Challenge: U.S Alliance With Democratic Islamic Republic Of Iran

Your challenge is to have the U.S allied with a democratic Islamic Republic of Iran with a POD of no earlier then 1982.
 
My best shot:

The end of the Iran-Iraq war in 1988 ends as little more than a stalemate, despite the awesome cost in money and lives to Iran, which found itself almost bankrupt and with over a million people killed in the war. Despite the fact that Iran was never really defeated in the war, the image among many Iranians is that while defeating Saddam had been plenty justified, many of the losses were unnecessary, and this erodes the popularity of the Islamists starting as the war ends. The process speeds up after Khomeini's death in June 1989.

Khomeini's successor, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, changes the course of this. Sensing an opportunity, he calls for Iran to be a support of Arab rights and a "unifier of Islam". This initially concerns American allies, but it becomes clear early on that Iran's actions are not hostile to Americans or American interests - in fact, Iran's open support of Muslims in the Soviet Union makes them rather more respected.

After the Gulf War, Iran begins talking with the United States more, including offering to help wherever possible with regards to Israel and the Palestinians. This is a risky move on Rafsanjani's part, but it gets him respect. The Arabs at first incensed by this action, but Iran offers to provide what support it can to the Palestinians on the condition that they work out their differences with Israel without violence. The signing of peace accords between Israel and the Palestinians in 1993 sees Iran challenged to make good on its promises - which it does. The latter years of Rafsanjani's era focus turns towards making better relations with the west, which also begins the liberalizing trend Iran experienced in the years later. Recognizing how hated Iraq was in the world, Iran began crafting an image of being the defender of Islam's spirit, and seeking to integrate it with the modern world.

Mohammed Khatami, who comes to power in 1997, takes this several steps further. Khatami allows many of the more hardline Islamist rules to be relaxed, while also encouraging freedom of expression and better diplomatic relations as well as improved economic performance. Khatami dusts some of the ideas of the Shah off, while being careful to point out that Islam is still the base of Iran, but also pointing out that Islam and a modern society with free rights can and should mix. Khatami's work is substantially successful, as diplomatic relations are re-established with the United States in 1998.

September 11, however, stuns Iran just as it does most of the rest of the world. Iran is one of the first Muslim governments to comment on it, calling it a "crime against humanity" and that "no people, even those who are truly evil, deserve to be victims of such a crime." That response does not go un-noticed in Washington, and President Gore invites Khatami to the United States in November 2001, with Khatami making a point of praying for the victims of the attacks at Ground Zero. This makes a quite visible difference in the views of both Americans and Iranians.

In March 2002, Iran offers to send troops to assist the ISAF force in Afghanistan. The United States accepts, and over 40,000 Iranian troops are deployed to Afghanistan, with Iranian commanders. The Iranian army does well, and Iran's decision in June 2002 to allow supplies to travel to Afghanistan via Iran helps the US immensely with logistical difficulties. This leads to a formal thank you from the United States to Iran for its help in Afghanistan in February 2003. This is followed by additional American investments in Iran and a deal to begin importing more oil from them rather than the Saudis. This improves Iran's economy quite substantially in 2003 and 2004, which leads to Khatami's successor, Mir-Hossein Mousavi, easily winning the presidency in 2005.

In 2007, Gore invites Mousavi to Washington, who gladly accepts the offer. The Iranian people in 2007, on the eve of the visit, are showed to have over 40% having a favorable view of the United States, far beyond any Arab nation. Continued economic growth and good relations see Iran's economy begin a long, steady rise in living standards in 2007.

By 2010, there is no formal alliance between them, but the United States views Iran as a friendly presence in the region, despite the near-constant to and from between Iran's reformers and its powerful Shi'a clergy. The country's economy has grown nearly 80% between 2000 and 2010, with the biggest growth in the high oil prices from 2007. Trade between the countries runs over $40 Billion in 2010, and tens of thousands of people go between the two nations each year.
 
