Alternate Iranian Hostage Crisis – Students Seize Soviet Embassy

When I was reading Guests of the Ayatollah: The Iran Hostage Crisis: The First Battle in America’s War with Militant Islam, the book said that there were alternate plans to seize the Soviet embassy instead of the American one, owing to the USSR’s state ideology of godless Communism.

This made me think: what if it had been the Soviet embassy in Tehran that was seized and Soviet staff taken hostage, rather than the American one.

At the time, the USSR was already in serious economic trouble, with an aging Politburo under Brezhnev, and the problem of defending the PDPA regime in Afghanistan. If the USSR had had a hostage crisis to deal with as well as the mujahideen in Afghanistan, there would be danger that its strained economy would have collapsed much more rapidly. The USSR could have collapsed in 1982 or 1983 instead of 1991, and there comes the possibility of bordering republics falling to theocratic regimes à la Khomeini’s Iran (though except for Azerbaijan they would have been Sunnite).

Would Brezhnev have tried to rescue the hostage by force immediately?

Would Moscow have sought alliances to fight Iran with traditional enemies of Russia?

Would Washington have seized on an occupation of the Soviet Embassy to end the USSR and the Cold War?
 
Since the Soviets hadnt intervened in Afghanistan when the hostage crisis began they have their options open not to mention a rather large ally in Iran in the form of Tudeh and an eager ally in Saddam next door things can get interesting.
 
It would not be pretty.... at this point Iran has no allies and can't turn to it's former patron (the USA). Also Russia is not half way around the world from the Iran, the Soviet military (Spetsnaz!) can stage out of their own bases.
I expect the Soviets would give the Iranian government an ultimatum, "return our people. and the heads of hostage takers, in 24 hours or else." For the "or else..." look how they handled it, when their people in Beirut where taken hostage...
They're only hope is the Carter Administration somehow holding the Soviets back.....
 
World War Three.
No way. At best it becomes Super Afghanistan with Iraq playing both the US and USSR against each other while Iran likely fractures into an incredibly bloody meat grinder. The US will do just enough to keep the Soviets and Iranians at war for some time (how are the Soviets going to psychologically endure those fanatical waves of soldiers?). The Iranians also still have their cache of military gear that will at least blunt the initial Soviet drive if there is one. The Iraqis take and hold Khuzestan and refuse to move further while the Soviets take the north with an American supported south struggling on. Moscow better be prepared for terrorist bombings and worse.
 
I wonder what effect this would have on the Carter versus Reagan election contest? I remember that the hostage crisis was a drag on Jimmy Carter. The hostage crisis, inflation, and the energy shock all took their toll.

If there was not the hostage situation, would Jimmy Carter had beaten Ronald Reagan?

I do agree that the Soviets would be more ruthless. I remember stories from soldiers who studied the Soviet Union that their approach to pirates and hostage takers was to respond with over whelming force. They believed that if you killed all of them then the other pirates and hostage takers would leave you alone.
 
I do agree that the Soviets would be more ruthless. I remember stories from soldiers who studied the Soviet Union that their approach to pirates and hostage takers was to respond with over whelming force. They believed that if you killed all of them then the other pirates and hostage takers would leave you alone.

I think doing that would almost certainly lead to a brutal Soviet-Iranian War. Maybe Iraq would get involved on the Soviet side.
 
wonder what effect this would have on the Carter versus Reagan election contest? I remember that the hostage crisis was a drag on Jimmy Carter. The hostage crisis, inflation, and the energy shock all took their toll.

If there was not the hostage situation, would Jimmy Carter had beaten Ronald Reagan?

I doubt it. To quote a later POTUS "It's the economy, stupid". The basic pocketbook issues were far more important to your average American than forgein policy, so waving the Hostage Crisis isent likely to get one anywhere. Indeed, a world in which the Soviets are making an earlier and bigger intervention in Southwest Asia (Particularly if they are over to trying to force regeime change) would play into Reagan's strong points
 

Gian

Banned
I would love to see a TL though where the students attack both American and Soviet embassies and thus gain the ire of both superpowers (but that's just me)
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Back in the day a reporter asked a Soviet Ambassador (I believe it was the UN Mission, but I might be wrong, been 40 years) this same question a day or two after the Embassy was seized.

His response was simplicity itself: "Our people would be flying back to Moscow, if not already home by now."

You flat didn't screw with the Soviets in that manner. They had a whole different rulebook.

Chapter One - Demand return.

Chapter Two - Dispatch Spetnaz

Chapter Three - Start depositing individual's testicles in water glass at bedside. Kidnap wives and children. Mail back parts as necessary.

Chapter Four - Welcome Soviet citizens home

Chapter Five - Ensure lesson penetrates that further aggression will result in less restrained response.

