Former hostages react to US-Iran deal
Some refuse to trust former captor while others see first step
McLEAN, Va. — The deal reached between Iran and six world powers over the weekend has been touted as a trust-building endeavor, though some who endured captivity during the prolonged hostage crisis that began in 1979 are skeptical.
“It’s kind of like Jimmy Carter all over again,” said Clair Cortland Barnes, now retired and living in Leland, N.C., after a career at the CIA and elsewhere. He sees the negotiations now as no more effective than they were for the Carter administration, when he and others languished.
Retired Air Force Col. Thomas E. Schaefer, 83, called the deal “foolishness.”
“Mypersonal view is, I never found an Iranian leader I can trust,” he said. “I don’t think today it’s any different from when I was there.”
Schaefer was a military attache in Iran who was among those held hostage. He now lives in Scottsdale, Ariz., with his wife of more than 60 years, Anita, who also takes a dim view: “We are probably not very Christian-like when it comes to all this,” she said.
The agreement between Iran and the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany — is to temporarily halt parts of Tehran’s disputed nuclear program and allow for more intrusive international monitoring of Iran’s facilities. In exchange, Iran gains some modest relief from stiff economic sanctions and a pledge from President Barack Obama that no new penalties will be levied during the six months.
Mutually beneficial deal
The hostage crisis began in November 1979 when militants stormed the United States Embassy in Tehran and seized its occupants. In all, 66 were taken hostage. Thirteen were released less than three weeks later in 1979; one was released in July 1980; the remaining 52 were released Jan. 20, 1981.
To be sure, the former hostages have varying views. Victor Tomseth, 72, a retired diplomat from Vienna, Va., sees the pact as a positive first step.
Tomseth, who was a political counselor at the embassy in Tehran in 1979, had written a diplomatic cable months before the hostage crisis warning about the difficulties of negotiation with the Iranians. Among other issues, Tomseth wrote that “the Persian experience has been that nothing is permanent.” As a result, he wrote that Iranians are more likely to be preoccupied with the shortterm gains of an agreement and to treat negotiations as adversarial.
Still, he said in a phone inter- view Monday that it is possible to cut a mutually beneficial deal with them.
“The challenge is Iranian society and politics is so fragmented that it’s difficult to reach a consensus,” he said — a problem that is also present in the U.S.
He said he considers the deal “in a category of an initial confidence measure.” aces. … We’ve seen the alternatives in Egypt and Tunisia,’ ” where established regimes have been toppled, Limbert said.
He said it’s a mistake to be overly pessimistic about the prospects for a deal.
“If we and the Iranians could never agree, then Victor and I and all our colleagues would still be in Tehran,” he said.