Sociology (Love, Friendship and the Intimate Sphere) Essay

Sociology (Love, Friendship and the Intimate Sphere) - Essay Example This means that love can grow between straight men and women as well as the homosexual and heterosexual individuals. This, in the world of present times, is quite a common occurrence. However the aspect of intimacy can take a U-turn when relationships start getting sour and there are heartbreaks left, right and center which mark the breaking up of these relationships. First we need to understand what the intimate sphere is all about before delving any further into the regime of love, affection and relationships. The intimate sphere speaks volumes of the manner in which intimacy is documented through the physical demonstrations of love, making out and kissing in public and even when the two love birds are alone. [Gordon, 1993] It also means that the two individuals feel strongly about each other so much so that they cannot spend their time without each other’s company. The social and cultural values seem to encircle the intimate sphere in entirety and this cannot be denied its due right in the related scheme of things. An unfortunate thing that has stepped into this intimate sphere is in the form of violence and violent activities being carried out between the members who are in a relationship which suggests that since they feel strongly about the whole linkage, there is an element which tells them from within to go against the norm and sho w hatred, for the time being or forever in one way or the other. What we need to understand is the fact that love means providing comfort and solace to each other rather what we witness these days is more of a violent activity where more and more love means more violent activities happening at different levels and in different relationships as well. It is rightly stated that violence is indeed the companion of the intimate relationships and the same do exist in close proximity of each other, much to the dismay of pure and ever lasting regimes based on love and

The Difference Between an Licensed Practical Nurs and Registered Nurse Essay Example for Free

The Difference Between an Licensed Practical Nurs and Registered Nurse Essay It takes a lot of courage to let go of what is known, familiar, and comfortable. Change is a driving force in everyone. Like a butterfly, individuals in the nursing field may go through similar stages of metamorphosis, which is a process of growth, change, and development, (Wikipedia Foundation, 2006). Nurses have a vast amount of opportunity for growth and change in the healthcare field. The nursing profession has often been viewed as target of change rather than a force that proposes, leads, and implements change†(Habel,2005). Many individuals are choosing to evolve and expand their careers and obtain their bachelor’s degree in nursing. While the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) performs much of the same skills, the student professional nurse must refine his or her skills in clinical judgment, collaboration, leadership, and delegation to effectively care for their patients as a professional nurse. The many comparisons and contrasts to the role of a Registered Nurse (RN) to an LPN can vary by their credentials. However, there are differences and similarities in pay, education, training, abilities, and their qualifications that are required for them to practice safely, and legally. While it is true that both are ultimately charged with providing quality patient care, the differences are vast and the careers of the two are usually very different. When comparing the differences in opportunities between a RN and LPN, one must first understand the abilities and skills sets of each. This paper will highlight some of the differences between and LPN and RN. Difference between an LPN and RN According to the Florida Nurse Practice Act, a Registered Nurse means any person licensed in this state to practice professional nursing and a Licensed Practical Nurse means any person licensed in this state to practice practical nursing. Practice of professional nursing means the performance of those acts requiring substantial specialized knowledge, judgment, and nursing skill based upon applied principles of psychological, biological, physical, and social sciences which shall include, but not be limited to the observation, assessment, nursing diagnosis, planning, intervention, and evaluation of care; health teaching and counseling of the ill, injured, or infirm; and the promotion of wellness, maintenance of health, and prevention of illness of others. The administration of medications and treatments as prescribed or authorized by a duly licensed practitioner authorized by the laws of this state to prescribe such medications and treatments. The supervision and teaching of other personnel in the theory and performance of any of the above acts. Practice of practical nursing means the performance of selected acts, including the administration of treatments and medications, in the care of the ill, injured, or infirm and the promotion of wellness, maintenance of health, and prevention of illness of others under the direction of a registered nurse, a licensed physician, a licensed osteopathic physician, a licensed podiatric physician, or a licensed dentist. The professional nurse and the practical nurse shall be responsible and accountable for making decisions that are based upon the individuals educational preparation and experience in nursing. As an LPN, in the setting where I work, I must admit that some of my roles differ significantly from that of an RN for example there are some medications that I have to administer under the direction of an RN such as IV pushes also it is not within my scope to do an initial admission assessment, whereas the RN is allowed to do those duties. An Rn can make a decision that a client will require a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC line) for the administration of fluids and/or medications and so can call a doctor for such an order. Thinking about the positive role models around me, I have to admit that the person I admire most is Florence Nightingale, who has been a pioneer in nursing. Her lasting contribution has been her role in founding the modern nursing profession, which has opened the doors of nursing for me. She has set an example of compassion, commitment to patient care, and diligent and thoughtful hospital administration, which I have been using and will always be apart of who I am, not only as a nurse but as a person. I endeavor just as Nightingale to leave an indelible mark in the field of nursing. My personal philosophy of nursing is that one must contemplate the qualities of the endeavors to which a nurse obligates their heart and soul to. A nurse commits to being the embodiment of altruism, charisma, empathy, and knowledge applied to the enterprise of protection, promotion, and enhancement of the holistic health states of all persons. This includes, and is not limited to a nurse’s practice in the professional arena, but also a nurse takes this way of thinking outside the workplace to uphold these ideals. So too should nurses reflect on their own knowledge base and strive to be always yearning for new experiences and understanding to elevate the level of professionalism inherent in their application of nursing. Furthermore, I believe nurses are obligated to their fellow professionals, as an integral part of the health care team, to aid and improve the ability of their peers. This collegiality is essential to the upkeep of the trusted image a nurse has among their colleagues and the public. Additionally, this allows for greater cohesion between health care workers and provides the patients with requisite care that espouses the statement of nursing above. Finally, a nurse must always remember to whom they are ultimately accountable; their patient. This accountability is first and foremost in upholding the principles a nurse represents. A nurse should constantly be asking themselves whether or not the care they are providing is exceeding the expectations of their patients and bestowing health advancement to preserve the patient’s health integrity. Moreover, a nurse must remain vigilant of the duty to themselves in the same regard by being able to self-evaluate: â€Å"Am I providing the exceptional, empathic, and optimal holistic care that my patient deserves and that I can be proud of? †

Culture Impact On International Business Cultural Studies Essay