As long as Iran is being ruled by the Islamists, an alliance with the USA is a ASBish thing. Israel will be pissed off if USA will allied with Iran.

Given that the extremists in Arabia hate Israel for being infidels and hate Iran for being heretics, it would make a logical sort of sense for the two to ally against a common enemy. Of course, this is another lesson in why religion and politics should never mix.
 

Typo

Banned
How worried was Israel about Iran before Armored Dinner Jacket? I thought they were paranoid about Iraq before he came to power.
It's not just that Israel was worried about Iran itself, although obviously Iran has being funding the Hezbollah in a proxy war with Israel for a while. It's that Israel and the Israeli lobby perceives that if Iran and the US buddy up then Israel will no longer be as vital to American interests in the Middle-East and therefore will stop receiving unconditional backing.
 
So many missed opportunities for both the US and Iran

I'll take a wild leap here, love the OP. I'd love for Iran and the US to kiss and make up. Iran could use the access to Western investment, technology, and so forth, and we could have an interesting ally that could make things a lot easier for us in Afghanistan and elsewhere.
Having the Iranians and Syrians aboard a Middle Eastern peace plan would compel a lot more pragmatism from the Hamas and Hizballah factions they've supported, though they might continue fighting anyway.
In that case I could see Iran, Syria, and Turkey making a free trade agreement, not to mention a mutual security agreement to deal with the Kurds. There's a ton of ways that could derail, but hey, if they could get the Kurds aboard that- curb the PUK, we recognize your right to exist and join the prosperity train OR ELSE.

I agree with others that in terms of realpolitik the US too beholden to the Saudis and Gulf oil sheikdoms, not to mention Israel would #@$% bricks if a US-Iranian rapprochement to go down without a laundry list of ASB-level Iranian concessions.
Basically Iran would have to abandon every geopolitical strategy they've concocted from the rise of ARK, accept a myriad restrictions that would wound Persian pride, all to maybe get some minor economic progress and get in bed with the Great Satan, which the ayatollahs would NOT sign off on even if Saddam were marching on Teheran.
You can argue that their strategy of backing Hamas and Hizballah has been an annoying spoiler role in Middle Eastern politics, or quite effective asymmetric warfare without much to lose.
 
I don't think this is that ASB. Avoid the hostage crisis, which is what led to breaking diplomatic relations between the two countries. The hostage crisis also was a hugely traumatic event within Iran and the internal turmoil and controversy it caused was a huge reason the Khomeinists were able to purge the regime of moderates and liberals.

Of course, the other thing you need to leave the clerical hold shakier is to avoid the Iran/Iraq War. Maybe without the hostage crisis, an Iranian regime that isn't completely at odds with the West is less vulnerable. Saddam decides not to gamble on an invasion and the West doesn't support him. Less war, more moderates and liberals in the Iranian leadership, and when Khomeini dies, he's succeeded by Ayatollah Montazeri who reforms the Islamic Republic so that the clerics maintain only an advisory, symbolic role.

U.S.-Iranian relations remain somewhat chilly, but diplomatic relations exist and gradually throughout the '90s commercial ties are restored. If 9/11 or a similar event still occurs*, Iran and the U.S. open a "new chapter" cooperating in the war on terror.
 
Er, so I guess I missed the whole "Post-1982" thing.

Well, how about try to get Ayatollah Montazeri to just shut up a little bit before Khomeini dies. He succeeds Khomeini, democratizes the state, and then there's a U.S. rapprochement during the 1990s and early 2000s.
 
Given that the extremists in Arabia hate Israel for being infidels and hate Iran for being heretics, it would make a logical sort of sense for the two to ally against a common enemy. Of course, this is another lesson in why religion and politics should never mix.

IIRC, there was some limited unofficial cooperation between Iran and Israel when it came to dealing with Iraq's nuclear program. Nothing brings people together quite like the thought of a common enemy getting his hands on nuclear weapons.
 
Top