Coups, sanctions, wars: The staggering ledger of reparations US owes Iran for decades of hostility

By Yousef Ramazani

As US President Donald Trump once again demands compensation from Iran for damage to American assets, the historical record reveals a far more substantial ledger of unprovoked attacks, assassinations, sabotage, and coups carried out by the United States against Iran, a debt that, by any honest accounting, far exceeds any claim Washington might assert.

The audacity of Washington’s demands for Iranian compensation stands in stark contrast to the documented history of US acts of aggression against the Iranian people.

From the orchestration of the 1953 coup that overthrew Iran’s democratically elected government, to US support for Saddam Hussein during the 1980s Imposed War, including the provision of assistance that facilitated his chemical-weapons program, to the downing of a civilian airliner carrying 290 people, and the imposition of sweeping and illegal sanctions that have severely restricted Iran’s access to medicines and other essential goods, the United States has accumulated a record of harm that spans more than seven decades.

The Islamic Republic of Iran has repeatedly documented these issues, presenting evidence to international bodies and pursuing legal remedies through international institutions.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has also issued rulings in cases involving the United States and Iran, including findings that Washington violated treaty obligations and orders concerning compensation.

Yet Washington continues to cast itself as the injured party, making theatrical claims to compensation while largely ignoring the far greater damage it has inflicted on Iran and the Iranian people over decades of open hostility.

Indifference to the 1918 famine

A century ago, at the dawn of modern bilateral relations, Iran looked to the United States as a potential friend and source of support, a country that many Iranians hoped could serve as a counterweight to the imperial ambitions of Britain and Russia.

Washington, however, ultimately aligned itself with British strategic interests, foreshadowing a pattern of indifference and intervention that would shape relations for generations.

In 1918, as the First World War and the occupation of Iranian territory by foreign forces devastated the country, Iran was struck by a catastrophic famine and epidemic. Estimates of the death toll vary considerably, but some historical accounts put the number of victims at around two million, an enormous loss for a population of roughly ten million at the time.

Amid the humanitarian catastrophe, the Iranian government urgently sought a multi-million-dollar loan from the United States to finance famine relief. Washington refused the request, leaving Iran without the assistance it had sought as the crisis deepened.

Meanwhile, British forces exploited Iran’s vulnerability, occupying parts of the country and imposing arrangements that threatened to reduce Iran to a de facto protectorate.

Iran’s parliament ultimately rejected the proposed Anglo-Persian Agreement in 1919, and in June 1921 the Majlis formally moved to terminate the agreement, reaffirming the country’s determination to resist foreign domination even in a moment of profound vulnerability.

1953 coup: Direct hostile interference

The United States and Britain orchestrated the overthrow of Iran's democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in August 1953, a blatant crime that has been extensively documented in declassified American intelligence records.

US President Dwight Eisenhower himself acknowledged in his diary that the United States had helped restore the Shah and overthrow the democratically elected government of Mosaddegh.

The CIA, working with Britain's MI6, directed a campaign of covert political funding, propaganda, and military action that brought down Mosaddegh's government and reinstalled Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

This act of "regime change" destroyed Iran's constitutional political order, strengthened monarchical authoritarianism, and fundamentally altered Iranian perceptions of the United States.

The consequences of this crime continue to shape Iranian-American relations to this day.

Training SAVAK: building a repressive apparatus

Following the 1953 coup, the CIA agents maintained a firm foothold in Iran to help organize and train the Iranian intelligence apparatus that eventually became SAVAK.

The CIA provided specialized training in counterintelligence, intelligence analysis, and covert operations to SAVAK personnel, creating a notorious torture center that became known for political surveillance, imprisonment of opponents, torture, and suppression of dissidents.

American diplomats were well aware of the serious human rights abuses in Iran but continued the close strategic relationship with the Iranian dictator throughout the 1960s and 1970s.

The United States, according to legal experts, thus bears responsibility for creating and sustaining the instrument of political repression that would torture and kill thousands of Iranians.

US military and political backing for the dictator

During the 1960s and 1970s, Washington made Iran one of its principal regional allies, providing massive arms sales, military training, intelligence cooperation, diplomatic backing, and support for the Shah's regional security role.

While arms sales themselves are not inherently illegal, the political wrongdoing was that Washington knowingly supported an authoritarian government whose domestic repression was extremely severe.