Culture Impact On International Business Cultural Studies Essay Culture always makes a great impact on international trade. Although there are similarities between various cultures, but there are also obvious differences, the ever-present different cultural backgrounds affect international trade. Different cultural products in international trade will have the name, trademarks, advertisements, and verbal and written communication translation impact. Therefore, cultural factors should be taken into account in the international trade, in order to avoid misunderstandings which may result in economic losses. In international trade, cultural background, language and customs and other cultural differences become the invisible barriers as cross-cultural communication in international trade. To analysis the differences of language and cultural factors and their impact, the crucial element to open the international market and expand International trade successfully is implementing cross-cultural exchange effectively. Many powerful companies failed in international business, the main reason are not the shortage of capital or technology, but due to ignoring the cultural differences impact on trade and communication. In the face of this, we should be aware of the importance of culture, find out the aspects of culture that impact on the international trade, and know how these points work. Relevance of Culture The impact on international trade of ubiquitous cultural factor is recessive and potential. Culture has the characteristic of group. As the common pattern of behaviour which accumulated in the history, people approve and follow their own culture they live with. Culture hybrid is the catalyst of economic development while culture conflict is the cancer cell of economic cooperation. 2.1 Concept of Culture Culture is the way in which a group of people solves problems and reconciles dilemmas. (Alfons Trompenaars, Charles Hampden-Turner, 1993, P6) Culture is formed by the ideas, concepts, behaviour, customs, habits, representatives of a group in a given period and the overall sense from this group out of all the activities. 2.2 Values of Culture According to the importance of culture, it is necessary to know the culture well. When acquiring a language and know the accuracy meaning in the culture, we can communicate with others through it. By understanding the customs, we can anticipate how business partners and customers are likely to respond. By learning the partners or customers culture values, we can distinguish between what is considered right or wrong, acceptable or offensive. To know the different ways of thinking in different culture, we can identify with other managers, provide knowledge to meet and negotiation with them. 2.3 Levels of Culture As we learn from the lecture, we know there are at least three levels of culture: National/Regional Culture-Culture within a country/regional Corporate Culture-Culture within a specific organization Professional Culture-Culture of particular functions within an organization 3.0 How does culture work As we know, culture is a broad concept. So it can affect international trade in many ways both internal and external the enterprise. 3.1 National/Regional Culture Language Cultural difference is an important factor that restricts the translation of the words. Because translation involves different using principle of two different languages. In the translation process, if you dont know the different culture very well, this often occurs that the meaning is quite the opposite with the real meaning which can lead to the misunderstanding. For example, when the General Motors Corporation enters the market of Belgium, the slogan was Body in Belgium, but when translating the slogan into Flemish language, the meaning was corpse by Fisher. The strange slogan led to embarrassment and the customers confusion. Things followed were the dramatically slip of the sales volume until the administration became aware of this problem. This situation shows the significance of understanding the language in the different culture background. Custom Different countries have different customs, the tradition way of life, the hobby of people, the taboo, etc., all these show the culture diversity of the world. A bitter case shows the consequences of disrespect of custom. Lawrence Stessin, the anthropologist, pointed this in his report. A business man from North California wanted to purchase a textile machines company from Birmingham in UK to open the European market. Not long after he took over the company, the manager from America want to rectify a problem about the British teatime. Lawrence said, in British, every worker had the teatime of half an hour. During the time, workers can taste some wine in the large ounce container on their own preferences. The manager proposed reducing the teatime to 10 minutes and union agreed. But a week later, the workers rioted in the factory. They broke the windows, destroyed the machines and hooted the administrators. The manager tried to redeem for the loss, he installed the vending machines with the low capacity cups instead of the large ounce containers. Based on the American custom, the rules requested more contribution and loyalty of the workers bu t disrespected the local custom, the company ended in bankruptcy. Values As the result of the difference of countries historical development, the formation of culture differs a lot in the long history. People also have different opinions and values on the same thing. In international trade activities, people with different culture background show the obvious differences on the concept of time, decision-making and conflict management approach. Americans believe in free competition and individualism. Personal courage to assume responsibilities is a virtue in Americans eyes and its the positive performance. So in a negotiation, the representative wields the power to make his own decision within the authorized scope. On the contrary, Chinese people pay great attention on collective decision-making and emphasise the team wisdom. As the proverb says, Two heads are better than one. Especially in Japan, a collective country, team interests are higher than everything at any time. The difference between Asian and Western values leads to the different understanding to some things, which sometimes results in the barriers in the trade and verbal communication. Mode of thinking American linguist Robert B Kaplan(1966) proposed the Cultural thought patterns in inter-cultural education through the research of abroad students who speak different mother tongue. He believes that thinking is spiral Oriental while Western thinking is linear in. Once an American corporation wanted to enter the market of south China, they sent a representative to deal with the business. Also, China side wants to enlarge its trade. Since both sides were satisfied with the deal, the negotiation should be favouring. But the process of negotiation was not so simple. It was problem here that the different thinking way. To show humility and amiable, the Chinese manager always used some fuzzy words, like maybe, perhaps, whatever, etc.. All these made the American manager doubted whether the Chinese manager were pure-hearted to make the deal. So they didnt sign the contract in China. To show the respect to others, the Chinese manager didnt express his will to deal. After going back to America, the manager wrote a letter to China and directly express that he wanted to cooperate with China. The Chinese are happy to accept and wrote back. But in the long letter, he put the key point in the end with the long-winded matting before. At last there was no tr ansaction because of the misunderstanding which resulted from different mode of thinking. 3.2 Corporate Culture The relationship between staff-Tom Peters, American writer on business management practices, said that the only real resource to the enterprise is human. Therefore, the harmonious atmosphere among staff is quite important to the development of enterprise. It is quite normal for a transnational enterprise to hire talented persons. While unseemly ways of arranging employees led to a series of problem in an enterprise. To some extent, the appearance of these people leads to internal staff personnel psychological confrontation. This is a process of coordination and adjustment. But the administration ignored this serious point and just paid more attention to these talented persons. During this period, the spirit and morale of the old staff were affected. They became less loyal and negative and resulted in the decline in performance. Another situation will lead to the discord among employees. As a Chinese, we are used to it while which may offend people in other countries. Suppose there are three employees, A, B and C. When A and B are talking about something, C comes and interrupts their conversation or joins their talking. It is normal in China and people can accept. In western, however, people think they were not respected or even offended. They cant accept this behaviour. So if this situation happens in an enterprise with employees from different countries, the harmonious atmosphere will be broken and lead to the performance. The relationship between higher and lower levels-the relationship between boss and employee is interaction and help each other forward. In the Chinese and Western culture, this relationship shows some difference: Role difference-In China, the mainstream of Chinese culture emphasizes the group and social values. People pay more attention on the affiliation between individual and