.