This became particularly controversial during the 1977-79 period, when the Carter administration claimed to promote human rights globally while maintaining a close strategic relationship with Pahlavi.

1979-1980 asset freeze and economic restrictions

In November 1979, US President Jimmy Carter ordered the freezing of approximately $8 billion in Iranian government assets held in American banks, marking the beginning of an economic war that would span nearly half a century.

Washington subsequently imposed broader economic restrictions and progressively expanded the asset freezes, with major American and international banks severing their ties to Iran and major corporations walking away from Iranian contracts.

Legal experts have characterized these actions as economic coercion, a characterization that has been reinforced by decades of continued asset seizures and restrictions.

In 1984, Washington formally designated Iran a so-called "state sponsor of terrorism," a political determination that subsequently became the legal foundation for numerous other illegal and repressive measures, including restrictions on financial transactions, sovereign immunity, Iranian assets, exports, investment, and litigation against Iranian state entities.

Over the decades that followed, the scale of frozen Iranian assets grew exponentially, with estimates now placing the total between $80 billion and $120 billion of Iranian wealth locked away globally in countries including South Korea, Japan, China, Iraq, and various European nations.

The historical facts are not disputed: the United States froze Iranian assets beginning in 1979-80, and successive US administrations have maintained and expanded these freezes through executive orders and political pressure, leaving the Iranian people deprived of their legitimate national wealth.

Operation Eagle Claw: Military incursion into Iranian territory

On April 24, 1980, the US launched Operation Eagle Claw, an attempt to rescue the American spies masquerading as embassy staff in Tehran that failed catastrophically in the Iranian desert.

American military forces entered Iranian territory without the consent of the Iranian government, generating a serious sovereignty and use-of-force issue, which remains a documented fact.

US support for Iraq during the 1980s Imposed War

The United States played a decisive role in enabling Saddam Hussein's unprovoked and devastating military aggression against Iran during the 1980-1988 Imposed War.

The aggression occurred at the instigation of the United States, just hours after unsuccessful US-Iranian negotiations in Germany regarding frozen assets.

US support to the Ba'athist regime in Iraq also included intelligence, satellite and battlefield information, diplomatic support, political engagement, economic assistance, dual-use technology, and efforts to prevent an Iranian victory.

Declassified documents show that Washington knew about Iraq's extensive chemical-weapons use, with a 1983 State Department memorandum explicitly discussing Iraqi chemical-weapons use.

The National Security Archive summarizes the evidence as showing that the United States nevertheless continued its broader policy of supporting Iraq.

The extent of American complicity was shocking. A covert program involving more than sixty Defense Intelligence Agency officers secretly provided the Iraqi general staff with detailed information on Iranian deployments and tactical planning.

The Iraqis shared their battle plans with the Americans, who knew that Iraqi commanders would employ chemical weapons in decisive battles.

The United States provided this critical battle planning assistance at a time when US intelligence agencies were fully aware that Iraq was using chemical weapons against Iranian forces.

The result was the chemical bombardment of Iranian soldiers and civilians, with more than 100,000 chemical munitions used against Iranian forces, as per documented evidence.

The city of Sardasht was bombarded with chemical agents, killing hundreds and injuring more than 8,000 people, with survivors still suffering the consequences today.

The United States knowingly supported and protected a government that was repeatedly using chemical weapons against Iranians, placing strategic objectives ahead of action to stop those attacks.

Furthermore, after Iraq's genocidal chemical weapons attack in Halabja in 1988, US authorities falsely blamed Iran, even though they knew that Iran had not used such weapons of mass destruction.

The false accusations were later repeated by some contemporary US politicians, such as former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, during the first Trump administration.

During the aggression, Washington also worked internationally to prevent Iran from obtaining weapons through Operation Staunch, which became part of the broader US strategy of undermining Iranian resistance against the unprovoked aggression.

1987-1988 US naval aggression in the Persian Gulf

The United States began escorting Kuwaiti tankers under US flags in Operation Earnest Will, leading to several direct clashes with Iranian forces.

For example, in September 1987, US forces attacked and captured the Iranian vessel Iran Ajr, falsely accusing it of laying mines.

In October 1987, US forces attacked Iranian oil platforms after the US-flagged tanker Sea Isle City was struck, destroying two Iranian oil platforms in Operation Nimble Archer.