group. The actions and observation must be in accordance with the expectation of group. In contrast, western people emphasize individual rights and independence. For example, to respect peoples rights and freedom, the speaker always uses the phrasing like Would youà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦? Could youà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦.? Shall Ià ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦? etc. No matter how the relationship is between two persons. This different position of role leads to the misunderstanding between boss and employee from different culture background. Daily conversation-Because of the difference of different culture, a polite term in one culture may be considered as the impolite, inappropriate language in another culture. In China, people used to show the respect only to eldership or higher authorities. Among the western people, they always call each others first name, whether you are my eldership or boss or teacher. Instead of being impolite, they think its the way to show intimate among people. For example, in a transnational enterprise, the manager is a Chinese and the employee is a British. The manager will assign a task to the employee without the words like please thank you which may depresses the employee in some extent. The opposite situation, if the manager is a western people while the employee is a Chinese. Its normal when the manager call the name of the employee. As the junior employee, Chinese people always say its too late, youd better to go home or something like that to show concerning. But the manager may feel being interfered because time to go home is his own right. Nonverbal communication-during the conversation, not only the express are different, but also the space distance in different culture background. In UK, people divided the distance into four types: intimate distance, personal distance, social distance, public distance. In France, people will hug and kiss the face. While in China, there is no definite distance in social intercourse. The type of body touch is shaking hands or hugging which mostly happens among the same gender. Expect lovers, the situation of kissing and hugging will never happen among the opposite gender. And females always go out hand in hand if they are good friends which may be misunderstood in western countries. 3.3 Professional Culture Within an organization, both professional culture and organizational culture can shape the decisions, output and something else in it. The organisational culture is a system that has an impact on the whole organization. While the professional culture lays particular emphasis on individual effort. The coexistence of these two cultures can plan the development of organization much better. If the organization can recruit participants who have the characteristics it requires, it does not have to develop these characteristics through training and education.'(Amitai Etzioni, 1961) If the organizational culture is fixed, the goals, the competitor, the position are definite, the organization has to recruit employees with the specific characteristics. Here, the professional culture does make sense. As a collective country, Japanese employ own the high loyalty to their organization. The unique loyalty can be seen as the professional culture within an organization. The loyalty plays a particular and significant role in the enterprise. The intrinsic motivation of the workers loyalty originates from the trust mechanism. Therefore, the Japanese workers loyalty is one of the most important reasons that the Japanese corporate achieve success. A Chinese business man established a restaurant in Japan several years ago. In the first few years, he hired Chinese people because they are his compatriots. Before long, however, the employees were replaced by Japanese gradually. Some guests from China want to know the reason. He told them that Japanese are easy to manage. More importantly, the Japanese employees are always concerning more about the restaurant. Once he became the staff, he was a member of this team. The team grew better so that the staff got better. A manager of human resource department in a Japanese transnational enterprise once said, as individuals, Chinese people have the excellent working capability. But as a member of the organization, they lack compatibility and sufficient responsibility. This enterprise recruited 20 IT employees from China. And the administration wanted to inculcate a spirit of loyal to organization. But too much emphasis on this point sometimes led to their negative mentality. There is another phenomenon that we can only see in Japan. Some Chinese consultants had the business transactions with a Japanese newspaper office. They found strange that they could rarely see the boss himself appearing in the office during the several years. All the internal things were assigned to the manager. The boss was always staying at home by remote control. Everything was in perfect order. All the employees worked hard and dedicate without lazing. They all treated the enterprise and boss as their family because they know better the company was, much more money they could earn. Once a Japanese manager was asked a question, Why dont you start your own business and be your own boss with your talent? In that company, he deals with all the affairs. He can earn much more if he start his own business. But he said that he has been in the company for more than three decades from a staff to a manager. His growth cant be without the training and cultivate of the boss and enterprise. They are a big family. In Japan, employees are loyal to the company. Even if another company will pay more and provide better treatment, they wont change their minds easily. How to measure an employees loyalty? When buying things for the company, the staff never receive kickbacks; never use the company telephone to make personal international call; to be the first one to come, the last one to go back; meticulous, and so on. In the eyes of Japanese workers, these things are unalterable. The best way to show the employees loyalty is the company of their choice, or single-mindedness. And the boss defines the loyal staff as actively perform the spirit of sacrifice. Since the 90s from last century, Japans bubble economy collapsed. The problem of employees loyalty emerged. Japanese human resource instruction conducted a survey in 2002. Among Netherlands, Mexico, United States, Germany, Italy, Japan and some other countries, the employees loyalty of the first three countries was 73%, 72%, 68% respectively. That of Japan was only 50%. They were shocked by the results. This result indicates that the positive influence of professional culture needs a steady surrounding. Conclusion In the East-West cooperation business process, cultural backgrounds, different cultural mentality, customs, are often overlooked by many people. While the cultural factor is the key factor that determines the success or failure of business activities. Quite different from the normal trade, the international trade within different culture background request more. Dealers should know each others culture and custom very well. Its the guarantee of success. In international business, we should pay more attention to differences in cross-cultural communication. Correctly deal with cultural differences and prevent the barriers that may be caused by cultural patterns and cultural prejudices. Among the staff, everyone should respect each other and treat equality. The key to success in cross-culture communication is treating the culture difference properly; try to exclude cultural superiority, cultural patterns and cultural prejudices of the interference. This is the only way to carry out the international trade activities in cross-culture communication successfully. We can establish the international culture exchange centre; carry out the multi-level forms of culture display and exchange to eliminate the concept of custom, language and art appreciation and other aspects of trade barriers. The formulation of foreign trade policy for the enterprises should be syncretised with that the local culture. We cant always challenge a culture if its not suited to our system. It is necessary to create the countrys cultural products for sale, but also the manner and extent of pricing that people can accept, and try to find suitable local custom channels to purchase objects willing to accept the publicity. These links are indispensable, and only all of them are put together organically, the barriers can be broken. In conclusion, we stress that culture is the primary factor in business trade, and the major barrier is the difference between historical cultures. Cultural factors are unavoidable. Cultural universals are dominant, and cultural differences can be bridged by international trade. Moreover, with the development of cultural interpenetration, the influence of cultural differences will become smaller. The cross-culture communication activity will become easier than before.