In 1985 Hezbollah kidnapped four Soviet diplomats in Beirut. At first Moscow played nice, then the kidnappers killed one of the of the hostages. The Kremlin sent in their top counter terror SPECOPS unit, Alpha Group. Inside a month they had the rest of the hostages back (hostages, if they were ot eventually executed tended to be held for extended periods, one American, Terry Waite, was held for over five years). Alpha Group, depending on the version you chose to believe, snatched between one and a dozen Hezbollah members off the street, including relatives of the suspected hostage takers and sent either an individual's ears, fingers, or an entire severely mutilated body to the family with a promise that they were just getting started.

The Soviets just plain ol' didn't care about the niceties. Alpha specializes in killing terrorist family members and supporters and doesn't give a fig about collateral damage.
 
I doubt it. To quote a later POTUS "It's the economy, stupid". The basic pocketbook issues were far more important to your average American than forgein policy, so waving the Hostage Crisis isent likely to get one anywhere. Indeed, a world in which the Soviets are making an earlier and bigger intervention in Southwest Asia (Particularly if they are over to trying to force regeime change) would play into Reagan's strong points
Especially since Carter could be blamed for doing nothing to support the Shah allowing the Soviets the opportunity to expand into Iran. Worse, you think the news won't be broadcasting the horrific collateral damage that will result from this war or Americans will accept the possibility of the Soviets seizing control over more of the world's oil supply, especially with the energy crisis? And what about the Saudis? With Iraq standing to expand and become even more powerful, the Soviets moving closer, and the general chaos the Middle East will suffer, the House of Saud is going to be making some pretty big noise.
 
I would love to see a TL though where the students attack both American and Soviet embassies and thus gain the ire of both superpowers (but that's just me)

Arguably, you might be able to get a timeline in which the entire Security Council can actually agree on a military intervention, for once. Seeing American boys and Russian boys not shooting AT one another, but WITH one another, would be kind of cool.
 
Arguably, you might be able to get a timeline in which the entire Security Council can actually agree on a military intervention, for once. Seeing American boys and Russian boys not shooting AT one another, but WITH one another, would be kind of cool.
But what is the endgame? Saving the hostages? Regime change? If the latter, that will definitely spiral into a host of unknowns.
 
Arguably, you might be able to get a timeline in which the entire Security Council can actually agree on a military intervention, for once. Seeing American boys and Russian boys not shooting AT one another, but WITH one another, would be kind of cool.

I just know that if such an event happened, Sabaton would at least seriously consider making a song about it.
 
But what is the endgame? Saving the hostages? Regime change? If the latter, that will definitely spiral into a host of unknowns.

Presumably, there'd have to be some kind of "Responsable Government" put in place. A joint UN mandate could be REALLY interesting, though I'm not sure of the mechanics that would be underneath one.
 

BigBlueBox

Banned
Presumably, there'd have to be some kind of "Responsable Government" put in place. A joint UN mandate could be REALLY interesting, though I'm not sure of the mechanics that would be underneath one.
They could also partition Iran according to the boundaries between the British and Soviet occupation zones of WWII.
 
In 1985 Hezbollah kidnapped four Soviet diplomats in Beirut. At first Moscow played nice, then the kidnappers killed one of the of the hostages. The Kremlin sent in their top counter terror SPECOPS unit, Alpha Group. Inside a month they had the rest of the hostages back (hostages, if they were ot eventually executed tended to be held for extended periods, one American, Terry Waite, was held for over five years). Alpha Group, depending on the version you chose to believe, snatched between one and a dozen Hezbollah members off the street, including relatives of the suspected hostage takers and sent either an individual's ears, fingers, or an entire severely mutilated body to the family with a promise that they were just getting started.

I heard a different Story to the same history, but I don`t know if the guy telling it played us listeners for a fool.
I was on a NATO base, Rheindahlen JHQ, and there was awargaming community. And one wednesday evening they were wargaming a fictional "Free the hostages" game. And one guy - and no I don`t know his name and back then I didn`t ask - told the entire room what really happened.
The russians took two hostages from the clan that had the russian hostages. One was selected to die. The other watched. Oh, and they stole an Ice cream truck. And they had a meatgrinder, life support machinery and liquid oxygen.
Afterwards a cube of frozen human was delivered by the surviving clanmember to the clan with the compliments of the KGB.
The next plane to Moscow left one hour after the delivery. And all hostages were on board.
 
Yeah, the Soviets aren't going to mess around; a Soviet hostage crisis is likely ended very, very quickly. An interesting TL, however, might be some radical hearing about what's gone down and deciding that Iran can never capitulate to the Red Satan, and so kills the hostages before they can be returned. If and when said radical's found, he will be removed with extreme prejudice, but the Soviets might well respond more bluntly also.

However, I do doubt the premise on which this is based to some extent. The Iranians stormed the embassy not only for reasons already hinted at, but also to prevent a second Operation Ajax from going down, according to many of the sources I have read. They could still seize both embassies, though.
 
Top