In April 1988, after the USS Samuel B. Roberts struck a mine, the United States launched Operation Praying Mantis, damaging Iranian oil platforms, sinking the Iranian frigate Sahand, damaging the Sabalan, and sinking or destroying several smaller Iranian naval vessels.

The International Court of Justice concluded in 2003 that the US attacks on the Iranian oil platforms could not be justified as necessary measures of self-defense.

The Court specifically found that Operation Praying Mantis as a whole, and even the portion directed against the Salman and Nasr platforms, was not a proportionate use of force in self-defense.

This is one of the strongest cases on the list because an international court actually ruled on the legality of the US conduct.

Iran Air Flight 655: Murder of 290 civilians

On July 3, 1988, the USS Vincennes deliberately shot down Iran Air Flight 655, a civilian Airbus A300 flying from Bandar Abbas to Dubai, killing all 290 people aboard, including 66 children.

Iran brought proceedings against the United States before the International Court of Justice, slamming the US for violations of international aviation law and the prohibition on the use of force.

The case was eventually discontinued after the United States paid approximately $61.8 million in compensation to the families of the victims without formally admitting legal liability.

The US explanation was that the cruiser mistakenly identified the Airbus as an attacking F-14, which was rejected by all international experts. It remains one of the most traumatic episodes in Iranian-American relations.

Continuing economic embargo and sanctions escalation

In October 1987, President Reagan issued Executive Order 12613, imposing an import embargo on Iranian-origin goods, with the restrictions becoming progressively broader over time.

In 1995, President Clinton issued Executive Order 12957 targeting Iranian petroleum investment, followed by Executive Order 12959, which imposed a comprehensive trade and investment embargo.

In 1996, the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act threatened sanctions against foreign companies investing significantly in Iran's petroleum sector, which Iran and many other countries regarded as extraterritorial coercion.

Under Obama, the United States dramatically expanded sanctions on Iran's central bank, oil exports, petrochemical sector, shipping, insurance, financial institutions, and international banking access.

The illegally repressive measures became sufficiently extensive that Iran was increasingly isolated from the international financial system.

Iran and UN human rights officials say these unilateral sanctions caused serious harm to health, medicine imports, food security, economic development, employment, and the general standard of living in the country.

The UN Special Rapporteur on unilateral coercive measures has specifically documented the negative effects of US sanctions on Iranian health and life, including difficulties obtaining vital medicines despite formal humanitarian exemptions.

Dual containment and support for anti-government groups

The Clinton administration pursued a policy of dual containment against Iran and Iraq, seeking to limit Iranian economic, military and regional influence while maintaining comprehensive sanctions.

Legal experts characterized this as a policy of economic strangulation of the Iranian people.

Beginning especially in the 2000s, Washington increasingly funded controversial initiatives, with the Iran Freedom Support Act of 2006 explicitly authorizing financial and political assistance to individuals and organizations hostile to the Islamic Republic.

These programs were aimed at interference in the country's internal affairs, "regime-change" operations, political subversion, and psychological warfare.

US legislation allowing seizure of Iranian assets

From the 1990s through the 2010s, US Congress repeatedly altered US sovereign-immunity law to permit Iranian assets to be attached and used to satisfy judgments obtained in US courts.

This eventually became the subject of a major case before the International Court of Justice: Certain Iranian Assets. In its 2023 judgment, the ICJ found that the US had violated the 1955 Treaty of Amity in several respects concerning Iranian companies and property, specifically finding violations of multiple articles of the treaty.

The international court also held that the United States was obligated to compensate Iran for the injuries resulting from those violations.

As of 2026, the compensation phase remains active, with the Court having scheduled November 25, 2026 for Iran's Memorial on compensation.

US courts, in their predatory campaigns, went so far as to rule on alleged Iranian responsibility for the 9/11 attacks, demanding billions in damages, even though the official investigation itself showed no Iranian involvement.

Stuxnet and the cyberwar against Iran

The Stuxnet malware was used against Iran's nuclear facilities, particularly the centrifuge infrastructure at Natanz, in what public reporting and US congressional research identified as a joint US-Israeli operation associated with the code name Olympic Games.

It was technically extraordinary because it did not merely steal information but was designed to manipulate industrial-control systems and physically disrupt centrifuge operations.

The broader cyber campaign has also been associated with malware such as Flame, which targeted Iranian systems and has been attributed by cybersecurity researchers to US and Israeli actors.