Essay --

n the play "Tragedy of Macbeth", William Shakespeare presents many examples of foreshadowing which pulls the reader in and displays an interesting and unique way of story telling. Right from the beginning in (Act 1, Scene 1) three witches appear who are the main sources of foreshadowing and start the entire story by agreeing with one another to meet up again "when the battle's lost and won". Further along in the play the actual prophecies given by the three witches occur when they meet Macbeth and Banquo then greet Macbeth with three titles "Thane of Glamis" "Thane of Cawdor" and "King hereafter". Following after, the witches don't meet Macbeth again until (Act 4) and during this meeting Macbeth learns three more prophecies that foreshadow his life to come. The three prophecies are an armed head, a bloody child, and a child crowned with a tree in his hand. The importance of the opening scenes and further along in the play start to bring truth of the prophecies in Act 4. In the beginn ing (Act 1, scene 1) of Macbeth the appearance of three witches shed light to what might happen. Everything starts to unravel when the three witches declare to meet up again with each other "when the battle's lost and won". Also a short time after that they yell out together "fair is foul, and foul is fair" this foreshadows that some sort of evil will be coming and that there will also be a victory of sorts to either the witches or the main character in the story, but the audience doesn't know specifically what is to happen. These also suggest a great battle will be fought against good and evil. However these events that are soon to follow will unfold at a rapid pace. This foreshadowing can be detected by the audience because they can feel the suspense... ...liam Shakespeare: Macbeth, the three witches are used as prophets that convey Macbeth's future fate directly to him. Macbeth detects these prophecies not as absolute truths but as predictions that might come true depending on if he thinks they are good or not. For instance at the beginning when the witches declare that they will meet again with each other "When the battle's lost and won". Also when the three witches meet Macbeth and Banquo, they greet Macbeth as three titles. Finally, when The three witches appear to him again they provide three more prophecies that ring actual truth to what is going to happen. The use of these characters in foreshadowing adds to the "tragedy" of the tragedy. Macbeth was foreshadowed or prophesied to commit these acts and die and he knew some and still failed to see them. This adds to the brilliance of Shakespeare's tragedy, Macbeth.

Women are better parents than men Essay

Today , with the development of society, people’s living styles have changed a lot. A common phenomenon is that more and more men play a fundamental part in our daily life, they stay at home doing housework and taking care of children. However, women work outside the home. Although this trend becomes more and more popular, the importance of women dealing with educating and taking care of children can’t be replaced. That is to say: women are better parents than men. Supporters of men are better parents argue that men have enough energy to do many things such as sending children to school or keeping track of the children’s doctor and dentist appointments, etc. But are these enough for bringing up a child? Of course ,the answer is No. In traditional belief: women who are not good at domestic duties will have difficulty in their family life sooner or later, so they have to get accustomed to cooking and taking care of children. Since they are teenage girls, they start to learn household tasks and raise children, so that they can become a good mother in the future. Besides, when the man are young, their mothers do everything for them, they do not need to do any housework if they don’t like. Generally, most men are not good at cooking and they are careless, which results in their children’s unwilling to be along with them. Also, women are more circumspective than men, this is women’s nature that counts as an advantage in being better parents. Women have a sharp insight, they can know what their children are thinking through careful observation. Are they happy or sad, hungry or thirsty, want to sleep or want to listen to music? And then women will try to meet their demands by appropriate methods. Mother is the person who understand her child best. Contrarily, there is always an unbridgeable gap between the father and children in a family, for father is a strict and serious men that children dare not to express their emotions, even sometimes the kid behave abnormal, the father can’t find out anything wrong. Last but not least, women are gentler and more tolerant than men, this contributes to women have more chances to contact with their kids. From very first day of pregnancy, there is a close and sacred relationship between mothers and their little babies. The belief that women’s sole responsibility is to raise their children has been deeply tooted in our society for a long time, hence, children may have a tendency to listen and confide their personal problems to them. And mothers will give them  suggestions on how to solve these problems correctly. And men are sole financial providers and have to work very hard to support family, which makes them have little chance to talk to their children and know them better. In consequence, women are considered not only better mothers but also close friends by their kids. Having said these, although men are trying their best to be a good househusband, women still outweigh them in terms of taking on child rearing.

United States

United States The U.S-Iran relations emerged as early as mid-nineteenth century. They had a diplomatic, cultural and economic relation. During this period, the two nations were great allies; Iran government did not trust Russian and British intentions but considered America as a trustworthy nation. Throughout the Cold War, the two governments (Iran and U.S.) supported each other since they were all against Soviet Union.Advertising We will write a custom research paper sample on United States-Iran relations, 1930-1945 specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More United States government went as far as supporting Iranian repressive regimes. Nevertheless, many people believe that it was the Iranians who encouraged Americans to get involved with them. The relationship between United States and Iran deteriorated during Shah Mohammad regime. It worsened after Iranian Revolution that took place in 1979. The diplomatic relation that existed between Iran and United Sta tes does not exist anymore today. This paper traces the diplomatic, cultural and economic relation that existed between United States and Iran during 1930 to 1945. U.S.-Iranian diplomatic relations started in mid-nineteen century when Tehran became strong allies with Washington to oppose Russian and British involvement in Iranian affairs. However, this diplomatic relation between the two states became slow after they signed economic treaty of friendship in the year 1856. U.S.-Iranian relations formally began when U.S legation was opened in Tehran during the reign of President Arthur in 1883. In 1888, the first Iranian delegate alighted in Washington (James1978). During his first meeting with President Cleveland, Iranian ambassador asked the president to form alliance with Iran against Russians and British who were interfering with Iranian affairs. The main reason why Washington had interest in Iran during 19th century was their concern for American Presbyterian missionaries in Iran. The group arrived in Iran in 1830s and Americans were greatly concerned about their well-being in Iran. On the other hand, Tehran was interested in America for protection. The Iranian government saw America as a nation with potential; they could help them encounter their enemies who were mainly Russians and British living in Iran.Advertising Looking for research paper on history? