Saudi Arabia played a central role in combating Iran’s
international influence. The Islamic Revolution in
Iran rattled the Saudi monarchy more than other regional
governments, as the Saudis legitimized their rule
through religion and had a substantial Shi’a minority.
Relying on its vast resources, Saudi Arabia thus moved
to shore up support with friendly governments. For example,
in Pakistan—a country possessing its own large
Shi’a minority—the military dictatorship of Zia-ul-Haq
was directly exposed to conservative influence from
Saudi Arabia, which financed the proliferation of Sunni
religious schools and collaborated with Zia’s government
to provide support for the Afghan jihad against
the Soviets. The combination of religious schooling and
the conflict in Afghanistan radicalized many Pakistani
Sunni students.31 These radicalized groups soon took a
militant form under the patronage of the CIA and Pakistan’s
umbrella intelligence agency, the Directorate for
Inter-Services Intelligence (more commonly known as
Inter-Services Intelligence, or simply ISI).32 Saudi Arabia’s
funding of anti-Shi’a Sunni groups was a tactic to
de-legitimize Shi’a Islam and the Iranian Revolution in
order to lessen its appeal in Saudi Arabia. The Saudis
largely succeeded, but as a consequence there was a vast
proliferation of extremist groups.33
Beyond Saudi Arabia, regional fears of expanding Iranian
influence seemed to be confirmed by communal
riots and civil disturbances, terrorist acts, and hijackings
in Kuwait. These events were also linked to instability
in Bahrain, where several coup attempts were directly
traced back to Iran through the Hojjat al-Islam Hadi
Mudarrisi, a network of support for Khomeini that had
been created while he was still in exile.34
November 4, 1979 was a decisive moment in Iran’s relationship
with the international community. On that day,
Iranian students, political activists, and religious actors
stormed and took over the US embassy. This dramatic
show of force reflected widespread fears of a repeat of
the 1953 CIA-engineered coup against Mossadeq. The
takeover of the US embassy in Tehran had two aims:
to limit the capacity of Americans to intervene in Iran,
and to arouse anti-Americanism and stoke a sense of Iranian
nationalism. In addition to these objectives, which
were largely successful, the hostage-takers were also able
to target, label, and marginalize political opponents as
pro-American. Indeed, the hostage-takers hailed their
capture of the US embassy as the Second Islamic Revolution.35
Khomeini’s harsh anti-Western rhetoric and the takeover
of the US embassy marked a turning post in postrevolutionary
Iran’s relationship with the international
community. The extreme tension with the United States
and the increasing need for international support and
allies meant that external issues directly impacted Khomeini’s
hold on power. Khomeini’s potent language and
support of those in control of the embassy allowed him
to assume the leadership of the revolutionary movement
while working within the powerful current of nationalism
and anti-imperialism.36
Few states other than Saudi Arabia were as fearful of
the Iranian Revolution as Iraq. However, Saddam Hussein
was also confident of Iran’s temporary weakness,
and thus invaded Iran in September 1980. In doing
so, he expected to regain territory signed away in 1975
and hoped to put an end to the appeal of Khomeini. In
this sense, the Iran-Iraq War was, in part, an attempt at
counter-revolution.
Instead, the Iran-Iraq war unified and mobilized the Iranian
masses under Khomeini’s leadership. Islam became
a central factor in the war effort, especially Shi’a Islam
and the tradition of martyrdom. Both the Iranian nation
and religion were perceived to be under attack, creating
a powerful common purpose for the Iranian people. After
anti-Americanism, war became Khomeini’s rationale
for eliminating the remaining political opposition. The
Iran-Iraq War afforded Khomeini the necessary latitude
to implement his vision for Iran.37 Khomeini used it to
clamp down on opposition and to consolidate power for
Islamists by showing that his version of Islam was associated
with the defense of the true Islam. By 1988, the
regime had consolidated its position. The military had
held up and there was less need to export the revolution.
Moreover, as a result of Saddam’s clear aggression, Iran
was more accepted within the international community
and Khomeini was no longer under direct threat; the
Islamic Revolution had been firmly established.