Pressure during the 2009 riots

After Iran's 2009 presidential election, Washington publicly supported and armed Iranian rioters who went on rampage in major cities. It was an attempt by the United States to overthrow the government.

There is clear and documented evidence of US support for Iranian armed rioters and communication initiatives, which amounted to clear political interference.

Maximum pressure after Trump's 2018 withdrawal from the JCPOA

In May 2018, Trump withdrew the United States from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA ) despite Iran's full compliance according to the IAEA framework.

Washington then reimposed and expanded illegal and sweeping sanctions under the policy known as "maximum pressure," targeting Iranian oil exports, banking, petrochemicals, shipping, metals, central-bank transactions, industrial sectors, senior officials, and numerous companies.

The humanitarian consequences became particularly controversial because the sanctions generated enormous secondary-sanctions and over-compliance effects, making foreign banks and companies reluctant to conduct even permitted humanitarian transactions.

The UN Special Rapporteur documented cases in which pharmaceutical companies stopped supplying medicines to Iran because of the practical effects of US sanctions.

Assassination of General Qassem Soleimani

On January 3, 2020, the United States conducted a drone strike near Baghdad airport that led to the assassination of Iranian top anti-terror commander Major General Qassem Soleimani, along with Iraqi resistance commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis and their companions.

UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial executions Agnes Callamard concluded that the killing was unlawful, as did independent human rights activists. 

Callamard further stated that the US had failed to provide sufficient evidence of an imminent attack that could justify the strike under Article 51 of the UN Charter and had violated Iraq's territorial integrity.

General Soleimani was in Iraq at the invitation of the Iraqi government when he was martyred.

US seizure and forfeiture of Iranian oil and assets

During the 2010s and 2020s, Washington increasingly used sanctions law, forfeiture proceedings, and maritime enforcement to illegally seize Iranian oil cargoes and other assets.

International experts characterized these measures as piracy, economic warfare, theft of sovereign property, and violations of international law.

2026 US-Israeli aggression on Iran

On February 28, 2026, the United States and the Israeli regime launched a large-scale aggression against the Islamic Republic of Iran, which resulted in the martyrdom of senior Iranian leaders, including the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei.

The unprovoked military campaign targeted numerous civilian buildings, military installations, nuclear facilities, and other strategic targets across the country in a flagrant violation of international law and the UN Charter.

The aggression was launched without any authorization from the UN Security Council and without any credible justification under the right of self-defense as defined in Article 51 of the UN Charter, as Iran had not committed any armed attack against the US that would warrant such a massive military action.

Legal experts and international law scholars have consistently questioned the validity of the US and Israeli justifications, noting that claims of alleged future threats were speculative at best and that the scope and scale of the operation far exceeded any plausible claim of self-defense.

The unprovoked nature of this aggression, coming after years of US withdrawal from international agreements and maximum pressure campaigns, represented yet another chapter in Washington's long history of unlawful military actions against the Iranian nation and a clear violation of Iran's sovereignty and territorial integrity, which demands compensation.

Minab school attack

On the first day of the 40-day war of aggression, an elementary school in Minab was struck by US missiles, killing at least 168 schoolchildren and teachers.

Multiple investigations concluded that American forces were responsible, with satellite imagery suggesting that the school was struck by multiple air-delivered weapons.

By June, US President Trump said "it might never be established who was responsible," while the Pentagon investigation remained unresolved in an attempt to absolve themselves of the crime.

US attacks on Iranian civilian infrastructure 

During the subsequent stages of the 40-day war of aggression, US attacks expanded to include civilian bridges, tunnels, communications facilities, water infrastructure, desalination plants, banks, electricity facilities, ports, and other infrastructure.

Hospitals and ambulances were also deliberately attacked in different Iranian cities during the war.

US naval blockade of Iran

In April 2026, the US announced a blockade of maritime traffic entering and leaving Iranian ports.

Iran formally complained to the UN Security Council, describing the blockade as a violation of sovereignty, a violation of territorial integrity, a breach of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, an act of aggression, and an unlawful interference with international maritime commerce.

Earlier this month, US War Secretary Peter Hegseth said the Navy could maintain the blockade indefinitely, making it indispensable for the US to pay reparations to Iran.

---

Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:

www.presstv.ir