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Iranian government had set a policy of third power strategy and they believed that United States was the best candidate. Iran wanted to preserve its independence and with the help of a powerful nation like United States, they were sure they will manage to do away with Russians and British people who were residing in Iran (Benson 1981). However, few of Iranian nationalists thought that Germany could be the best candidate. Though after World War II, Iran had a change of mind concerning America: the policies set by Washington towards Iran destroyed the image of a compassionate great power. Iranian nationalists began to oppose their autocracy and considered U.S as imperialist and intruders in their affairs. After Iranian Constitutional Revolution (1906-1911), the Americans managed to take part in Iranian politics. This Iranian Constitutional Revolution led to declaration of Iran as a constitutional monarchy. United States and Iran joined hands to oppose the Russian and British imperialism. This was after Russia and Britain decided to classify Iran as their own sphere which they can control. They together with St. Petersburg opposed and besiege Iranian autocracy and constitution. Iranian nationalists therefore had hopes that Washington will offer diplomatic support and help curb Russian and Iranian interference in their national affairs (Mark 1987). This is why quite a number of Iranian nationalists had a positive view of U.S. They believed that Americans were not interested in their nation and would only offer them protection. The way Iranian nationalist viewed Americans was reinforced after Howard Baskerville who was American Presbyterian missionary teacher died in a civil war. He was helping Iranian revolutionaries fight Russian forces in Iran. The fact that Baskerville died while fighting for and protecting oppressed Iranians made Iranians nationalists consider Americans as champions. The Americans had won Iranian trust. In 1911, Iranian constitutional system employed a group of Americans as their financial advisers. William Morgan was the leader of the group and they both helped in resisting Anglo-Russian plots in Iran. Things however did not run smooth as expected between Americans and Iranians. At the end of the year 1911, there was a great showdown between St. Petersburg and Tehran which led to military coup in Iranian nationalist camps. This led to termination of Iran’s constitutional trial and later on American advisers were dismissed of their job in I ran.Advertising We will write a custom research paper sample on United States-Iran relations, 1930-1945 specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More The Iranian government learnt a lesson from their constitutional trial; their attitude towards Americans changed and it is believed that the future Iranian generation will never attempt to engage Americans to act as the country’s financial adviser. Since then, U.S House of Representatives and President Taft decided to detach from Iranian development plans. American government took the initiative of defending Shuster. Iranian reformist and nationalists intentions were impressed with Shuster’s cooperation; this expressed solidarity. This news spread all over America; all pages of American press were in support of Shuster actions and they also talked about Iranian revolutionaries in a favorable way. Iranians ability and desire to employ reforms and also to defend their independence offset their frequent appearance in narratives written by American missionaries who reviled Iranian society their main cultural traits. They also reviled their pandemic failures as well as Iranian hatred towards them. There are however, some missionaries who recorded positive legacy in Iran. This is based on their behaviors and actions towards the Iranian for example Baskerville who died while helping Iranian revolutionaries fight Russian forces in Iran. Dr. Samuel Jordan who started American College in Tehran (now the Alborz School) and his beloved wife Mary Park Jordan was also among American missionaries who were more celebrated by Iranians (Mark 1987). Declaring neutrality during World War I could not prevent Russian and British army from occupying Iran. President Wilson was the one who facilitated and encouraged American entry in 1917 World War. He insisted on arranging for post war between his allies as he believed that it was the only way he could safeguard weaker nations from Alli ed powers (William 1984). President Wilson wanted to restrain the allies’ imperialist desire which expressed his deal. This nurtured affirmative assessments by the Iranian nationalist. President Wilson’s intentions and plans were later put to test in Iran. U.S.-Iranian relation was greatly affected in 1917 by the outbreak of Bolshevik Revolution which gave rise to attempts of containing communism by the Americans and British. They wanted to spread communism to neighboring territories after World War II.Advertising Looking for research paper on history? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Washington recognized that Iran was British sphere which raised their temper to promote communism at the end of World War I. Washington wanted to forestall Iranian sovereignty without getting entangled in their national affairs. Americans therefore formulated an irresolute policy to govern Iran. The policy was enacted for 35years in Iran. During the Paris peace talks, Tehran sought Washington assurance that Iran will be granted its independence and its wartime grievances will be honored. Iranians were therefore excluded from taking part in the peace talks in 1919. Iran were presented by American delegations in the peace talk whereby the presented Tehran’s concerns and grievances. The Americans refrained from supporting British involvement in Iranian affairs. Washington remained true to his words and this shows that he was not willing to take any new international responsibilities in any part of the world include Iran. It also means that Washington was not ready to challenge t he British who had established interest in Iran. Washington had the desire to offer tribute to Wilson’s wish towards nations which they considered independently weak. This is also one of the reasons why Washington refrained from all international dealings. London never gave up on Iran, its government still was determined to increase it’s seize the country. They took advantage of Russian civil war that took place in 1918 to 1920 and Bolshevik rejection of Tsarist treaties that were imposed on Iran. In August 9, 1919, London government made attempts to enforce supremacy in Iran by organizing Anglo-Iranian Agreement. This agreement was similar to that of British protectorate when they wanted to control Iran affairs (Nasrollah1952). However, Washington managed to intervene for the Iranians by opposing the agreement during the Paris peace talks when he granted Iranians their independence. Iranian nationalists also denounced London’s agreement. Wilson also apprehended Anglo-Iranian Agreement. His critics concerning the agreement are a clear evidence of British and France determination to implement imperialist policies in Iran and also to legitimize Europe imperialism by taking advantage of League of Nations. Wilson was forced to challenge Anglo-Iranian Agreement due to many factors; he got pressure from domestic critics, he was not willing to go back on war to assure weaker independent nations of their independence and protection, he was also urged by Iranian nationalist to challenge the agreement and lastly Wilson was concerned about how the agreement will affect American economy and their undertakings in Iran in the future. Iranian parliament declined London’s request in 1921to prevent them from implementing their imperial ambition. During this period, Iranian nationalists were hoping that it will do away with British’s desire for their country through the help of America. They also desperately needed new sources of revenue and t hat is why Iranian authorities