It is undeniable that the United States' involvement in international disagreements creates a

foundation for better relations between feuding nations or groups. In various middle-eastern
clashes, the United States has always sought a way to uphold the United Nations resolution
strategies and encourage negotiations. A good instance is a conflict between the Jews and Arabs
in the Middle East within Palestinian boundaries. Unfortunately, nations such as the United
States in cultural and political lives of areas such as Iran and its Tudeh Party have been viewed
as dictatorial imperialism. That means that the weight given to the United States' ability to get
involved in Middle-Eastern affairs is relatively low. Considerably, imperialist perspectives from
the United States are some of the issues that, as per this discussion, caused the failure of the
Tudeh Party in its bid to take over the Iranian government.

Despite its tremendous successes against the opposition in the middle eastern nations, the United
States' involvement is still disregarded. From a reflective article by the communist party of Iran
released in 2001, Iranian politics and affairs have been driven via Islamic politics. However, as
per Khater (332), the United States and other imperialist powers in Europe, such as Great Britain,
were unhappy. This is because they think it leaves many loopholes for the entry of authoritarian
leaders such as those of the former soviet states. As presented by the article, the history of the
Tudeh party seems to align with the moral and democratic principles of the nations that Iran
considers imperialist. This ranges from the party's political base to organizational success;
unfortunately, middle-eastern nations seem to disregard the American influence because of its
intent to end leftism. According to Khater (333), in leftist organizations such as the Democratic
Organization of Iranian Women, the most important thing is to generate a considerable social
force among workers and other relevant parties. However, imperial west and allied nations such
as Great Britain realized that Iran and middle eastern nations were rich in oil and attracted huge
attention from other nations. This causes a clash between the interests of the people and those of
international communities who can see the bigger threat to the internal affairs of middle-eastern
countries.

In another perspective, with regard to the reflection of the communist party of Iran, leftist parties
such as the Tudeh may seek to downgrade the influence of what they see as the imperialist
United States. Every evidence produced by this party's reflection paints the intentions of the
United States as insincere and manipulative, which throws downs the weight given to the
American ability to intervene in the Middle-Eastern Affairs. Khater (334) addresses the effort of
the early Tudeh Party of Iran's bid to nationalize the oil industry from a corrupt dynasty led by
the Pahlavi people. According to the Iranian government and the reflection provided by the
communist party, the Pahlavis under Reza Shah were prepped and mentored to lead the
industries by imperialist nations such as the United States. The weight given to the United States'
ability to intervene in middle-eastern affairs goes further down based on the report released by
itself and its allies. According to Khater (335), for instance, political opponents associated with
TPI also believed that its failure to ascend to power after the coup of 1953 was caused by
imperialists' unflinching persistence. Modern middle-eastern nations who understand the role of
the TPI in the time it ran Iranian affairs have low regard and trust for American involvement in
the region's affairs.

The statement issued by the Tudeh/Masses Party of Iran in 2001 further reduces the weight of the
American people in the involvement in middle-eastern affairs. The party sided with the Iranian
decision to take on their affairs via an Islamic perspective of politics. In addition, Khater (336)
states that TPI aligned itself with the common ideologies across the middle-eastern regions and
the soviet states; some of these ideologies include communism and Marxism. Some of these
ideologies are largely inapplicable across western nations such as the United States. This
undermines its ability to get involved in the affairs of a communist middle-east. Based on the
factor that the Middle East and Iran choose to conduct their activities through Islamic politics,
the United States' effort to get involved in its affairs is further limited. As per Khater (337), this
is because the American people and imperialist allies believe in secularism and view
communism and Islamic politics as factors that undermine democracy across the Middle East.
The statement released by the Communist party can be said to start a new phase of relations
between the United States and middle-eastern nations but not in an entirely positive way. This is
due to the politically reacting issues coming from the Arabian countries and the democratic
aspirations fronted by the American people.

The ability of the United States to intervene in middle-eastern affairs may, however, have some
positive impacts despite the statement provided by the communist TPI in 2001. One of the
aspects that the democratic world cannot ignore is rightist politics; as much as Islamic politics is
countered, rightism is a pertinent part of middle-eastern social operations. As per Khater (332), it
means that imperialist capitalists such as the United States may continue opposition to
secularists. Based on the prevailing economic and political situations in the world today,
American imperialist politics may partially succeed in ejecting leftist movements in the middle-
eastern nations such as Iran and Iraq. The statement released by the Iranian TPI makes the
United States look like imperialists, and people who invasion on middle-eastern affairs target
certain institutions. While fronting its argument, as per Khater (335), the TPI indicates that
Iranian parties such as themselves have a history of relentless efforts to support the aspirations
and interests of the people. However, the insight it provides is that the involvement of western
and European nations in middle eastern activities is aimed at maiming their economies.
American influence across the middle-eastern region is still an antagonistic contradiction to the
Iranian and Arabian societies.

The arguments provided in this discussion display a constant clash between the United States and
the Middle East. However, most of these differences only come from differentiated ideologies in
politics and governance. The involvement of America in various international affairs over the
years has produced outstanding results. However, the differences in ideals make the latter view
Americans as imperialists and a state that should not be involved in the affairs of the Iranian
people. Some of the arguments fronted to respond to how much weight is given to the American
ability to intervene in Middle-Eastern Affairs include its attempt to transform the country into
secularist politics. Apparently, Iranian politics are affiliated with Islam; however, imperial
arguments indicate that this undermines democracy and social equality in government. The
influence of the American people in Iranian politics with regard to the history of the TPI and its
statement in 2001 regard its intentions as insincere and manipulative.