Thirty-two years ago this week, on April 24, eight U.S. servicemen died in the southeastern desert of Iran when their mission to rescue 52 Americans held captive by the revolutionary regime in Tehran was aborted by President Jimmy Carter.
Operation Eagle Claw was one of the first missions conducted by the recently-formed Delta Force. Depending on whose account you read, it was either an unlucky masterpiece of complex planning or a desperate attempt to save a doomed presidency that never should have been given the green light in the first place.
The mission’s failure convinced U.S. military leaders to rethink how they would conduct special operations in the future: formulating plans that were simpler, carrying them out under unified command, and managing the risk.
While our military has learned the lessons of the failed hostage rescue mission, however, our political leaders have not.
When the first reports came in of the deadly aircraft collision during a sandstorm in the Iranian desert, Jimmy Carter lost his nerve. Rather than follow the advice of his military advisors and continue the mission with a smaller force, he pulled the plug and exposed it to the world. His fear of defeat trumped his will to win. The result? Our enemies smelled weakness and sought to deepen our humiliation by parading about the sand-clotted bodies of our dead servicemen like trophies in a Roman Triumph.
Jimmy Carter’s multiple failures in Iran have given us thirty-two years of state-sponsored terrorism in the Middle East. By allowing the forces of chaos and extremism to unseat the Shah of Iran, a staunch U.S. ally, Carter not only destroyed the future for two generations of Iranians; he ushered in an era where a sovereign government operating under the guise of terrorist proxies was allowed to murder, maim, and bomb with impunity.
The victims of Iran’s terrorist rampage included people such as Robert Ames, the CIA Near East chief of operations, who was killed when Iranian-backed terrorists blew up our embassy in Beirut on April 17, 1983.
As one of the first journalists on the scene after the bomb ripped off the front of our seaside embassy, I will never forget a dust-and-debris-covered press officer named Ryan Crocker emerging from the rubble to tell us that he had seen the U.S. ambassador, saved by the weight of his office desk, climbing down a broken fire escape at the rear of the embassy .
The victims also included people such as Donald G. Havlish, Jr., an insurance executive from Yardley, Pennsylvania who missed taking his daughter to her first day of preschool on the morning of September 11, 2001 so he could attend a business meeting in New York. He worked on the 101st floor of the South Tower of the World Trade Center, and was killed by the al Qaeda terrorists who crashed a hijacked airplane into his building that morning.
Although I did not know him, I came to know his widow, Fiona, and helped her and other families of 9/11 victims trace the origins of the 9/11 plot back to Iran. These brave families won a measure of justice in a federal court on December 15, 2011, when District court judge George B. Daniels, after hearing our testimony, determined that the Islamic Republic of Iran shared “material responsibility” for the 9/11 attacks with the al Qaeda terrorists.
Mihaela, their daughter, who had turned 13 by then, impressed me to tears as she stood near me in the cold winter winds where once the South Tower had stood. With TV cameras trained on her, she made a brushing of her father’s name in the commemorative marble plaques around the foundation. “I am Mihaela Havlish, the daughter of Donald G. Havlish, Jr, who died on September 11, 2001,” she said. Simple, clear, brave.
We have an opportunity today to ensure that Robert Ames, Donald Havlish and so many others -– including hundreds of our servicemen in Iraq — will be the last American victims the evil regime in Iran can claim. We have the opportunity today to craft effective policies that will end the rein of terror in Iran.
And yet, President Obama has embarked on a different course – a course that I believe will lead directly to a major war with Iran that we do not need and that we can actually prevent.
His course is called appeasement. It begins with the notion that you can rationally discuss matters of import – such as nuclear weapons development and terrorism — with a regime that seeks just one thing: to negotiate the size of your coffin.
The Islamic Republic leaders have shown repeatedly that their only goal in these negotiations is to buy time to complete their nuclear weapons development. During their latest round of talks with the Obama administration on April 14, they succeeded yet again.
If you read the opening of this Bloomberg News wire story; you’ll see what I mean:
“The first international talks with Iran on its nuclear program in 15 months produced a promise to reconvene in May amid calls for urgent diplomacy to avert military strikes.”
See anything there about getting the Islamic Republic to stop uranium enrichment? Neither do I. Forget about any calls on the regime to lift its stranglehold on the Iranian people.
During the 2008 presidential campaign, then-Senator Barack Obama, backed by top Congressional Democrats such as Maryland Rep. Chris Van Hollen, were calling for “negotiations without preconditions” with the Iranian regime.
To their mind, it was U.S. “intransigence” that was causing the bad behavior of the Iranian regime. If only we would relent, they would behave.
Almost immediately after taking office, Obama sent emmissaries to open a channel to Teheran. Six months later, the Iranian regime got its first payback: When three million Iranians took to the streets after a fraudulent presidential election and publicly begged for U.S. help (with signs in English for the benefit of international TV cameras), President Obama remained silent.
When he finally spoke, it was to declare haughtily that the United States had a bad history of intervening in Iran’s domestic affairs, and so we would abstain from playing any active role in aiding the Iranian people in their quest for freedom.
This, too, was appeasement.
Remember what Winston Churchill said after Neville Chamberlain returned from negotiating with Adolf Hitler in Munich, “You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.”
And that is precisely where we are headed now because of the appeasement policies of Obama, J Street, and the Obama Democrats.
I believe we have a real alternative, but one that has never been tried before: we must urgently launch a massive program to help the pro-freedom movement in Iran.
We need a comprehensive strategy that uses all the tools of power diplomacy to help them achieve their freedom from tyranny. Why? Because it is in our national security interest to do so.
We should, for example, provide money for a strike fund to support the families of Iranian workers who leave their jobs to protest the regime.
We should provide secure communications equipment and training on how to use it.
My own favorite is to airlift in WIMAX point of site Internet wifi transmitters at a cost of $500,000 each, a relatively small investment in terms of defense, that can provide free, secure Internet service to all regions of Iran that are currently under a regime-ordered communications black-out.
We should provide the pro-freedom movement with the best political consultants money can buy, who know how to wage high visibility grass roots campaigns. During the Cold War, such operations were carried out covertly by the CIA. These days, ironically, they mostly are done by George Soros and the Democrat party.
We owe it to our men and women in uniform to try this approach before they get called on once again to pick up the pieces from the mistakes of our politicians.
When the war from the dishonorable decisions hits, who can predict the ultimate consequences in terms of regional stability, oil prices, and, worse, the number of Americans who will lose their lives?
About the Author: Kenneth R. Timmerman is the author of Countdown to Crisis: the Coming Nuclear Showdown with Iran (Crown Forum 2005), and was nominated jointly with Amb. John Bolton for the Nobel Peace prize in 2006 for his work on Iran. He is the president of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran, and is the Republican nominee for Congress in Maryland's 8th District.
If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.
Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.
If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.