promoted extensive economic investments by the Americans in Iran. The only useful economic incentive that Iran could offer America during this period was oil. However, there was a big problem; the British owned Iran’s major valuable economic resource. The British government was the major shareholder of the company that was drilling oil in Iran. The company was later renamed to Anglo-Persian Oil Company (APOC) and today it is known as Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC). The British has indulged in Iranian oil and they actually owned it; they only gave Iran 16% of the net revenues obtained from oil (Nasrollah1952). This is why Iranian nationalists wanted their independence back to be able to have control over the major natural resource which is oil. The only way Iran could obtain back and own their oil which had been dominated by the British was by striking a deal with United States. Tehran began to engage the Americans in a discussion if they could indulge with Washington to take over the control of the oil. The Standard Oil Corporation Company (New Jersey) together with the State Department and Sinclair Consolidated Oil Company gave a positive response to the Iranian deal. The company was located far away from Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC). This move was however opposed by Russia and Britain who dominated Iranian oil. They placed genuine contractual and political obstacles in United States paths. However, United States Department and American companies were not willing to do anything to obtain Iranian oil. They did not want to put or start a fight with the Britain. Some of the factors that made American decline Iranian concession were: they had reserved substantial amount of oil during this period, many countries wanted them to form part of their oil concessions and they were many uncertainty concerning the amount of oil available in north Iranian oil fields. Tehran did not however give up on United States; Iran was willi ng to engage American financial adviser’s team in managing Iranian financial affairs. This deal was endorsed by the State Department in 1917 before the year ended. The American financial advisers made it in Iran in 1922 and they were led by Arthur C. Millspaugh who was not willing to neither take part nor sides in Iranian factional politics. This leader had his own ways and methods as compared to Shuster who led the first group of American financial advisers in Iran. This means that this was the second group of American financial advisers to arrive in Iran after the first group was dismissed of their duty. The new group arrived in Iran when the country had undergone significant political transformation. Reza Khan a patriotic military officer and his partner Sayyid Zia Tabataba who is a political dilettante and pro-British journalist joined together and staged a military coup in 1921. They got support from the British. The coup main purpose was to establish Soviet Socialist Re public of Gilan and to form regional fragmentation. They got assistances from Bolshevik forces who resided in Caspian province. Reza Khan also had plans of making attempts to do away with British military in Iran and also stop London’s imperial influence. However, this task was going to be more challenging than the previous one. Reza Khan’s persistence and had work through consolidation of military and political powers managed to overthrow Qajar dynasty which had lasted for 125years. He then inaugurated his own Pahlavi dynasty in 1925 which is the same year he overthrown Qajar. Despite the heavy political upheavals in Iran, U.S State Department’s Office of the Foreign Trade decided to proceed with the task they were called for. This mission lasted for three years despite the fact that they worked independently and privately with a pure capacity. It was actually Reza Khan who terminated U.S mission. The Americans could also not accomplish their mission because of many obstacles such as internal political rivalries, Millspaugh’s abrasive conducts and graft and patronage system was highly spread among Iranian political leaders. Reza Khan increased his domineering conducts and he never complied with any of Shah’s requests to increase the military expenditure (Rouhollah 1975). Millspaugh came up with many reforms which he implemented immediately and they include new taxation but he financed Reza Shah’s Trans-Iranian Railway project. This project was started in 1927. The poor were highly affected by the new taxation laws. The murder of Robert W. Imbrie who was American vice consul further increased complications between Iranians and Americans. Robert was murdered in 1924 in Tehran by fanatical mob. This event damaged the good relations that American press had with Iranians. The press did not appraise Iran anymore after the event. In 1925, a book was published concerning American assignment in Iran; it was titled The American Task in Persia. The book was official released before American financial mission’s contract in Iran was terminated and also before Millspaugh and Reza Khan’s relationship completely deteriorated. Reza Khan was still the war minister and also the prime minister and still supported Millspaugh. In the book, Millspaugh discussed Iran’s shattered economy, the obstacles they met and dealt with, and lastly he gave himself credit for all the reforms he brought in Iran. Actually Millspaugh sympathized with the Iranians and Iran as a country in the book. He also extremely criticized Iranian bureaucracy in the book. However, Millspaugh’s book created a big influence; it shaped American political view towards Iran. Many journalists used Millspaugh’s book as a source when addressing and giving comments on Iran. In the year 1927, Millspaugh continued with his book where he commented on developments in Iran. In 1932-3, Reza Shah made attempts to re-negotiate bac k Anglo-Iranian oil concession mainly in favor of Iran. However, these attempts were futile because he failed. Millspaugh also managed to publish Foreign Affairs article where he addressed the dispute that existed in Anglo-Iranian oil. Millspaugh went ahead to blame Reza Shah and the AIOC for not granting them equitable terms for their stay in Iran. Millspaugh’s views on AIOC mislead pertinacity and its harsh political implications. The article covered both unofficial and official circles in America beginning with national oil crisis in Iran in 1951-53. Millspaugh left Iran in the year 1927 and later on Reza Shah drew closer towards Weimar Germany. Reza Shah was hoping that he could restructure Iran’s economy and military and at the same time he wanted to influence the Soviet and British back to Iran. In 1933, Hitler rose to power and he became successful; there was rapid industrialization and militarization in Germany (Fatemi1960). This evoked Reza Shah and he began t o admire Hitler’s dictatorship. To improve his relation with Berlin, Reza Shah decided to add more incentives and became ideologically hostile and aggressive towards Britain and Soviet Union. In the meantime, Washington continued to make keen observations on Iranian developments. He then managed to grasp how important Iran’s oil could have been to America. The diplomatic relation between U.S. and Iran was temporarily suspended between 1936 and 1938 by Tehran when Iranian representative in United States was detained by American government because he violated traffic rules in late 1935. The U.S.