Tehran's Own Hostage Crisis

Arab gunmen seize London embassy and issue an ultimatum

"I should like you to know of my deep personal concern about the situation at the Iranian embassy in London. This intrusion constitutes an act of terrorism and an infringement of the immunity of diplomatic staff which the British government finds totally repugnant and is acting firmly to counter."

Thus, in a pointed message to Iran's President Abolhassan Banisadr, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher expressed her displeasure over the seizure of the Iranian embassy in London by Iranian Arab terrorists. Obviously she was also indirectly condemning the Tehran government for allowing Iranian militants to hold the American hostages for the past six months. The irony could hardly have been lost on the Iranians, who went to embarrassing lengths in an effort to establish a difference between the two embassy seizures. Touring the Persian Gulf, Iran's Foreign Minister Sadegh Ghotbzadeh said that the seizure of the American embassy in Tehran was "a reaction to 25 years of oppressive plunder," whereas the London incident was "a terrorist act" perpetrated by "a few mercenaries who are being employed by another government." Whom was he talking about? Tehran's favorite enemies, the U.S. and Iraq, who were now working "hand in hand against Iran." He neglected to mention that Washington and Baghdad have not agreed much on anything for years, and in fact have not even had diplomatic relations since 1967. Never mind; the explanation was bound to play well with the Iranian masses.

Three or more gunmen, who claimed to be Iranian Arabs from the southwestern province of Khuzistan, had seized the Iranian embassy on the edge of Hyde Park and held hostage some 20 people, mostly Iranians. They threatened to blow up the five-story building and kill the Iranian nationals (but not the four British hostages who had been caught) unless the Tehran government would agree to their demands. These included the release of 91 Iranian Arab political prisoners currently held in Khuzistan and the granting of some measure of autonomy to their oil-rich home province, which the Arab separatists prefer to call Arabistan.

The reaction of the Tehran government was an object lesson in the negligible value it places on the lives of its own people. President Banisadr announced that he was prepared to allow the hostages in London to be killed rather than accept the demands of the terrorists. Said he: "We are ready to accept the martyrdom of our children in England, but we will not give in to blackmail."

The militants who had seized the U.S. embassy in Tehran declared with equal bravado: "We do not trade plotters, saboteurs and domestic mercenaries for the subversive misdeeds of hirelings outside our borders." Their advice to the Iranian hostages in London: "Do not fear martyrdom. Resist, and victory will be yours." Similarly, Foreign Minister Ghotbzadeh observed that "anyone who has died for Islam goes directly to heaven." After talking to the London gunmen by telephone, Ghotbzadeh rejected their ransom demand and threatened to have one of their imprisoned comrades executed for every member of the London embassy staff who was harmed.

London police decided to handle the embassy seizure with as much patience as possible, but they were hard put to control the clamorous crowds that assembled and turned the scene into a bizarre street happening. Pro-regime Iranian students, led by a zealot with a bullhorn, chanted, "Long live Khomeini" and "Death to Carter." Separated from that group, by the efforts of police, were the anti-Khomeini Iranians and the fed-up Londoners, who shouted, "Go home, go home!" A lively group beating drums danced for peace, and a group of Britons sang Rule Britannia. Lamenting the fact that the city was being turned into a "battlefield for other people's quarrels," the London Evening News asked, "So what are these guerrillas doing here anyway?" The Daily Mail wondered why it is that "three-fifths of the world is covered with water and the rest by Iranian students."

There was an even broader irony in the London embassy takeover. It dramatized the domestic unrest from which the Banisadr government has been trying to divert attention. For six months the authorities in Tehran have concentrated on the international crisis surrounding the American hostages. But that preoccupation has not succeeded in covering up all the serious threats facing the regime, from both the large and rebellious ethnic minorities and Iran's giant neighbor to the north, the Soviet Union.

For the past month, for example, savage fighting has been taking place throughout Kurdistan, in northwestern Iran. To rout Kurdish guerrilla forces, the army and air force have bombed the provincial capital of Sanandaj, killing hundreds of civilians and causing extensive damage. Fearing even greater trouble ahead, many Kurds are reported fleeing westward toward the Iraqi border.

The rebellion flared up more than a year ago, after the revolutionary government in Tehran and the leaders of the country's 4 million Kurds failed to reach agreement on a plan for Kurdish autonomy. The Kurds said that they wanted only to preserve their culture and Ian guage and to run their own local government. Tehran suspected that their real goal was independence. What particularly irritates the central government is the disdain of the Kurdish population for Khomeini's brand of militant Islam. They prefer the Kurdish Democratic Party and other leftist groups to the clerical establishment in power in Tehran.

The conflict between militant Islam and the Communist left has also created troubles elsewhere. Last week's May Day demonstrations were marred by violence throughout Iran. In Tehran, Muslim zealots known as Hezbollahis (members of God's party) attacked the rallies of two leftist groups, the Marxist Fedayan and the Islamic socialist Mujahidin. The attackers used rocks, clubs, knives and iron bars, leaving scores of leftists injured. In his May Day speech Khomeini accused the leftists of treason and of collusion with the U.S. The truth is that the Fedayan and the Mujahidin are best united in their hatred of the U.S., but the Ayatullah correctly perceives that the left represents a threat to his Islamic dreams.

At this point the Soviet Union is playing an extremely cautious role in Iran. The chief instrument of Moscow's influence is the Tudeh Party, which counsels other leftists to forget their differences and "fight U.S. imperialism." Tudeh leaders admit privately that an attempt at a Communist revolution in Iran would be premature. They believe that Iranian Communists should not repeat the mistakes of their Afghan counterparts but should "first let the apple ripen."

In the meantime the Soviets are discreetly supporting the Kurdish Democratic Party, the principal force behind the struggle for autonomy in Kurdistan. Iranian military intelligence believes the Soviets have airdropped weapons and ammunition for the K.D.P. Moscow, for the time being, does not intend to revive the Turkish Democratic Party, which separated Azerbaijan from Iran in 1945-46. But neither Moscow nor Tudeh can afford to antagonize the Tehran government. Thus, for the present, they support it with ostentatious ardor. Their apparent strategy is to do what they can to prevent better relations between Iran and the West while they wait for the present regime to fall apart from its own excesses and weaknesses. Khomeini himself is 80 and ailing, and so far has proved incapable of creating a government with a strong chance of surviving him.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.