Another Delay for the Hostages

Worries about the collapse of a "gentleman's agreement"

There was too much optimism two I weeks ago, and there is too much gloom now. Reality is somewhere in between." So said a Western diplomat in Tehran last week, reflecting on agonizing new uncertainties about the fate of the 50 Americans held hostage by militants occupying the U.S. embassy and the three at the Foreign Ministry. A United Nations commission, named to study allegations against the deposed Shah and his regime, began hearing witnesses in the Iranian capital. In approving the commission, the U.S. had assumed that Iran, as its part of a "gentleman's agreement," would arrange for early release of the Americans.

Those expectations appeared to be dashed when President Abolhassan Banisadr said that the two issues were not related. Then last week the Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeini announced that the hostages' release would have to be decided by the country's new Majlis (National Assembly), which will be elected later this month and convene on April 7. At week's end the militants apparently agreed that the U.N. commission members would be able to meet the hostages--but when and under what circumstances were not clear.

What had gone wrong? Had the Iranians reneged on a commitment in order to further humiliate and punish the U.S.? Had U.N. Secretary-General Kurt Waldheim, who handled much of the negotiations, promised Washington more than Tehran was prepared to deliver? The most plausible explanation was that the murky internal politics of Tehran were responsible. Both Banisadr, who has advocated release of the hostages since his election in January, and the militants at the embassy had been pressing Khomeini for a decision. Government insiders in Tehran contend that the Ayatullah could not afford to favor either side. If he instructed the militants to release their captives, he would lose face: until a month ago he had defended the hostage taking. If he sided with the militants, he would drastically undercut Banisadr and his attempts to fashion a stable government. Said a Western diplomat: "To look at the bright side, Khomeini is in effect telling the students it is not their business to decide the fate of the hostages."

Throwing the decision into the hands of parliament will probably put off the hostages' release for at least a month. Privately, some American diplomats feared that the deal had fallen through. But the official U.S. posture, as one State Department expert put it, was that "everything that was supposed to happen is happening." In a press conference last week, Secretary of State Cyrus Vance insisted once again that "the commission's mission is twofold: to hear the Iranian grievances and also to bring about the speedy release of the hostages and thus bring an end to the crisis."

One mildly hopeful sign was an announcement from Tehran last week that the ban on American journalists had been lifted. At week's end no U.S. correspondents had been granted visas to enter Iran. Still, one Western diplomat interpreted the announcement to mean "preparations are being made for the release of the hostages--a task that is much more complicated than was thought immediately after Banisadr's election."

The five-member blue-ribbon commission* meanwhile spent a busy and sometimes harrowing week in Tehran collecting information and hearing allegations against the ousted Shah and SAVAK, his secret police. In compliance with Banisadr's instructions, government departments hurried to gather whatever documents they could about the previous regime's corruption, atrocities and violations of human rights. Central Bank Governor Ali Reza Nobari presented the panel with documents that apparently supported the government's charge that the Pahlavi family plundered more than $56 billion from public funds. The present government wants this "stolen wealth" returned to Iran.

The commission spent two days meeting and talking with many of the 1,700 victims of the Shah's regime who appeared before them. Some of the witnesses bore gruesome scars from torture, amputated limbs and empty eye sockets. Others carried pictures of young children who had been shot dead by the Shah's troops during demonstrations. Concluded the commission in its communique to U.N. headquarters in New York City: "A most painful experience of human suffering." On another day the panel visited Behesht Zahra Cemetery, where thousands of those killed during the revolution are buried; as Waldheim had been on his visit to Tehran in January, the commission members were nearly mobbed by throngs of grieving and angry demonstrators, who pounded their autos and cried, "Death to the Shah!"

The panel was originally expected to complete its work this week, although the deadline may be extended. New documents and evidence will take time to study. Moreover, the commission has vowed that "it will not consider this mission finished until the hostages are seen." Until then, Administration officials--and worried relatives of the hostages--could only watch and wait, hoping that the Iranians would still live up to their bargain.

* The envoys: Venezuela's Andres Aguilar Mawdsley, a former Ambassador to the U.S. and the U.N.; Algerian Chief U.N. Delegate Mohammed Bedjaoui; Syrian Diplomat Adib Daoudy; Sri Lankan Lawyer Hector Wilfred Jayawardene; and French Human Rights Activist Louis-Edmond Pettiti.

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