-Iranian relations totally changed during World War II (James1989). The British and Soviet army occupied Iran with hopes that it will steer neutral course in the war. Iran acted as an allied transit route to reach Russia since there was no other route; Moscow which used to be the shortest route had already joined the war on 1947. Reza Shah however continued to be allies with the N azi Germany. However, Berlin’s anti-Allied surveillance activities in Iran gave Moscow and London a plot of how they will remove Reza Shah from his throne come 1941 and put his son Mohammad Reza at the thrown. Nevertheless, Reza Shah was a smart man; he had formulated and pursued a policy earnestly after Anglo-Soviet group occupied Iran. This is because he feared the repercussions of being allies with Germany and therefore he had prepared himself just in case something bad come out of it by making pliant signals to Washington. United States joined the war in 1941 and by 1943 they stationed all their forces in Iran with the primary aim of controlling and preventing transportation of supplies to Russia. Iran’s economy was further burdened by the war and it drastically faltered. It was at the mercies and command of their allies who had promised substantial assistance after the war. In 1945, Britain’s financial resources were drained by the war (Gary1974). They ther eby made post-war Labor government in London with an aim of conducting extensive and costly nationalization schemes back in Britain. The labor government gave Iranians a great share of wealth obtained from the oil but they created a greater havoc which led to irreconcilable confrontation in the year 1951. Later on Iranians inaugurated new rules and directions in the U.S. policy in Iran. With regards to depletion of Britain’s military strength and resources in Iran during World War II, United States Department had already been exploring ways and means by which it could curb Soviet influence in Iran long before the war ended. Before 1941, Washington allowed Iranians to occupy a marginal role in foreign policy formulation. About $15million amounted from trade between Iran and United State in 1941. Despite the fact that U.S.-Iranian trade had expanded during World War II, Washington’s extra-war plans in Iran were overwhelmed by the absence of long term goals and lack of un ity at State Department. Washington thought that he could rely on British analysis of developments in Iran when the war began given that London too had a role to play in Iran. Washington assumed Louis Dreyfus’ (U.S. representative in Tehran) advice instead he followed his own thoughts on the issue. Washington did not trespass on Soviet and British interest in forming an alliance with Iran. However, circumstances could not allow him to stay loyal to his wishes of backing off in Iranian affairs. Iranian politicians were forced to turn to America during the way and they formulated positive equilibrium policy after asking U.S. to sign Tripartite Agreement between three states which include Tehran, Moscow and London (Yeselson 1982). The negotiations for the agreement began in late 1941 and by 1942, the deal was sealed. Washington had given the Allied powers six months to move out of Iran and provide financial support to Tehran for using Iran’s resources during the war-time. These were some of the terms of the agreement. In December 1941, Tripartite Agreement was endorsed by The Secretary of State Cordell Hull. In 1943, Cordell also understood and accepted U.S.-Iranian relation. He accepted to take responsibility for making sure that Iran attained independence by seeing the two allies out of Iranian territory. U.S.-Iranian relations further developed when American advisers were engaged in Iranian affairs by Tehran. Actually it was like history repeating itself: in 1920s, American advisers were hired to offer financial advice to Iranians. Tehran had hopes that hiring the American advisors will be of great importance to the nation. In 1942, Tehran assigned five different groups of American advisory in Iran. The American’s mission was to refurbish Iranian army, to reorganize gendarmerie in Iran; they also had financial mission and smaller missions to the police department and Ministry of Food and Supply in Iran. This group of Americans was led by A rthur Millspaugh. However this time around Millspaugh became loyal, his financial mission and that of other American advisory missions were in-line with State Department (Fred 1996). This contributed to smooth operation to deal with the allied groups in Iran. Millspaugh did not act based on his private capacity but followed direction from the State Department. However, just like before, all the missions were hindered by Iranian political rivalries which were deeply rooted in their interests mainly on economic, tribal, political and military. The frequent reshuffles of the cabinet in Tehran also hindered the mission since it oscillated political orientations in the country. Between 1941 and 1946, 11 different prime ministers ranging from independents to centrists to pro-court conservatives were assigned in Iran. This created more confusion and misunderstanding especially when a new leader is assigned. The American advisors themselves were not organized, they also had constant staff s hortage, got inadequate support from State Department and U.S. War Department refused to share their resources and military staff with the missions. There were also no coherent objectives set by the missions. The financial mission became created a great rift between Washington and Tehran which led to its termination in 1945. Millspaugh policy not only failed because of the stated factors above but it was also caused by his overbearing insolence and demeanor in handling Iranian officials. He also had personal rifts with Reza Shah over military budget for Iranians. Washington was therefore convinced not to insist on the continuation of Iranian financial mission. This second mission and other American advisory programs eroded Americans image of being a benevolent third power nation in Iran. Mohammad Mossadeq formed a negative equilibrium towards United States (Rouhollah 1972). The only American mission in Iran which became success was the group in charge of reorganizing gendarmerie for ces. This mission was led and supervised by Colonel H. Norman Schwarzkopf of New Jersey police. Schwarzkopf mission was to suppress the sovereign movements in Azarbaijan and Kurdistan in 1946. He also played the key role in propping up Mohammad Reza Shah’s dictatorial regime and conducting coup expeditions in 1953. Schwarzkopf however moved out of Iran in the year 1948. At the time the war ended, with rapid perfusion of temperaments of Cold War in State Department, all the policies that Washington had set in Iran were fleeting gradually. This was due to immediate differences and expediencies of opinion between U.S. representatives in State Department and in Iran. The State Department adopted the Jernegen memorandum of Near East Division in early 1943. It acted as a guide for future American policy in Iran. The memorandum was however prepared without any form of consultation with the U.S. representative in Tehran. This shows that it was an idealistic recommendation meant for d isinterested post-war policies in the U.S. of helping Iran to develop its economy and also to prevent Soviet and Britain Union from undermining Iranian independence. However, before the year ended, Jernegen’s fundamental idealism memorandum was clearly set with realizations that the main objectives of U.S. was about to clash with Soviet and British goals in Iran particularly in light of suspicious mounting of State Department in 1944. These were Soviet’s main ambitions for post war. However, Soviets refused to state their post-war policies towards Iran in 1943 Foreign Ministers Conference that took place in Moscow and also in Tehran Conference of the Big Three. The Soviet only gave out prosaic reaffirmation to the public in respect for sovereignty in Iran conducted by the Allies (Fred 1979). They also acknowledge Tehran’s efforts and contributions towards Allied war. Americans had failed to come to an agreement on Washington’s directions and policy on pos t war towards Iran. Their disagreement can best be illustrated by Stalin and Roosevelt’s private conversation during Tehran Conference. Stalin articulated Moscow’s desire to access free port on the Persian Gulf. They also wanted an international trusteeship to manage Iranian State Railroad. Roosevelt agreed to Moscow’s demands without consulting American Tehran or aides. His actions only encouraged Soviet ambitions