This knowledge deficit, and in particular a manifest failure and unwillingness to recognize the historical context and founding myths of Iran and in relationship with the West, has been tragically evident in the current crisis. Quite apart from the lack of strategic vision that led to the invasion of Iraq, it is now apparent that the Americans, and to some extent the Europeans, are struggling to find ways in which to solve the Iranian question. The consequence has been an over-dependence on rhetoric and demagoguery that has been confrontational rather than constructive, punitive rather than a means to a defined end. There has been a marked failure to distinguish between the state and the nation, and to recognize social changes and the political dynamic. Instead, much like Ahmadinejad, the preference has been to analyze Iran in the framework of a revolution that occurred more than a generation ago, as if all that has transpired since is inconsequential. More damning has been the failure to engage with Iran as a distinctive actor, as opposed to an extension of the Cold War or intra-Western rivalries. Particularly ineffective has been the tendency to view Iran through the familiar analogies of the Western experience, defining it as totalitarian and ignoring the complexities it represents. Such intellectual indolence may reflect a justified frustration, but it does not assist in the effective formation of policy. [p. 239]
Confronting Iran is worth reading for the nine page conclusion alone. For all that could be said about Western relations with Iran, especially U.S.-Iranian relations since at least 1953, Ansari concisely lays out the bare facts of those historical events that have been unfortunately developed into mythical allegories.
The reader would also be helping himself before approaching Confronting Iran by first beginning with two things. It would be wise to understand the concept of American Empire: its culture of militancy, both economic and otherwise, and the effect Empire has on not only how the world sees the U.S., but how the U.S. purposes itself upon the sovereignty of other nations in order to satisfy its own desires. One must also have at least some working knowledge of primeval Mohammadan Islam versus the modern world’s understanding of its militant form.
The fact of the matter is militant Islam gains credibility not only when the U.S. sticks its nose in the Near East for no apparent reason, but also when U.S. policies, whether through sanctions, rhetoric, or regime change, affect the otherwise likely economic prosperity of Near East nation-states. It is no small fact that our policies create havoc and give reason for those with no hope for economic self-sufficiency to join militant groups. One need only look to Stalin’s interference in Central Asia during the early Communist period in the 20th century to see how those societies are still affected from past outside interference.
In all, Confronting Iran is a timely read, especially in light of the views held by the near majority of current 2012 GOP presidential contenders.