and desires in Iran. Stalin’s however was at odd with Jernegen memorandum but wanted to keep Millspaugh’s future prescriptions of having a joint British, U.S. and Soviet trusteeship over Iran. After realizing the importance of Iranian oil in the ongoing war and also in future large-scale conflicts linking U.S., the State Department near East Division was backing more resolute steps to secure American oil dispensation in Iran. This however corresponded with Tehran renewed attempts to use Iranian oil as an incitement and encouraging the U. S to get involved. Negotiations for Iranian oil concession were made in 1943 between Tehran and Standard Oil of New Jersey, Standard-Vacuum Company and Sinclair. These prolonged talks eventually reduced when stiff competition began between Moscow, American oil companies and Soviet Union since they were all granted oil concession in northern Iran (Ervand 1982). The AIOC majorly concerned about American oil deal, they believed that not only will America involvement bring stiff competition between British and Americans but it would also lead to Britain’s post-war economic survival. It will also intensify renegotiation of AIOC’s contract to favor Iran. This is because American involvement in Iranian oil concession would present more lucrative terms to the Iranians. By the time the war came to an end, Americans were not sure of their future U.S-Iranian relations. This fact was aggravated by political realignments and cabinet changes in Tehran and continued efforts from Russ ia and British to enlarge their countries. Between February 1945 and July 1945, Roosevelt was replaced by Truman as the U.S. president. It was during this period when Potsdam and Yalta conferences were held. Washington was convinced about Moscow’s uncooperative attitude towards Iran. Nevertheless, Moscow remained stiff; it refused to renew its pledges to withdraw its army from northern Iran within a period of six months after the end of the war. Moscow insisted that they had no need for restating existing terms of Tripartite Agreement that was signed in 1942. After the termination of World War II and emergence of Cold War, Washington became more attentive to Iranian requests and questions. At the same time, Millspaugh also tried to make attempts to influence U.S policy in Iran. In 1946, he published another book on Iran titled Americans in Persia. This book was full of metaphors as compared to the first book. He accused Iranians for litany and portrayed them as nation which is not capable of governing itself. He claimed that Persia had not made any attempts to prove that they were capable of self-government and his thoughts were that Persia was wrong for demanding their independence (Arthur 1973). Millspaugh anticipated for recognition of Moscow’s economic desire in northern Iran and also adoption of open-door policy whereby economic resuscitation of U.S, U.S.S.R and Iran are joined together under supervision by U.N committee. However, Millspaugh recommendation was incompatible with the emergence of Cold War in Washington. Millspaugh however never gave up, he used his abilities to influence State Department but this too was undermined by his public allegations of Washington’s alleged policy of conciliation towards the State Department and Moscow’s complicity in failure to fulfill his financial mission in Iran. Iran, Turkey and Greece became initial test-case for cold War. The worst was however expected after Moscow refused to withd raw its army from northern Iran by the set date according to 1946 Tripartite Agreement (Fred 1979). Leaders also feared the formation of self-directed governments in northwestern provinces in Iran mainly in Kurdistan and Azerbaijan. The local Soviet however backed up these democratic parties. It was also feared that Washington could implement containment policy since he had refused to take into consideration domestic grievances of the self-directed movements in Kurdistan and Azerbaijan. Washington had also refused to acknowledge any possibility of Soviet objectives being implemented in Iran and also take domain in Iran whereby they control all the activities taking place in the nation. Tehran also never gave up on United States, it turned to them for assistance. However, despite British and American protest against Moscow, the two nations managed to have a private talk with Iranian nationalists where they persuaded them to carry out bilateral talks with Moscow rather than involving U.N Security Council to condemn Soviet actions (Mary1997). Washington worst fears and concerns were that the 1946 crisis felt in Iran could jeopardize United States future as an effective environment for carrying out international reconciliation. The Soviet-Iranian wrangle could turn into a complete disaster if the Soviet Union is tolerated in the Security Council. This could also undermine the ability of U.N to function as a gadget of solving conflict. After all the wrangles , Soviet army finally left Iran enabling Iranian army join Azerbaijan and Kurdistan in a mission to overthrow autonomous governments (William 1946). Soviet’s change of mind owed more to Iranian pledge to Moscow to push Soviet oil concession. However, deal to give concession of oil to Soviet was stopped by Iranian parliament after they had ratified all the arrangements and laws passed by Iranian government in 1944. United States however continued to purse their stop-go policy; they only stopped after Iran went through national oil crisis in 1951. Washington was however still convinced that it was London’s responsibility to examine how Moscow influence in Iran since United States had dismissed the British forces responsibility for comprehending communism in Turkey and Greece. In conclusion, The U.S-Iran relations emerged as early as mid-nineteenth century. They had a diplomatic, cultural and economic relation. During this period, the two nations were great allies; Iran government did not trust Russian and British intentions but considered America as a trustworthy nation. Throughout the Cold War, the two governments supported each other since they were all against Soviet Union. However, relationship between United States and Iran deteriorated during Shah Mohammad regime. References Arthur, M. (1973). The American Task in Persia. New York: Arno Press. Benson, G. (1981). United States-Iranian Relations. Washington: University Press of America. Ervand, A. (1982). Iran between Two Revolutions. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Fatemi, M. (1960). Diplomatic History. Prentice: Prentice Hall Publishers. Fred, H. (1996). Islam and the Myth of Confrontation. New York: I.B. Tauris. Fred, H. (1979). Iran: Dictatorship and Development. New York: Penguin. Gary, H. (1974). The Iranian Crisis of 1945-46 and the Cold War. Journal of Political Science Quarterly, 89(1), 117-146. James, G. (1989).The United States and Iran, 1946-51: The Diplomacy of Neglect. New York: St. Martin’s Press. James, G. (1978). The United States and Iran: Foreign Relations of the United States. Washington: Government Printing Office. Mark, L. (1987). The Origins of the Iranian-American Alliance 1941-1953. New York: Holmes Meier. Mary, H. (1997).Empire and Nationhood: The United States, Great Britain and Iranian Oil. New York: Columbia University Press. Nasrollah, S. (1952). Diplomatic History of Persia 1917-1923: Anglo-Russian Power Politics in Iran. New York: Russell F. Moore Compan y. Rouhollah, K. (1972). The Foreign Policy of Iran: A Developing Nation in World Affairs 1500-194. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia. Rouhollah K. 1975). Iran’s Foreign Policy 1941-1973: A Study of Foreign Policy in Modernizing Nations. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia. William, W. (1946). Kurdish Independence and Russian Expansion. Journal of Foreign Affairs, 24(4), 675-686. William, O. (1984). Anglo-Iranian Relations during World War I. London: Frank Cass. Yeselson, M. (1982). United States-Persian Diplomatic Relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.